Seattle Schools Community Forum

Dick Startz, a professor of economics at the University of Washington,wrote an article for Crosscut today in which he proposes higher pay for teachers, but only after they accept evaluation. The article is instructive in how it demonstrates the misinformation about teacher evaluations and the naivete of academics. The professor bought ALL of the education reform lies about the absence of any performance evaluations for teachers - and blaming the teachers' unions for that absence. He also failed to notice the strong anti-tax sentiment among voters. His plan seems to suggest that if the teachers first subject them selves to a pointless review then the community will suddenly double their pay. There is no evidence to support this view. Big surprise, the professor has a book coming out soon: "Profit of Education".

Interesting discussion on the teachers contract at the Daily Kos. From the thread (italics mine, bold theirs): Wednesday afternoon the Seattle teachers' union (SEA) achieved a huge victory over the proponents of what is popularly (and erroneously) known as "education reform." After many, many hours of hard negotiations, the SEA negotiators achieved a tentative contract with the district. What is remarkable about this contract is that: * Teachers' final evaluations will not depend on student test scores. * Teachers' jobs will not depend on student test scores . * Teachers' pay will not depend on student test scores. This tentative agreement was reached despite intensive efforts by the Broad-Foundation-connected superintendent to insert test scores into all three of the above areas. And actually, it is a real victory for the teachers (in terms of ridding themselves of what they did not want in the contract) and anyone who does not support the ...

I saw this agreement last night, hot off the district presses, but for some reason, the network I was on at headquarters wouldn't let me sign on here so I couldn't post it. The Labor Relations page has all kinds of versions of the agreement information (but ignore the Fast Facts - it's useless). There are some interesting things and some things I think are vague and wonder what they mean. Maybe some teachers out there can help us. I did attend the Work Session on Maintenance (interesting) and about half the Board meeting (also interesting)but I'll post separate threads on those. From the agreement: looks like seniority is in and super seniority is out. I think the premise here is that if you start from a place where ALL teachers are good, then you have to have some mechanism to figure out who goes if there are RIFs and the union says seniority. (Yes, I know, that's mighty big if.) On the other hand, I think the union gave in at super seniority which probabl...

For the past two months the Seattle Times has been running editorials about how students' standardized test scores reflect the quality of instruction they received and how standardized test scores absolutely should be part of a teacher's performance evaluation. Then, yesterday, the MSP and HSPE pass rates for 2010 were released by the OSPI. Now the Times accepts the idea that the low pass rates are primarily due to students' unfamiliarity with the tests, a change in math Standards, and inadequate resources to support struggling students. The Times needs to decide their opinion on what drives student test scores. Are they determined primarily by teacher effectiveness - and therefore an appropriate part of a teacher's performance evaluation - or are they driven by student familiarity with the test, district-level support for struggling students, and the moving target of state Standards - and therefore NOT appropriate for use in measuring teacher effectiveness? Whic...

Major news about a major study from an Economic Policy Institute briefing paper on the study (italics/bold mine): If new laws or policies specifically require that teachers be fired if their students’ test scores do not rise by a certain amount, then more teachers might well be terminated than is now the case . But there is not strong evidence to indicate either that the departing teachers would actually be the weakest teachers, or that the departing teachers would be replaced by more effective ones. There is also little or no evidence for the claim that teachers will be more motivated to improve student learning if teachers are evaluated or monetarily rewarded for student test score gains . I have only skimmed the briefing paper but it looks like good, sober reading. I plan on sending this to the Board, the Times editorial board, my legislators, etc. Please consider doing the same. From the Daily Kos which has links galore: This document has been in the works for several ...

We all know that there is no school so bad that a motivated student cannot wrestle an education away from it. We have seen all of the inspiring stories of students who grew up with everything against them: poverty, neglect, substance abuse, etc., yet managed to achieve in high school, win acceptance to a competitive university, and become a shining example of how far hard work, talent, and determination can take you here in the good ol' U.S.A., the land of opportunity. We also know that there is no school so good that it can force an education onto an un-motivated student. We have plenty of examples of this as well. Just the same, it is easier to get an education from a good school than a bad one. Given this knowledge, education activists have worked and sought equity of opportunity. Look through everything that the District has ever said about equity and it has ALL been on the opportunity side. All high schools must offer a minimum number of AP or IB classes. All schools mus...

( Update: I had originally filed this thread with a timeline but it ended up seeming long so I went back and omitted it. It is in the appeal document.) I found the appeal document about the sexual harassment case that the district has now lost on appeal. I read through it and I think I understand why the district lost their appeal (it's a technical reading of the RCW). What I think is most important in the reading is tracking how this assistant principal, from about the moment she made her complaint, was bounced around the district. Glenda Williams' initial assertions were found valid by the District. They disciplined the principal and moved her and from there it must have seemed like a trip down the rabbit hole to her. That multiple principals and staffs felt compelled to think the worst about her (when they knew nothing about why she was transferred) is kind of sickening. She had good years at Ballard before the incidents began and managed to have 3 good years at R...

Here's Danny Westneat's column from the Times. He puts a very human face to the discussion about teacher evaluation. I'm not saying Seattle's grade-the-graders proposal is worthless. There have to be ways to reward the stars and shed the lemons. Seattle is right to confront these issues. But across town, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is in the midst of a study of whether it's even possible to reliably score teacher effectiveness. And, if so, what things — experience? test scores? knowledge? teaching style? — are the best measures of a great teacher. They don't know yet (the results aren't due for a year and half.) My hunch: Teaching — especially good teaching — is far more art than science. And he ends with: No matter what teacher-testing tools they come up with, they should inform, but not replace, people. In the end a principal should do what managers must do in countless other workplaces: decide who gets promoted and who gets fired...

Will it ever end? Norm Rice says his piece at the Times. I guess the Times is going with the old adage of saying it enough times (and tapping your heels together three times) will make it come true. As a community, we need to determine if Seattle will be an early adopter or a laggard in education reform. And there's nothing in-between like careful consideration of what we do and the people in charge of enacting it (as the State Auditor questions their commitment to rules and regulations and oversight)? But he does say: The union and the school district need to come together and agree on what can be done now — controllable, deliberate steps we can take to improve education. Okay, Norm, so can you allow the union a chance to think about what they are asking members to do? Research shows that outside of parents, an effective teacher is the most important factor in determining whether children will succeed in school. Yay, Norm. More than just a factor in compensation, evaluati...

Let me begin by saying that I would absolutely love to be able to use some objective measure of student academic growth as a measure of teacher effectiveness. I sincerely would. I am open to hearing about such a measure that can isolate the growth of student learning that is attributable to the teacher. I'm dying to hear about it. I just haven't heard it yet. I won't pretend that the proposed measure is the student's cumulative acheivement. I will grant folks who want to use student test results as a measure of teacher effectiveness the sophistication that they are using a measure of change. I'll even grant them an additional level of sophistication that acknowledges the smaller potential for growth among students who are already near the top of the measure. The five point change from 45 to 50 is easier to coach than the five point change from 85 to 90. Just the same, the data and the conclusions have grave faults. I review data for a living, so I have some familiar...

So most of you may have heard that the LA Times is doing a huge multi-part story about teacher evaluation. One of the biggest parts is a listing of every single public school teacher and their classroom test scores (and the teachers are called out by name). From the article: Though the government spends billions of dollars every year on education, relatively little of the money has gone to figuring out which teachers are effective and why. Seeking to shed light on the problem, The Times obtained seven years of math and English test scores from the Los Angeles Unified School District and used the information to estimate the effectiveness of L.A. teachers — something the district could do but has not. The Times used a statistical approach known as value-added analysis, which rates teachers based on their students' progress on standardized tests from year to year. Each student's performance is compared with his or her own in past years, which largely controls for outs...

Thanks to Another Mom for this alert. (Please note: italics mine.) "Earlier this week, we noted that district negotiators said they would seriously consider the latest SEA proposal, which attempted to address our mutual interests in quality teaching while not misusing student test data to fire teachers. District negotiators returned Thursday and did indeed engage in a serious conversation with SEA to explore our proposal. The session concluded without any tentative agreements being reached over adopting the jointly developed Professional Growth & Evaluation process, but the district did choose to add an extra day of negotiations on Monday. The bargaining teams had not planned to resume contract talks until Tuesday. SEA supports moving forward with the historic progress already achieved through the jointly negotiated Professional Growth and Evaluation plan. SEA's proposal on Tuesday suggested carving out middle ground by recognizing the district's inte...

The District wants to include measures of student growth as part of the annual teacher performance evaluation. That seems reasonable. In fact, I don't think there is anyone who would be opposed to a fair and thoughtful use of student outcomes as part of the teacher evaluation. How will the District measure student growth for the purposes of teacher evaluation? That's not entirely clear, but we do have some hints: From the letter to teachers dated 8/3/10 Student learning and growth will be based in both teacher-determined and District-determined data and measures, and will account for the fact that not all children are the same. The District measure will be based on the overall growth of a teacher's students relative to students of similar demographics who have performed like them in previous assessments, and will be calculated as a two-year rolling average on at least two student assessments. I'm not sure what this means. A. " the overall growth of a teacher's...

FYI, tomorrow morning your chance to sign up for the first Board meeting of the school year 2010-2011. I suspect it might be something of a dogfight to get on the list because it is the first Board meeting in awhile AND there are likely to be speakers vying for spots on both sides of the teacher evaluation issue. I know the Alliance is urging people to speak out and I suspect the SEA is as well. Naturally, some of us might want to speak on the State Audit which the Board has remained strangely silent about. Again, you call the Board office at 8 a.m., 252-0040, to leave your name to get on the list. Or, send an e-mail (again at 8 a.m.) to boardagenda@seattleschools.org . Keep in mind that speakers who address something on the agenda get first preference. Here is the agenda for Wednesday night.

A guest column in the Seattle Times today explains why it is a bad idea to tie teacher evaluations to student test scores.

KUOW had this piece by reporter, Phyllis Fletcher, on the teacher negotiations. Tomorrow (the 10th) The Conversation will discuss the teacher evaluations. Please call in at 543-KUOW or conversation@kuow.org.

Syndicated columnist Leonard Pitts, Jr. really lets teachers have it with his column printed in the Sunday Times, Teachers and teachers unions: Get on board or get out of the way. Basically he asks why teachers are so firmly against being accountable. He tells the story of receiving an e-mail from a teacher who said the union protects teachers or "she'd be at the mercy of some boss who decided one day to fire her." He continues: In other words, she'd be just like the rest of us. The lady's detachment from the reality most workers live with struck me as a telling clue as to why our education system frequently fails to educate. When you can't get fired for doing bad work, what's your impetus for doing good? Many of us seem to be wondering the same thing. I see the direction he is going in and I actually agree. Teachers need to be evaluated just like any other job or profession. He goes on to say that it is really the teachers unions that are ...

So our second favorite superintendent (chancellor), Michelle Rhee, of D.C., has dismissed 241 teachers (5% of the teachers) evaluated under a new system and found lacking. This article appeared in the NY Times. A few were dismissed for not having the right qualifications under NCLB (which would beg the question, who's fault is it for hiring them?). Ms. Rhee says: “Every child in a District of Columbia public school has a right to a highly effective teacher — in every classroom, of every school, of every neighborhood, of every ward, in this city,” the chancellor said in a statement. “That is our commitment.” In addition there were other employees from librarians to counselors to custodians who were dismissed. What is interesting is that there seems to be no administrators on that list. Every single principal in D.C. is doing a great job and the teachers are the problem? Hmmm. And, 737 employees were put on notice that they were in the second tier from the bottom so sh...

Why is Charlie always right? I would have to paraphrase but on the subject of Michael DeBell, Charlie always seemed a bit mistrustful of Michael's words. And, increasingly, Charlie is right. I believe that Michael is a bright guy and a calming presence on the Board (not that any of them are prone to hysterics). His heart is in the right place but his brain is...MIA. To wit, Nina Shapiro interviewed him about the Board vote to extend the Superintendent's contract. Here's what he said: Far from a skeptic, board president Michael DeBell frequently serves as the official voice of the board. And even he, while voting in favor of the superintendent, indicated that he had "wrestled" with the decision. "It's important to acknowledge that many parents and teachers have felt they are not part of this reform process," DeBell says, explaining his ambivalence in a conversation with Seattle Weekly this morning. By reform process, he means a variety of ...

Another day, another Seattle Times editorial on public K-12 education. This one in praise of state grants to districts that will pilot new teacher and principal evaluations. Lots of room for discussion here. 1) These things start out with talk about multilayered and textured systems, but they end with student scores on standardized tests and a form on a clipboard with checkboxes for principals to fill in. It has to be dumbed down for the managers to use. The same managers who are being trusted to design the system. Big hint: the people who design the system will design it to make their own jobs easier. 2) The Times now says that effective teachers and principals are the most important factors in student learning outside of the students' homes. So why, earlier this week, did they try to give the superintendent credit for increased student achievement? That credit should have gone to teachers and principals. 3) The Times seems blind to the fact that the very people they are relying ...