GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

It must be noted that the DN was all for this new eval system until only 7% of teachers were rated ineffective. Note they’re against, against VA growth measures and have, miraculously, blamed the UFT for the whole thing. It’s another example of a crumbling for-profit press fitting the facts to whatever accusation they choose to frame. It’s shameless, but it offers a glimpse into how Tweed and the mayor WILL be attacking the APPR as being -wait for it- too weak on teachers next Fall.

So while it’s nice to see the DN dislikes value added measures, the piece represents a cautionary tale of what might happen if the eval system isn’t put into place: The annual January to June Bloomberg drama will center around the APPR (where he’ll punish teachers for losing the 4% state aid with a threat of layoffs) and the edreformers will try to get a newer, even more unfair eval system to take its place in the middle of budget season.

You say, essentially, that the new
evaluation system must be a good one if the DN dislikes it.

I disagree.

The new system is still in the buggy stage, and the newspapers, including the DN and the Post, are laying down markers to get the state to adjust it the way they want.

You can bet that will happen – when Rupert Murdoch snaps, Andrew Cuomo jumps (please google Murdoch calls Cuomo “Chicken” to see what I mean.)

Be very certain the state will “strengthen” the evaluation system next time around to make Zuckerman, Murdoch, et al. happy – the “I” ratings will be in the double digits.

And let’s not forget that the city still gets to do a VAM and we already
know the kind of job they did with the one they used for the TDR’s. 
Gary Rubenstein did a great job exposing that.

Remember, these are POLITICAL decisions they are making about teachers.

They already know how many they want to fire every year.

They have a system in place that will get them those numbers.

All they have to do is adjust the algorithms to get there.

The pressure is already being put on the NYSED and the Regents and the governor to do just that.

A teacher evaluation system based upon error-riddled high stakes standardized tests in every grade in every subject, both local and state tests, all the year long that utilizes value-added measurements that are notorious for wide swings in stability and large margins of error is NOT a good one.

It’s that simple.

An evaluation system based upon multiple measures like classroom observations, student portfolio work, peer evaluations and the like is a much better system to use to evaluate teachers.

But that kind of system isn’t subject to the kind of rigging a test-based system that uses VAM is – that’s why it’s not in place.

If you want to trust to the good-heartedness of the people at the Regents and the NYSED to not cow to the DN, Newsday, Post, Times, et al. and rig a system to “I” rate double digit percentages of teachers every year, go right ahead.

I, however, am not that confident the people in charge of the system have either the students’ or the teachers’ best interests at heart to make sure that the system is a fair one.

Rather I see that both Tisch and King have been put into their positions of power (and Cuomo too, for that matter) because they are willing to do the bidding of the oligarchs who own this state – and some of those oligarchs just happen to be named Zuckerman and Murdoch.

Currently the oligarchs want teachers fired – especially veteran ones – and teacher protections weakened so that they can start gobbling up the profits from the ed sector.

You can bet APPR will help that objective along – as it was meant to do,

RBE; The APPR is exactly that multiple measures process that you spoke of. It’s biggest drawback -the VA portion- would mark a whole 6 or 7% of teachers for 3020 according to the SED data…and of that, the principals would have the choice to refer them to be fired or not (it’s not automatic).

While that’s clearly too high -nothing should be based on high stakes tests- it’s not the scores and scores of teachers we all feared would come up short on that portion. Far from embracing anything the MSM says, I do think it’s responsible to consider that the oligarchs you speak of are starting to come out against the eval system…that indicates to me that it may not be all that bad.

Much to unpack from your comment, but just to leave you with a last thought: the ‘ local’ portion is designed to not use growth measures like VAM. That portion too might very well come down the even more multiple measures (some tests, some peer observation, perhaps some performance based data, some classroom data). The only VAM formula we’ll be dealing with is the state’s

…..which we won’t be, as the mayor will probably use this issue to rob schools of the state aid and put more pressure on the union during the next budget season.

Hey Matt, I see what you’re saying. I’ve updated the teaser with language that makes it more clear that it is an opinion.