On Sunday, the LA Times published an excellent analysis of how and it what ways some teachers help their students succeed while others hold them back.
Here’s a clip from their summary:
Based on test score data covering seven years, The Times analyzed the effects of more than 6,000 elementary school teachers on their students’ learning. Among other things, it found huge disparities among teachers, some of whom work just down the hall from one another.
After a single year with teachers who ranked in the top 10% in effectiveness, students scored an average of 17 percentile points higher in English and 25 points higher in math than students whose teachers ranked in the bottom 10%. Students often backslid significantly in the classrooms of ineffective teachers, and thousands of students in the study had two or more ineffective teachers in a row.
The district has had the ability to analyze the differences among teachers for years but opted not to do so, in large part because of anticipated union resistance, The Times found.
What a great idea? One of the best parts, is the fact that, while criticizing the ineffective teachers, the Times showed that good teachers—even more than class size and resources—can make a big difference in the academic lives of our kids.
And so what is the response of AJ Duffy, the president of UTLA, the LA teachers’ union? Did Mr. Duffy applaud the LA Times reporters for recognizing the importance of teachers, thereby proving the district’s fears to be groundless?
Uh, no.
He began organizing a “massive boycott” of the paper.
Oh, A.J. You rarely fail to disappoint us.
While we’re on the subject, Neon Tommy has also launched a very good series on LAUSD in which NT reporters visited seven district schools to examine why LAUSD has some of the lowest test scores in the state of California.
Duffy is eminently hateable, but I’m surprised that you invest so much faith in an analysis that relies exclusively on two CST scores – language arts and math. To evaluate an elementary school teacher, wouldn’t you want to know how the children are doing in social studies, science, the arts, their attitude toward learning, their emotional development? The incentive in the Times’ approach is clearly to teach toward those two tests. The Times long ago stopped covering education, or at least anything that doesn’t fit the narrative dictated by the Eli Broads, Bill Gateses and Richard Riordans of the world.
I know Duffy is the head of the UTLA and his views are important and nominally representative of teachers generally, but we need an institution that speaks for teachers who support reform efforts. Teachers’ insights and perspective are incredibly important and Duffy’s foolishness isn’t doing them or the kids any good in the long run.
Welcome back, Celeste.
Without knowing how students were assigned to classes, it is impossible to conduct a value-added assessment. It states so in the booklet from the test publisher, ETS.
“Using Student Progress
To Evaluate Teachers:
A Primer on Value-Added Models
Policy Information PERSPECTIVE
by Henry I. Braun”
Follow the link and read it for yourself.
http://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/PICVAM.pd
Bad teachers get protected by UTLA. Good teachers get nothing from UTLA. Since UTLA uses close to 50% of their resources protecting the bad teachers job, while assigned at home, I don’t understand why the good teachers keep feeding this monster.
Good teachers WANT the bad teachers gone. The good ones have pride in their profession. The bad ones ruin what could be a great school district.
Until the good teachers withhold union dues the profession will continue to be tarnished. Members! Your dues are your voice. You have a choice. Continue to pay dues and continue the cycle. Stop paying your dues and be heard.
Spread the word. You know who the good teachers are. Take your union back!