GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

The  Danielson  framework,  the  way  it  is  being  used  in  the  PLA  schools,  will  lead  to  the  complete  destruction  of  the  teaching  force  in  NYC  if  implemented  system  wide.  It  is  loaded  with  many  “bullet points”  and  examples  that  a teacher  should  do  to  be  rated  “effective  of  highly  effective. ” Any  deviation  from  any  bullet  point , or  example  is  being  used  by  administrators  as  “gotchas”  to  rate  teachers  “developing”  or  “ineffective.”  Teachers  are  being  mandated  to  have  students  sit  in  “purposeful  groupings.”  Activities  must  be  created  to  meet  each  students  ability,  and  learning  profile.  There  has  to  be  activities  which  students  find  “engaging.” Lesson  plans  must  be  formatted  in  a specific  format,  with  specific  terminology. (associated  with  Tomlinson’s  Differentiation)  There  are  10  unannounced  observations. It  is  micromanagement  in  the  worst  way.   Last  of  all……The  UFT  is  “nowhere  to  be  found.”

I think it’s all conjecture until the UFT and doe reach a deal, but the APs at my school told us 10 observations total, with some mixture of full period formal and 5-20 minute walk-through making that up.

Without  revealing  sources.  What  I  posted  previously  is  happening  in  some  PLA  schools.  NONE  of  the  10  observations  are  announced.  They  are  all  being  written  up.  The  observers  are  focusing on   the  deviations  from  Danielson ,  and  writing  up  many  “developing,  and  ineffective” observations.  An  observer  did  collect  lesson  plans  requiring  a  specific  format.  The  way  these  observations  are  being  conducted,  are  just  as  subjective,  if  not  more  so  than  anything  under  the  old  “S,  and  U  system.”  They  have  those  domains  in  front  of  them,  and  “God  help”  a  teacher  who  deviates  from  any  of  the  suggested  examples. It  is  horrible  micromanaging.  I  was  also  told  these  write  ups  are  being  uploaded  onto  ARIS,  and  a computer,  not  the  principal  will  determine  the  final  year  end  evaluation.

Great story Geoff.

VOTE NO!, could you tell us how many schools you personally observed this in? You say it’s happening in “some schools.” There are 143 schools in the pilot, so if it’s happening in 3, then we’re talking about a tiny fraction and one that should be dealt with on an individual basis.

I’d also like to point out that a “developing” observation is not unusual. It’s not even grounds for being “written up.” In fact, from what I’ve heard, most teachers are expected to be developing in many areas, even those teachers who have been teaching for a while. The standards are high, no doubt. That’s the point of having the observations, though: to see where teachers fall and give them insights into how to improve.

As for the ARIS part, I think you’re mixing up ARIS Learn with the project. Learn is for sharing information between the teachers and the administrator, so if the administrator is posting observations there, then it just means they’re sharing the info with the teachers without having to waste paper.

Trying to function under the Danielson system, I do not understand why teachers, evaluators and administrators do not get the same training.  What is the big secret?  Are we not interested in what is good for the students yet the system functions on catching teachers doing something wrong.  If this concept has a purpose for the good of the students please tell me what I am missing.