Skip to:

The Great Teacher Evaluation Evaluation: New York Edition

Comments

Nice explanation. The "By Need" distribution seems to be saying something significant.

If value-added evals are implemented with fidelity, of course they will drive teaching talent out of high-poverty districts. That's Supply and Demand 101. Your chart adds to the overwhelming evidence that vams are biased against high-poverty schools. Second, evaluations have always been political and they always will be. They can't find replacements for 5% statewide, much less replacements for the exodus out of high-poverty schools. Real world, the number of "ineffective" teachers will largely be determined by the plausible number of replacements out their. How could it be different? What principal is going to volunteer for large numbers of teacherless classrooms? Third, we were coerced into value-added evals. We have three options. One, convince reformers its a bad policy and to change their minds. Two, work discretely with collaborative evaluators and juke the evals stats the way that systems always play games with numbers. Three, when value-added is implemented by true believers, monkey wrench the system. Oh, there's a fourth, litigate, litigate. litigate. Mostly, I expect a combination of normative gamesmanship and outright monkeywrenching until its clear that a prohibitive amount of money and energy has been wasted. Again, its so sad. "Ineffective" teachers cannot be systematically identified. Its easy to identify bad teachers, however. If we got rid of teachers who do their jobs badly, wouldn't that correlate with ineffectiveness? Teachers and unions would gladly help remove the 5% or so of bad teachers. In many, or most, or almost all systems, value-added evals may help remove them, but they will do so by increasing test-driven education malpractice and damaging the effectiveness of the vast majority of teachers. Almost every individual reformer I've talked to agrees that value-added evals were a mistake. Why to they keep trying to save that policy? Again, my hypothesis is that its because the Billionaires Boys Club hasn't shifted gears.

DISCLAIMER

This web site and the information contained herein are provided as a service to those who are interested in the work of the Albert Shanker Institute (ASI). ASI makes no warranties, either express or implied, concerning the information contained on or linked from shankerblog.org. The visitor uses the information provided herein at his/her own risk. ASI, its officers, board members, agents, and employees specifically disclaim any and all liability from damages which may result from the utilization of the information provided herein. The content in the Shanker Blog may not necessarily reflect the views or official policy positions of ASI or any related entity or organization.