The Los Angeles Times recently published a database of third- through fifth-grade teacher evaluations based on changes to their students’ test scores from one year to the next.
This sparked a national debate among educators and parents eager to place their kids in classrooms with the “most effective” teachers rather than those where test ratings had slipped.
According to those familiar with the process, the value-added method used by The Times ranks 6,000 Los Angeles teachers based on seven years’ worth of data obtained from the Los Angeles Unified School District, making the database widely available to any who want to review it.
Teachers with students who showed an increase in test scores were ranked higher than teachers with students who didn’t.
It didn’t take long for the controversy to flare, not only in L.A. but in other parts of the country where discussion has spread.
While there has been some interest locally, Kyrene administrators so far haven’t addressed the matter head-on, although recent opinion seems to oppose The Times’ decision.
“This is certainly not a beneficial concept,” Dr. David Schauer, superintendent of the Kyrene School District, said.
“When you use measures that aren’t fair or equitable, it really creates serious issues that set us back from ever getting reform to happen.”
Also critical of The Times’ listing was Erin Kirchoff, Kyrene Education Association president, who said teacher evaluations should not be solely based on student achievement.
“You can’t determine what students you will be teaching in your class,” Kirchoff said.
“If I get a group of high-performing kids, I’ll be rewarded for their higher achievement. This kind of system doesn’t work anymore.”
Schauer said hybrids are currently being developed for other forms of teacher evaluation that can potentially be more equitable.
“The (Times’) method is absolutely not fair for the teachers; it singles people out and creates adverse relationships,” Schauer said. “We would definitely not want to implement anything like this, but we are developing alternatives.”
KEA’s Kirchoff said the Kyrene district has been in the process of implementing an alternative “Career Ladder” program in order to determine teacher effectiveness. Although that method has been in the middle of a legal debate, it was granted a stay in Arizona this year.
Career Ladder is an extensive process of reports based on the teachers’ goals for students and themselves, assessing students multiple times to compile a detailed report on their students’ achievement.
“Career Ladder is a perfect example of pay for performance that is equitable and reasonable for all teachers,” Kirchoff said.
“But the money is not linked to all my kids passing. The money is linked to: Am I effective with how I taught it, am I effective with reflecting on how I taught it; and will I improve on it in the future.”
Kirchoff said using a standardized test does not work for student, or teacher, evaluations. Evaluations must be tied to student achievement, not just test scores, she said.
According to Schauer, although teacher evaluations based on student’s scores is not a valid methodology, there are many more qualitative ways to assess teachers.
“Principals are required to visit classrooms to observe teachers and their educational strategies,” Schauer said.
“I expect my principals to be in the classrooms consistently, and really know what’s going on each class – and I think that’s a huge aspect in the evaluation process.”
Arizona currently requires more than 30 percent of teacher evaluations be based on quantitative data, but this research often becomes entangled with vague procedures, Schauer said. It is more equitable to determine teacher effectiveness based on direct observation, he said.
Most parents, too, have the chance of observing their children’s teachers, Kirchoff said.
“The teachers are always willing to talk with parents,” Kirchoff said.
“Depending on the district, parents can visit the classroom, as long as it’s not intrusive. Parents have a lot of options to come and observe their child’s teacher and their child’s education.”
Although teacher evaluations aren’t available to the public unless a public information request is made to the district, parents can still review overall ratings of local schools.
“We don’t think it’s beneficial to have our teacher evaluations available to the public, and we certainly would never want something like the L.A. Times situation,” Schauer said.
“If we can find an objective way to measure student growth, then that is much fairer. We can’t underestimate what our teachers can bring to the classrooms for our students.”
