Thursday Must Reads: A Preview of New LAT Teacher Rankings…& More

LA TIMES GIVES PREVIEW OF NEXT ROUND OF TEACHER RANKINGS BUT….THIS BRINGS UP A QUESTION

On Wednesday, the LA Times invited 11,500 of LAUSD’s elementary school teachers “to preview and comment on new individual teacher effectiveness ratings prepared by the newspaper.”

The average person cannot access the ratings, but individual 3rd through 5th grade teachers may preview their own personal rankings and then comment in advance of when the Times opens the new database up to the rest of us.

However, there is no word on how this new ranking metric is different than the old one which is one of the things that it would be important to know. (Yooo-hooo! And we’d like to know now, not later.)

I’m sure that when the Times publishes the whole kit ‘n’ caboodle, a description of the methodology will be part of it.

But one of the biggest criticisms by education experts of the Times’ decision to publish the teacher rankings last August, is that the metric used to arrive at those rankings controlled for too few variables, thus could not help but produce false positives and false negatives—in other words, effective teachers that were ranked “ineffective” and vice versa. (This is basically what the University of Colorado study found. But they were far from the only edu-wonks to make this criticism.)

Then there was the broader criticism that, even if the valued added model was accurate, stamping teachers with the labels of most effective or least effective (words that imply a larger, qualitative judgment), based solely on their ability to get kids to perform well on the state’s standardized tests, is problematic on a good day.

Again, many of us are grateful to the Times for jump-starting this conversation in LA about the need for merit-based teacher assessments, but very queasy about the public airing of what a varied list of experts contend are flawed rankings.

All this is to say that, before we get what some will see as LAUSD Elementary School Teacher Humiliation, the Sequel, we’d like to know a bit more about how the Times arrived at their new round of scorings.

Doesn’t seem like too much to ask.

---

CALIFORNIA SENATE CONSIDERS INNOVATIVE EDUCATION BILL

Senate Bill 789, which focuses on assessing how California schools are doing in teaching and fostering creativity, will be voted on in committee this week. According to The California Alliance for Arts Education, the bill would specifically establish “an Advisory Council charged with crafting a creative and innovative education index for schools. The index would provide schools and districts throughout California with an opportunity to share evidence of how they are cultivating creativity and innovation as part of a comprehensive education.”

Here’s more:

A creativity and innovation index would provide a way for schools to rate their progress in teaching, encouraging and fostering creativity in students. Index scores would be voluntarily compiled by school and district staff from a survey of curricula and teacher reports. It would quantify the opportunities in each school as measured by the availability of classes and before and after-school programs offered by and through school districts that nurture creativity and innovation in students. Examples might include visual and performing arts education classes, debate clubs, science fairs, theatre and dance performances, music concerts, film-making, creative writing, and independent research.

The scores of individual schools and districts would be published, establishing incentives for schools to promote an overall environment that fosters creativity and innovation through visual and performing arts, science, humanities and other educational opportunities. Public evidence of a school’s active commitment to developing the full potential of its students would benefit schools in building partnerships with both parents and the broader community.

Now that nearly everything not aimed at the state’s standardized math and reading tests has been slashed from K – 12 school budgets, this is either a brilliant and much needed move, or a wonderful concept that is doomed to failure, because of the aforementioned budget slashes. I don’t yet know.

I hope it’s the former. But, in any case, I’ll keep track as the bill moves—or doesn’t—through the state legislature.

Hannah Madams at Neon Tommy has more on the story.

---

AFTER HORRIFIC POST-GAME BEATING DODGERS HIRE BILL BRATTON AND COMPANY TO REVIEW SECURITY

Much of LA—myself included—continues to reel at the brutal beating of Santa Clara paramedic, Giants fan and father of two, Bryan Stow—who now, we are told, has brain damage and faces, to understate matters heartbreakingly, “a long recovery.” Stow is in a coma.

The two men who beat Bryan Stow, have not been apprehended, although dozens of people reportedly witnessed the beating.

As a consequence of Friday night’s season opener brutality, on Wednesday, the Dodgers’ owner Frank McCourt issued a statement announcing that the team was was hiring former LAPD Chief William Bratton to review Dodger game security measures.

The LA Times’ Shelby Grad and Richard Winton have the story.