Comments on: City says teachers improved during pilot observation process

By: Ggrosselfinger

Ggrosselfinger — Wed, 26 Sep 2012 14:58:00 +0000

An ideal district would have an educator as superintendent with a board with business expertise. This would allow an education principal to be more connected with district procedure and a better understanding of Danielson, thus benefiting teacher evaluations without political or personal judgement.

GGrosselfinger…teacher.

By: Sway007

Sway007 — Fri, 21 Sep 2012 20:38:00 +0000

To use Danielson the right way, an Administrator must be an expert in instruction. To many A.P.’s cannot be trained in Danielson because they are not experts. Teachers do not get proper feedback.

By: guest

guest — Sat, 15 Sep 2012 03:34:00 +0000

sideshow

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 14 Sep 2012 14:48:00 +0000

Hi Leonie,

The city provided the data to GothamSchools. We attributed the numbers in the story to “officials” as though they said it to us, but they also sent us a slideshow of the data. I have updated the language and will embed the slideshow, although as they admitted it’s not the most easy-to-digest information. Thanks for pointing this out. GD

By: Leonie

Leonie — Fri, 14 Sep 2012 12:42:00 +0000

I am similarly skeptical about the claims until the city releases all data; the reporters and the union shoud demand this. ESP the statistics about the correlation between growth scores and observations; and then hand them off to a real statistician for analysis please!

By: BloombergMustGo

BloombergMustGo — Fri, 14 Sep 2012 12:16:00 +0000

I observed my students repeatedly. They all got better. Where’s my raise?

By: Cautious

Cautious — Fri, 14 Sep 2012 09:28:00 +0000

Why can’t principals give feedback throughout the year and still use the “S” or “U” system? The Danielson Framework is an extremely complicated and time consuming model for principals to use. (Just ask any principal who has used it) Also, if a principal knows a veteran or even newer teacher is doing a good job, why should that principal be forced to use such a cumbersome evaluation process?

By: Pogue

Pogue — Fri, 14 Sep 2012 09:28:00 +0000

When it comes to education, any information after the phrase, “City says…” is to surely be taken with a grain of salt.

By: Guest

Guest — Fri, 14 Sep 2012 04:09:00 +0000

Agree with the previous comment….

There is a assumed self efficacy problem in the DOE’s report. If you ask any coach if their players improved while they were coaching they will say yes. The same is true with school administrators

Of course an administrator who has spent time observing, conferencing and coaching a teacher is likely to feel that a teacher has improved. Maybe teachers did improve, but I’m not sure the DOE report proves much of anything.

If the value added data and the observations really did have a high correlation I bet the report would have included both.

This seems like posturing for an evaluation deal that must be done by December.

By: Show us the numbers please

Show us the numbers please — Fri, 14 Sep 2012 03:00:00 +0000

Did the academic achievement actually improve? The reported data are the results of surveys of the particpants, not actual data of student achievement. A particpant saying “I think it improved student achievement” is rather incomplete. Where is the data from the pilot?