GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

The stronger argument for the UFT would be that the harm inflicted on teachers would outweigh the public good. The judge’s decision states, on p. 6, that “The Court of Appeals has held that
the proper test to determine whether the release of records which do not fall into any of the listed categories constitute an ‘unwarranted’ invasion of personal privacy is a balancing test in which the ‘privacy interests at stake’ are balanced against the ‘public interest in disclosure of the
information.’”

Right here there’s a strong case for withholding the teachers’ names and ratings from the press. For the reasons brought up here by Aaron Pallas and others, the rankings will contain many flaws. FOIL requests do not have exemptions for flawed information–but because this flawed information affects teachers’ reputations, self-perception, employability, and more, without truly enlightening the public, it should fail the balancing test.

Seriously disappointing news. I kind of expected it but still disappointed.
As if vilifying teachers is really going to make our schools any better.

I knew this would happen. Now watch the massive amount of veteran teachers who will transfer out of New York State tested classrooms/subject areas. What this means is that newbies will end up stuck in NYS tested classrooms and have their names plastered in a huge gatefold in the New York Post every year.

It’d be really nice if we could get away from this focus on testing and “performance” and focus on doing things like actually teaching student. Sadly, this just isn’t going to happen. I’m sure this will become a trend, and more people will avoid becoming a teacher in public schools – especially the ones that are the toughest to work in.

CONSTRUCTIVE or DESTRUCTIVE

This court decision allowing the DOE to release the Teacher Data Reports to the public is certainly a decision that requires further review by a higher court. I need to call into question the real purpose of these reports. Are they purely constructive and going to be used to design an individualized professional development plan for a teacher which will ultimately improve instruction and student outcomes? Or, are they intentionally destructive with disciplinary action against the teacher as the outcome putting them clearly in the category of “personnel matters”? If, in fact, it is the latter, and I believe it is, then we need to address the issue of whether or not “personnel matters” are matters that are appropriate to be released and discussed in the public arena. What do you think?