Article

Who profits with more testing?

If Ohio's new teacher merit pay framework survives intact in HB153, testing will become an even greater centerpiece of public education. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Public Schools, spent nearly $2 million to implement 52 tests, so that a new teacher evaluation system could be trialed. 52 tests! $2 million not spent on teaching.

At the center of this effort in North Carolina is the Eli Broad foundation.

Superintendent Peter Gorman may be the face of public education in Charlotte, but is a Los Angeles billionaire the power behind the scenes?

Locally and nationally, skeptics are questioning the clout wielded by Eli Broad. His foundation, which has helped put Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools in the national spotlight, has also paid to train Gorman and the school board, and to help CMS hire administrators with a business bent.

This does all lead to an interesting question posed on the pages of the Washington Post today

In addition, who creates, scores, and maintains these tests? This promises to divert taxpayer dollars from the classroom to the testing companies. Handing public dollars over to private testing enterprises is outsourcing the intellectual work teachers train to do: evaluate students. It is a waste we cannot afford and promises further dumbing-down of our nation’s classrooms.

One might wonder if we are sending kids to school to learn or to simply take tests so we can "evaluate" teachers, and of course, hand over tax dollars to for-profit vampire testing companies.

Merit Pay Mess

The budget bill, HB153 contains a lot of provisions that affect public education and teachers. Few, if any, are well thought out. The law firm Muskovitz & Lemmerbrock recently wrote their analysis of HB153, which we have published in full below. Using that, let's take a quick look at teacher pay and evaluations.

First, forget your contract. HB153 prevails over that. From now on you will be paid depending upon;
(1) Your licensure level
(2) Whether you are highly qualified, or as some have smartly pointed out, whether you can breathe
(3) Your annual evaluation

The fun starts with these evaluations. You're going to get lumped into one of four ratings;
(1) Highly effective
(2) Effective
(3) Needs improvement
(4) Unsatisfactory

You will have noticed there isn't any middle ground here. Indeed, 2 of the levels could well lead to mass firings of teachers, as the analysis points out

These evaluations must then be used for decisions regarding compensation, nonrenewal, termination, layoffs and professional development. If a teacher received a rating of "unsatisfactory" for two consecutive years, a rating of "unsatisfactory" for two of three consecutive years, a rating of "needs improvement" for three consecutive years, or a combination of "unsatisfactory" and "needs improvement" for three consecutive years, the teacher loses his or her continuing contract.

The Buckeye Institute was salivating at this thought of being able to fire 25% of teachers. HB153 really does light the way for this to happen.

Now supporters of this will argue that if you are an effective teacher you have nothing to worry about. Well, let's take a look at how these evaluations will be performed.

In class observations - two 30 minute observations per year will be performed. Apart from being a huge administrative burden, which we laid out here, you also have to worry that the observation is performed by someone who is qualified to asses your work, and is going to be fair.

By far the biggest piece of the evaluation is Value Add - 50% of your evaluation in fact. We've talked a lot about how unreliable this measure is for individual teacher performance, here and here for example. But what if there's no data? Well that's ok, only 40% of your evaluation will be based on it. I know. Think about it.

Just in case observations and bad measurements aren't enough, the legislature adds one extra layer of crazy to the mix - parent and student survey's.

The evaluations will include whether parents and students are satisfied with a teacher, "which may be measured by surveys, questionnaires, or other forms of soliciting feedback," the law reads.

A provision wirtten by the Onion.

To recap - your pay will no longer depend upon your collective bargaining contract, or step increases, but instead your pay, and your career, will be determined by measures that don't work, require more teaching to the test and open to subjective abuse by administrators. And just in case you're thinking to yourself - "I'll sue if they fire me unfairly", HB153 has that covered too - The bill specifically grants civil immunity to the local board of education and school board members for conducting these evaluations.

We here at Join the Future highly encourage you to contact your state Senator and tell them that these provisions need to be removed from the budget.

Contact your state Senator. Your career may depend upon it.

Budget Bill Analysis by Muskovotz - Attorneys at Law

This week in education cuts

Here's the stories of education cuts this week, as reported by local media

Saturday, April 30th, 2011

Sunday, May 1st, 2011

  • Even JTF needs a break

Monday, May 2nd, 2011

Tuesday, May 3rd, 2011

Wednesday, May 4th, 2011

  • Primary election results snap shot
    Today's news is dominated by the results of the election yesterday. There's sure to be lots of fallout from the failed levy efforts around the state. We'll continue to bring you news as it develops.

Thursday, May 5th, 2011

Friday, May 6th, 2011

The Columbus parent trigger profit motive

A smart and interesting post at Plunderbund, discusses which of the Columbus schools might be susceptible to a parental takeover, now that the Ohio house has reduced their statewide parent trigger provision to a trial in Columbus.

So how likely is that to take place? Consider some details:

As reported by ODE for 09-10, 21 percent of the students at Weinland Park are at the school for less than one year. That also means that the number of parents involved enough to sign the petition is around 80%, with the student population constantly changing. So if 50% of the parents need to sign, but only 80% are around, the parent(s) leading this effort must obtain the signatures of approximately 63% of the parents. And Weinland Park serves a population categorized as 93.7% “economically disadvantaged” in a building that already runs a non-standard year-round schedule. For additional perspective, the number of economically disadvantaged students is 43% statewide. I’m going to take a wild guess and project that these families have greater concerns than taking over a school. Just a guess.

This is a smart and reasonable observation, but as we pointed out in an article a while ago, it's not the only consideration to account for. Indeed, other provisions included in the budget bill could have a significant impact too.

The other question to be asked is this;

How much money could a for-profit charter make by sponsoring an effort to take over one of these Columbus schools?

With an empty promise to desperate parents to fix things, and a paid effort to garner the required parental support for the takeover, these schools might be easy marks, with easy profits to follow.

Can Teachers be Evaluated by their Students Test Scores?

More Value Add research, this time from the Annenberg Institute for School Reform, that should cause pause to those in a headlong rush to implement high stakes testing and measurmenet as a means of judging teaching effectiveness and compensation.

Prepared by Sean Corcoran, assistant professor of educational economics at New York University’s Steinhardt School of Culture, Education and Human Development, and research fellow at the Institute for Education and Social Policy in collaboration with the Annenberg Institute

Value-added models have become increasingly popular in today’s policy environment as a way to evaluate, reward, and dismiss teachers. These statistical models aim to isolate each teacher’s unique contribution to their students’ educational outcomes based in part on student test scores.

But NYU professor Sean Corcoran uses data analysis to argue that value-added models are not precise enough to be useful for high-stakes decision making or professional development. Corcoran cautions policy-makers, in particular, to be fully aware of the limitations and shortcomings of these models and consider whether their minimal benefits outweigh the cost. (September 2010)

The Use of Value-Added Measures of Teacher Effectiveness - Executive Summary

The full report can be read here.

Back to School for the Billionaires

The richest man in America stepped to the podium and declared war on the nation’s school systems. High schools had become “obsolete” and were “limiting—even ruining—the lives of millions of Americans every year.” The situation had become “almost shameful.” Bill Gates, prep-school grad and college dropout, had come before the National Governors Association seeking converts to his plan to do something about it—a plan he would back with $2 billion of his own cash.

[…]

“A lot of things we do don’t work out,” admitted Broad, a product of Detroit public schools and Michigan State who made a fortune in home building and financial services. “But we can take the criticism.”

The bottom line? The billionaires aspired to A-plus impact and came away with B-minus to C-minus results, according to the NEWSWEEK/CPI investigation, which was based on specially commissioned data and internal numbers shared by the philanthropists’ foundations.

[readon2 url="http://www.newsweek.com/2011/05/01/back-to-school-for-the-billionaires.html"]Continue reading...[/readon2]