Merit Pay Considered in Albemarle?

Teaching is sharing, not competing.

In a seemingly unimportant story about a meeting between the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors and the County School Board about compensation strategies the following screamed out at me:  "Supervisors also asked the board to consider a merit-based compensation scale. "

Come again?  One would think that something as important as Merit Pay or Merit-Based Pay would fly a little farther up the news flag pole locally but sadly that is not the case.  No worries, Teaching Underground has you covered.   In fact we've had you covered on the topic of Merit Pay something like six times already.  We will say again with a loud and unwavering voice that making kids part of the pay equation is a bad idea.   Don't believe us?  Keep reading.

"Merit Pay" seems like a Panacea for all that ails schools performance wise, but also financially.
Can this be so?  The concept is to boost student achievement and improve our schools using bonuses for teachers.   Many are supporting this flawed concept.   Common sense and mounting evidence suggests Merit Pay is not only a failed solution but that it is not even an improvement.   For this idea to be suggested is contrary to what most educators already know.

Nashville schools were part of the most scientific evaluation to date and after 3 years of study Matthew Springer, executive director of the National Center on Performance Incentives announced the following:.

 “We tested the most basic and foundational question related to performance incentives — Does bonus pay alone improve student outcomes? – and we found that it does not.”  

I tend to be wary of "centers for" things but it seems prudent to point out the above name seems to suggest they would be looking for evidence that it did positively affect student performance.   The RAND corporation's mission is to improve policy and decision making through research and analysis.  It might seem RAND has failed on the front end part of their mission here.  Meanwhile New York City, Chicago along with the State of Texas tried and abandoned such plans after showing no improvement.  But here we are.  Still dealing with faddish cavalier approaches to reform.   Education Historian and expert Diane Ravitch has a better sense of things and doesn't mince words here on the subject.

Bad  reform ideas seem more contagious than good ones.

No Child Left Behind and now Race to the Top pushed by our Education Secretary Arne Duncan fail to comprehend the complexity of what motivates all of us who teach.  A uniform system of pay does indeed do little to motivate us yet we show up every day and good teachers have yet to beat down the local government or statehouse door calling for such a shift.  We teach not to be rich but to make a difference.  Fair pay and work conditions are far more important.  It is exceedingly difficult to measure teacher effectiveness and quality and designing a valid system is elusive so we settle for something else. The only result of PfP is the further demoralization of teachers and more reliance and focus on standardized exams which are debatable in terms of their measure of showing teacher quality.  Something they were not designed to do.    The United States is constantly compared to Finland where they've focused instead on reduced class size, boosted teachers’ salaries, and eliminated most standardized testing.   It would appear we are resolved to forge our own reform path come hell or high water.  It is hard to turn the reform train around.

We could separate Merit Pay and Value Added(another topic we've covered pretty well) and they both amount to Pay for Performance.  You can pay me for what I do, or, you can pay me for what my students do.  The latter is a bad a idea and no sound example of the former truly exists.  That does't change the fact that current compensation practices are inadequate and potentially outdated.  I can only hope is the same will soon be true for Merit Pay.   Most teachers simply ask they be paid what they are really worth something that is rarely the case.

In the meantime we plan on doing our best to "educate" our local representatives on the subject with the hope that Merit Pay might not progress far beyond consideration.    We'd encourage you to voice whatever our your view is as well. 

High School Students

They say the darndest things. Art Linkletter and Bill Cosby usually dealt with younger subjects than we do but working firsthand with students in high school you gain some invaluable insights.   Get a sense of things by watching the clip below.  So after reading all the evidence in favor of Value Added...just watch this and maybe you'll understand how we can sometimes feel.      :)  

Don't read too much into this.  It's obviously meant to be funny.

As we enjoy an occasional laugh at their expense we must be able to laugh at ourselves.  We keep in mind how much we love our jobs and the opportunity to work with our students.  Oh and we too have been known to say the darndest things.

Economists Prove Teachers Matter

The headline reads "Did You Have  Good Teacher? Expect to earn More as an Adult."

This conclusion was drawn from a research study conducted by three Harvard and Columbia economists that definitively connect career earnings to a student's access to a good teacher in grades 4-8.  So they have essentially proven something common sense says is true.  Teachers matter. 

Of course they do. There are good ones, and then there are some not so good.   Just as there are good ways to use research and some not so good.  The basic problem I have with this research is they define a good teacher by using student test scores alone.    If the same was done in my or any other school I am 100% certain that data would be misleading. We don't all teach the same level and thus not all the same kids with the same learning needs.  They might not have the same goal in mind.  By such logic it could be argued that to some degree, the students we teach define us as teachers.  So what remains unclear despite this study is how to best measure quality. 

Such an approach using testing to identify "good" teachers assumes cause and effect.  It is then parlayed into the dreaded Value Added Measurement of teacher effectiveness.   Nevermind all the other factors affecting kids during their incredibly complex development and education.   Consider if it is possible that students who already do better on tests are more likely to find success in school, get into a better college and eventually get a higher paying job.  Does evidence suggest students from higher socioeconomic levels do better on tests, thus better in school, thus generally earn more money than their peers?  Do the student goals differ?  College admission is a goal.  But who do we hold accountable when goals are not met? 

The TU asks why it is that economists have all this time to study education?  Might they be better served to study something closer matching their background...say, our struggling economy?  Maybe some educators should spend some time studying our economy and drawing some equally obvious conclusions and then suggest some changes.  Maybe they could even prove economists matter...?

The problem is not necessarily with the research itself, it is how it will probably be used.    I can foresee this evidence used as rationale or justification for an increased emphasis on the validity of Value-Added Teacher Evaluations.  And those teacher evaluations will rely disproportionately on student data from testing.    Decision makers and politicians beholden to the appearance of taking action and doing something in our perceived education crisis will likely fail to make reasonable changes from such research and instead use it to justify a call for kneejerk and potentially harmful changes. They do not mean harm they just lack sufficient understanding of all that is involved in education. 

Numerous videos are  included along with the New York Times article and they do much to reinforce the notion that our schools are failing.  I am increasingly frustrated by media and their lack of objectivity on education.  Instead of presenting a balanced view of reality, they(and NBC)  fall prey to the gloom and doom model to attract attention and readers.  This undermines public confidence in our schools and has become a self fulfilling prophecy.  The video at one point references the low grades the public assigned when asked to grade our public schools to illustrate this point.  

If using such data driven decisions were a sound approach then we should follow suit with other public institutions.  Shall we start with our political ones and remake them all in a flurry of reform?  I suspect that course would meet greater and more organized resistance and be deemed unwise.  The video continues on and mentions that among teachers  “there's growing frustration that those skills can't be measured by a test. standardized tests are an accurate reflection of a student's achievement. 60% say those tests determine what they teach.”   Subjective(using real people) as a component in measuring things isn't flawed enough to justify swinging the pendulum too far the other way.  Teachers know that.  If they didn't they'd make course recommendations solely based on how kids score on a test or only assign grades based on tests. 

The increasing role of data in teacher hiring, retention and evaluation does something that few other human endeavors do.  Rely on data more than people.  The problems with VAM(Value Added Models) in such a process is described as either smart or dumb by  Bruce Baker (a guy way smarter than anyone at TU)who said there were 3 main flaws with this approach.  You don't even need to understand what he's saying to figure out he seems to suggest flaws with VAM.

• The first error is a deterministic view of a complex and uncertain process. 
• The second common error becomes apparent once the need arises to concretely measure quality
• The third error is a belief that important traits are fixed rather than changeable 

Here are some things to consider which help put this study in proper perspective.

• •  The difference cited in a lifetime amounts to $4,600.  Over 20 years that's about $225 a year, $19 a month, $4.75 a week, or less than a dollar a day.   What if a student had a great teacher but chose a more service oriented profession with less potential for earnings...hmmm?  Let's take for example...maybe a job like...TEACHING!  Economists would be the ones to qualify worth solely by income.  Hearts of stone those folks. 
  • Kids with good teachers have a .5% greater chance of going to college.  So if a bad teacher taught 200 kids and an good teacher taught 200 kids, the good teacher would send 1 more on to college. 
  • A classroom with $266,000 increase in career earnings.  If I taught a class of 30 kids who worked for 30 years that'd be about $295 difference for each of them. 
  • Robert H. Meyer of the Value-Added Research Center  is quoted as saying “That test scores help you get more education, and that more education has an earnings effect — that makes sense to a lot of people.”  The problem with that is clear to an educator.  A system that relies too heavily on testing in determining the fate of our kids.  Most of the nations(Finland for example) that outperform the United States on international tests do not share this test heavy approach. 
  • The link between teacher performance and student test scores while statistically proven, is not ironclad.  Using this data in such a way has the potential to undermine the collegial and supportive professional environment among teachers and disrupt and discourage peer support.  The effect would hurt all students and counteract any gains, real or perceived.  In short it won't matter who you hire, it will undermine our profession.
  • “The message is to fire people sooner rather than later,” Professor Friedman said.  WTF?  So a new teacher with less experience who needs time to develop as a professional and master their craft should be fired?  What about the teacher who is asked to teach a different curriculum each year?  One who is stricken with illness for a lengthy period of time health problems?  That seems like sound reasoning... huh?  The way to strengthen education is to fire people.  Did you hear that message?  In other words...blame the teachers. 
  • Is it possible as suggested by someone who questions the validity of such research that value added is simply the only financially practical way to tell the difference between teachers?  "Observations or videotapes of classroom practice, teacher interviews, and artifacts such as lesson plans, assignments, and samples of student work" are all financially prohibitive as they'd take too much time and money to effectively implement.  To me it is simple...you know a good teacher when you walk in their room...and yes that is a subjective measure.  But so is measuring learning.  Standardized tests are more objective but we'd be foolish to place any more weight on them than we do already.
  • There is another group who has growing influence on education policy I am wary of, Pyschometricians. They contend that a test is only valid if it actually measures what they are supposed to.  I haven’t seen a test, nor would I want to, that can measure how good a teacher someone is. 
  • Whether it is John Keynes or Adam Smith, economics is a "dismal science" that essentially amounts to theory.  Kinda like education theory. I read some of the comments on the article and they seemed more soundly based on the real world.
  • Are similar data heavy measures applied to similar things?  Like:  Our curriculum, online classes, charter schools, would they be welcome in private schools since education is education ...public or private?  Or could the same conclusion be drawn from how far back a kid sits in a classroom, how fast they finish a test, or whether or not they're a student-athlete? 
  • "But controlling for numerous factors, including students’ backgrounds, the researchers found that the value-added scores consistently identified some teachers as better than others, even if individual teachers’ value-added scores varied from year to year."  Anyone bother asking why it varied?  

  
  The study simply confirms what we already knew.  The question before us is how or if that is useful.  Let me be the 10,000th person to tell you that over-representing the value(pun intended) of Value Added is unwise.  We have begun to employ this approach across the nation in a sweeping tide that shows little sign of turning back.  We've seen the damage such a tide can do when it advances too far unchecked. What is even more frustrating is we seem to be spending more time, money and resources to develop, justify and advance  these methods all for what at can at best be described as a minimal return.   Thus pushing the tide even farther and doing untold damage.

  
  

  So the study found out that teachers matter.   Teachers matter a lot and all this data shouldn't.  Perhaps a study showing parents matter would be equally useful.  Allow me to briefly respond to the research after what has grown into a lengthy post.  "Well ...Duh!"  I'll restate what I find the most fault with about all of this, it is that data driven reform attempts to replace what throughout history has been the skilled art of teaching with some sort of exact science.  In our effort to continually educate and develop the human mind we are forgetting we still dealing with people and we cannot do the job alone.  Funny thing about people and their behavior is that more often than not they find ways to defy scientific explanation.  

  
  

  Value-added is an oxymoron if ever there was one. 

Apples to Apples?

K12 Inc., the country's largest provider of online k-12 education has come under fire from several sources recently for it's attempts to turn a profit by drawing students away from traditional public education classrooms.  Just last week, the New York Times ran an article subtitled Online Schools Score Better on Wall Street than in the Classroom.  Sounds like a pretty bold claim, but we've argued before, with the dot.com decline and housing market bubble burst, education may be the last safe refuge for Wall Street in the 21st century.

Ron Packard, CEO of K12 Inc, issued a reply to this article yesterday in the Fordam Education Institute's Flypaper.  I'm not completely opposed to Virtual Education.  I believe that responsible virtual education within the framework of existing educational structures is vital for 21st century learning.  I do have reservations about a complete package of online education outsourced to a distant and nebulous institution whose primary purpose is maximizing profit.  This description may not fairly characterize K12 Inc., but Packard's defense of the company in response to the NY Times articles is less than convincing.  Of the several arguments presented by Ron Packard, I found number one most lacking.  I've pasted the text of his argument below:

Academic performance of virtual schools: K12 data shows that a large and growing number of students coming into virtual schools are below grade level. The high growth rate of virtual schools means that a large portion of students taking the state tests are in their first year. This makes static test scores poor measures of a school’s overall performance because students perform better on state tests the longer they are enrolled. To measure academic growth, K12 administers third party norm-referenced tests.  Data from these tests show students are making positive academic gains relative to national norms.

 This is not the first time that I've heard this argument to defend poor results of online learning or even charter schools.  So, let's look closely at this argument.  First, Mr. Packard argues that students coming into his schools are below grade level.  It stands to reason that their performance will fall below that of on-grade level students.  Does that mean it's the student's fault and not the school?  I'm o.k. with that as long as we let our "traditional" public schools put forth the same argument.  Do students matter or not?  We have to be careful not to allow student ability or circumstances to provide an excuse for poor service.  If online schools and charters are given a pass because of the population they're dealing with then let's not apply a different standard to public schools dealing with the same students in order to label them as failing.

Second, it looks like the tests are getting blamed.  In the world of public education, again this argument doesn't fly.  The tests are the tests and if you can't perform then you're not performing.  Have you noticed any of the value-added or growth model laws passing across the nation?  It doesn't matter whether students are transferring, adding, dropping, repeating, or not even in your class in some states.  If the test scores aren't good enough, you're not good enough.  That applies to schools and increasingly to teachers as well.  If the tests aren't good enough to judge online education and charters then why do we assume they're good enough to judge traditional public schools.

I suppose if you can be identified by initials and your stock is publicly traded a different set of standards apply.  That shouldn't be a surprise, we've known for a while that Wall Street standards don't apply to the rest of us.

Can a school board member and some principals stop the insanity?

The answer to that Question:  They can try.  The TU has been vocal about our stance on testing, value added, and the like.  As influential as we are, we realize it will take a powerful shift to change course to a more sensible path.  It will also take large numbers of people.  Where do you stand?  Do you buy into all the testing talk?  We certainly don't.  Some recent news has lent a lot of support to our position and if nothing else makes us feel better.

Ask yourself this:  Have you ever seen any of the tests that measure student performance?   I have taught for years with such a test and have yet to see more than a handful of questions and the outdated released version.  Now, such tests will most likely directly affect how I am evaluated.  More questions arise like how specifically does this make me a better teacher and how does it help kids learn?  Is this approach working after decades of effort? 

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan recently spoke at the NCSS conference in DC and called for continued accountability.  From his speech(and for the record we rarely shout):


"Testing advocates are often outshouted, however, by those who view testing as the problem. They say that testing—especially fill-in-the-bubble, high-stakes standardized testing—is a flawed tool for evaluating students—let alone teachers.
Now it is absolutely true that many of today's tests are flawed. They don't measure critical thinking across a range of content areas. They are not always aligned to college and career-ready standards. They don't always accurately measure individual student growth.
And they certainly don't measure qualities of great teaching that we know make a difference—things like classroom management, teamwork, collaboration, individualized instruction and the essential and remarkable ability to inspire a love of learning."

I preferred Ravitch myself.  

Francis Gary Powers probably failed a test

Ever ask why these tests are so secret?   I do all the time.  I wish they'd guard our unmanned spy aircraft this closely.  Then we wouldn't be looking at photos of one sitting in Iran right now. Who is holding these tests and all this testing accountable.  Answer: Not enough people. 

This week has seen some people above the TUs pay grade and level of influence become much more vocal in opposition to such measures.  Maybe the TU should do as Iran did this week and call the Swiss ambassador to protest.  It would likely have the same result.   But Iran is a problem.  We're not.


The links below will take you one the TU's favorites, The Answer Sheet and two posts that share the story of a school board member who arranged to take the FCAT in Florida.  His story is very telling.  

Part I
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/when-an-adult-took-standardized-tests-forced-on-kids/2011/12/05/gIQApTDuUO_blog.html
Follow-Up
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/revealed-school-board-member-who-took-standardized-test/2011/12/06/gIQAbIcxZO_blog.html#pagebreak


This story out of New York where public school principals are publicly opposing their state's newly developed teacher evaluation system. The whole issue of accountability, value added and the merits of testing is starting to be called into question at an increasing rate.  Thank goodness.   Hope it is not too late.  The only rule from psychometricians I know about is do not use tests for purposes other than that for which they were intended.

All this is a step in the right direction but it will take more teachers(like the TU), more principals and most importantly parents to stop the insanity.

Are We Really Going There?

D.C. Schools Prepare for Nation's First Sex-Education Standardized Testing

Go ahead, click the link.  That title's not a joke.  Our capital's school system plans to use multiple choice standardized testing to gauge student knowledge in 5th, 8th, and 10th grades on a number of health related topics.  Officials created the test to comply with a recent policy enacted by the D.C. City Council.

Officials said that the test, which will also include questions on nutrition, mental health and drug use, is based on a provision of the Healthy Schools Act of 2010, which the D.C. Council passed to address health issues in the 75,000-student system.

But the legislation’s sponsor, council member Mary Cheh (D-Ward 3), said the law requires only that the District produce an annual report describing progress on student health concerns. It does not mandate creation of another standardized test.

As silly as this sounds, every time the citizens of our nation sit back and allow passage of what appears to be reasonable education policy our schools take one more step down the slippery slope of insanity.  Did you hear about the 52 new standardized tests last year in Charlotte-Mecklenburg?  To implement the new Pay for Performance systems students took standardized tests in nearly every subject, including Yearbook!

Now, Virginia is among the bandwagon states that want to link teacher evaluation to student "growth and performance."  Here's the catch.  Can anyone argue that teachers should be rewarded for promoting student growth or assissted when they don't/can't?  Not at all.  Whether you refer to "growth models" or "value added", the idea that teachers should be judged on how much a student learns in a given year can't be refuted.  So no one pushes back against legislation that tries to enable this.

We're beginning to learn this year in Albemarle County about our new Teacher Performance Appraisal system.  We've started changing the system to comply with state requirements that at least forty percent of a teacher's evaluation is based on "student growth."  So far we haven't fallen prey to the testing craze, we don't have to specifically link all of our "growth goals" to standardized testing.  It's going to be hard.  Administrators will have to ensure that teachers set reasonable and rigorous enough goals.  They will have to make sure that standards are applied equally across the division.  Some teachers will have specific data to include (with SOL testing) while others can be more creative (music, art, Psychology, etc.)  In the end, it might look easier to just give the kids a test see how they do.

Standardized testing for Sex ed?  Really?  Wake up America.  Republican or Democrat, education policy isn't working, and until more people stand up and expose the consequences of current education policy we're likely to see more of the same until we finally break this system and start over from scratch.  That idea might sound good to some, but for the millions of students who are being broken down along with the system that is supposed to support them, that is not good enough.

Best and Brightest

My colleague and I write a lot about education reform here on the TU.  It may seem like we oppose much of the current reform. We do.  Not because we are obstructionists.  In fact it is obvious that our nation's education system needs continual improvement and we welcome positive changes.  Less obvious is which if any of these reforms have merit.  The one size fits all systemic changes that are being pushed by major players will do little to affect positive change in the average classroom.  They may in fact do the opposite.  What is certain is that the focus of many of the ideas and measures is the quality of the teacher.   Many profess that an influx of the nations “Best and Brightest” to the teaching profession will do much to fix all that is wrong.
 
Of course there are bad teachers out there and a growing number of initiatives seem focused on identifying and then purging them from the profession.  I have no problem when bad teachers leave.  I have a problem when good teachers leave.  That is happening with greater frequency.  I also have a problem with how these efforts to root out bad teachers affect what I do in the classroom.  Some cite the lack of teacher dismissals as evidence that bad teachers are protected by tenure and that it seems anyone can keep a teaching job. But they forget that many self select and quit. They also underestimate the complexity of judging quality teaching.  It is true anyone CAN teach under ideal conditions.  But there is much facing schools and done by today’s students in those classrooms to prevent such ideal conditions from materializing.  When people realize how hard it can be many there including these Best and Brightest will say in effect “I’m out”, and head for the door.  Knocking many of us regular teachers over as they rush past. But people teaching for the right reasons stick it out.  That should matter.   They find ways to improve or ask for help.  They do a lot more for kids than what happens between the bells. To me it is far more important WHO a teacher is as opposed to WHAT they are. 


As the focus shifts to those actually doing the instruction efforts are made to ensure all students have access to quality teachers.  How could anyone oppose such a thing?  But these efforts to identify bad teachers and standardize curriculum hurt me in a variety of ways.   Couple that with the promotion of common techniques from the edgurus or edupreneurs of the day and you’ve got a tangle of adverse affects. These hurt quality teachers.  Those that have control over what I do see teaching as a science.  Where a variable can be altered and it will reproduce a desired outcome. Those who teach know it is an art.  This disjoint lies at the heart of many issues and is in part a reason why we created this Teaching Underground.  Those who have survived the first few purgatory like years that weed out people in teaching for the wrong reasons or those who do not possess the necessary skills know there are no shortcuts and there are no easy years.

Those promoting B and B talk miss many key points.  Chief among them is the fact you can have all the degrees in the world and still suck.  Drop a Harvard law grad or Wall Street CEO in some of the classes I’ve taught and the kids will sniff them out and eat them for breakfast. Educational success is not a guarantee of success in life.  Especially not the life of a teacher.  I’m proof of the opposite since I am still working despite my unimpressive academic record.    A review of this might lead one to conclude I am unfit for every job. But there is no substitute for experience.  I learned much from mine.  Lessons I will not soon forget.  Lessons that I use daily.  One of those is that even smart people can be dumb and lazy.  Nothing against smart folks joining up, just cautioning that they do so for the right reasons.  That they understand there is no playbook or model for what happens every day.  They better be child-centered and not self-centered or they won’t make it.   Three years does not an expert make.  And to think they’ll remedy everything might be short sighted. 

So take for example Mr. Mortimer Zuckerman.  A bright fella who says in part “America has to rethink how to attract, employ, retain, and reward outstanding teaching talent.”   What Mr. Zuckerman forgets while he pounds away in one of his 4 houses or his 100+ ft yacht, is that teaching at Harvard and Yale and publishing magazines differs a great deal from teaching in a public school.      Teaching is a human endeavor.   What people say does in fact matter.  Calling for more Best and Brightest hurts.   A  Race to the Top and No Child Left Behind continue to have unintended consequences. Throughout, one constant is that we are not all motivated to work harder and longer solely by money.

What else he does in the article does is tougher to discern.  I’m surprised I even picked up on it given I am just a teacher.  He starts with pointing out the “Educational Crisis”…then moves on to criticize tenure and I think the overall nature of our educational workforce lowering the crosshairs directly on teachers. (Allow me to return fire)  Catch phrases like digital learning and concepts like having kids learn by watching DVDs of top teachers reveal that the view from the top is not what I see everyday.   Will it work?  Maybe with a small percentage of our kids who are self motivated.  “In fact, the new methods could reduce the longer-term need for mass teaching manpower”  Really?   Over-reliance on technology is dangerous.  It shouldn't replace teachers, it should empower them.   As good as it sounds having a kid in California watch a teacher from North Carolina using technology ain’t exactly gonna work for a lot of kids, and it doesn’t work for teachers either.  You can’t simply watch a good teacher and then repeat what they do.  Authentic assessment is what many of us do every day.   Intentional or not Zuckerman’s ideas further erode understanding of what good teaching really is and how valuable those people are.  It is not teaching to the test, it is teaching the kid.   There's no rubric for good teaching. 

This simplistic approach to educational issues reveals the divide between those that teach and those that “know” about teaching. Among the most asinine of ideas are many coming from  “reputable” educational researchers who hide behind mountains of data.  Too many of whom inexcusably fail to even talk to teachers in any of what they do.  The Best and Brightest should follow the same path to the profession as the rest of us, not get short tracked.   I frown upon alternative licensure not because I am threatened by it but because it makes a mockery of the requirements and processes in place as part of preparation to become a teacher. Not the least of which is the professional semester or student teaching.  Forgo it and you have no idea what the job is really like.    Kinda like many writing on education reform.

Those who seek to break down some of these regulations and “judge” teachers objectively put all of us who care about quality teaching in peril. Would we do the same for doctors and pilots?  They often blend anti-union and anti-tenure ideas and propose annual contracts.  Remember the origins of tenure.  Without tenure I might be less likely to take risks, take on a student teacher, share ideas, be innovative or take on some of our more challenged kids.  You cannot on one hand stress the importance and impact a great teachers then totally discount everything they say.  We do not choose our “clients” and we are subject to a slow erosion of our autonomy within our workplace  But still many teachers endure.

Best and Brightest talk does much to demean those of us who labor every day to help kids learn.   I know many great teachers whose SAT scores eliminated them from the most prestigious learning institutions.  But they know their craft well and in front of kids they transform into the most brilliant professional you’ll ever see. These three simple words subtlety imply we who are teaching are not smart  Sure I was just happy to get into college and I work with some of the folks who taught me when I was in High School.    I can only imagine what they think of me and purposefully avoid asking what I was like in High School.  But I do ask them how I can do better on occasion.   I am not the best at much of anything and I am smart enough to know I am far from bright.  Still I know a good teacher when I see one.

I’ll even admit I might be counted among the bad teachers by some measures.   Some of what I say here may sound a bit "holier than thou" but it is only meant to awaken the common sense among us.  I don't give much advise on investing or campaign strategy.  But I’d advise people who don’t face 14 year olds each day listen none the less.  Let’s not get hypnotized by the sheepskin shingle on someone’s wall and instead measure WHO people are as much as WHAT they are.  Listen to the professionals in the job when they say things are bad ideas.  Absolutely look for the best teachers we can but do not exclude those who can excel at the job because they didn't end up at an Ivy League.  Let’s remember that these efforts here to identify and remove those who are not good teachers do much to impede and frustrate good teachers.   As a result I have seen too many join those exiting on their way out the door.  In part since they can no longer excel and enjoy the profession and teach the kids the as they once did.  Ultimately this Best and Brightest approach might leave us worse off than we were are now.   Making the job of those of us who are crazy enough to endure for the right reasons harder.  Whatever the case it doesn’t help us teach the kids we’ve got much.

Thems fightin' words

My last few posts had a sort of boxing theme woven in. Not sure why as I never really watch boxing. But for the first time publicly I will admit I occasionally watch C-Span. I'll risk the damage to my reputation and street cred to share something with all the subterranean readers.

C-span is a channel I usually only peruse when really really bored or on the way to another channel. Once in awhile I actually plan ahead and tune in to something on C-Span. Such was the case a few days back when I watched a program called After Words where Diane Ravitch interviewed Steven Brill on all things education. The bout, I mean show, lived up to my expectations. I agree completely with almost no one in this deceitful world of ours but I'd sit on Ravitch's side of the church in a wedding for sure. I'm just sad we rely on a 74 year old to carry the flag and she's pretty much the only one that makes a convincing case on behalf of common sense.

Buckle up and make some popcorn before you sit down to watch. This is a tense, informative, frustrating and entertaining look at what amounts to a debate reflecting the polemical nature of education reform. Sure I'm personally a little frustrated with all the data, abstract talk and absence of real teachers in the conversation but still I highly recommend you spend a few minutes(or even the whole hour) watching.

Click link below to watch the program.
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/StevenB

This interview has it all: Diane Ravitch, Steven Brill, Joel Klein, No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top, Charter Schools, The Death and Life of the Great American School System, Class Warfare: Inside the Fight to Fix America's Schools, Teacher Unions, Pay for Performance, Merit Pay, Value Added, Democrats for Education Reform, you name it.

Love to hear some reaction and then I'll maybe share some of my own.

Why You Should Care

Bad things are happening in Virginia.  As a public institution, our schools are part of a system "for, by, and of" the people.  Increasingly, the public has allowed too much distance between themselves and the decision-making that drives policy in our schools.  I can't help but feel that political and educational leaders are fine with this.  It makes the hard work of having to justify and take responsibilities for making decisions a little easier.

The Virginia State Board of Education recently announced a Pilot Program that was conceived as a plan to earn Federal "Race To The Top" incentive money.  The state did not receive the grant, but they've moved ahead with the plan.  The plan is easily framed in language such as "performance pay" and "measured by student growth" which sound perfectly sound on the surface.  Launching this program as a voluntary pilot also minimized potential backlash, so much so that the real news seems to have been lost.

According to the Virginia Department of Education, the essential elements of this Pilot Program have already been approved for statewide use.  Districts are encouraged to adopt them early, but the new Guidelines for Uniform Performance Standards and Evaluation Criteria for Teachers will take effect for the entire state by July 1, 2012.  I suppose that since they've adopted the guidelines already, there is no need to evaluate the efficacy of the pilot to determine the guidelines' worth.

Essentially, I see no genuine public discourse of the merit to this system and similar systems across the nation.  It is easy to promote such a plan in today's political climate.  Teachers have become a target, a scapegoat even for society.  A plan that supposedly rewards the good teachers sounds great.  The idea that you earn more pay based on better performance is quite an American ideal.  To measure performance on how much a student improves over the course of a year instead of a final absolute score sounds pretty fair as well.  This is why the public discourse is needed.  As good as this plan sounds, it is terrible.  We need more public awareness of this plan because I for one would appreciate a better explanation from our leaders about why this plan is good.  I would also like for the public to be more aware of the pitfalls of this plan so that leaders would have to address their critics and constituents.

I encourage you to read our previous post "Taking A Stand in Virginia and Texas" if you haven't yet.  But don't think that we at the Underground are a couple of lone nuts speaking out agains the system.  Mary Tedrow wrote a piece for the Washington Post "Answer Sheet" blog today specifically addressing problems with the Virginia system.  She articulates the issues much better than we are able, so we strongly encourage you to read "Virginia's Ill Advised Assessment Experiment."  Also on today's Answer Sheet you can find an article by John Ewing, president of Math for America, explaining the pitfalls of Value Added Measures.  The article "Leading Mathematician Debunks 'value-added'"is a little longer, but if you're interested in a more academic discussion of the problems with the metrics used for 'value-added' it is worth the read.  Both articles do an excellent job of moving beyond the effect on teachers and describe the negative effect on students and learning arising from this movement.

Taking a Stand in Virginia and Texas

In the previous post on the Underground, my colleague referred to Superintendent John Kuhn of Texas testifying before the Texas legislature regarding teacher evaluation and "value-added" systems of measuring teacher effectiveness.  Across the nation, we are moving toward systems that measure the effectiveness of students, teachers, schools, and entire districts on the basis of standardized testing.  The push toward common core standards will only lead to more. (See here for a interesting post discussing merit pay and common core standards)

I am convinced that the American public agrees.  I am also convinced that our politicians, educational leaders and all of the media-endorsed experts agree that excessive standardized testing degrades our educational system.  I don't think these same leaders and "experts" understand just how much their ideas and policies that sound great in theory can do so much damage when put into practice.  Let me concede a few things:

1) The idea that every family in America can expect a consistent and quality curriculum for their students is a good idea.

2) The idea that a teacher should be evaluated based on how well they are able to move their student from one level to the next is a good idea.

3) The idea that teachers and schools should be held accountable for what and how they teach is a good idea.

Maybe that is a little common ground that we can all agree on that might help us move toward reducing our differences.  The differences arise in the methods proposed to make these ideas reality.  Organic systems work when they are sensitive to their environment and respond properly.  In the human body, this means the brain receives information from the body and responds accordingly.  Executive functions in a healthy system arise from quality feedback.  For whatever reason, the executive functioning of education policy acts independent of quality feedback.  Perhaps the teachers and students who raise their voices in opposition to the onslaught of standardized testing are seen as too self-serving.  But the survival and maturation of our system requires that decision-makers understand the impact of their decision.

That is why Superintendent Kuhn should be applauded.  Openly testifying to the Legislature that he has considered opting his child out of the testing process and publicly naming a company like Pearson, asserting that we have placed more trust in them than in our local teachers, is not the smartest political move.  Standing out against the grain of public education policy may cost him any hopes he may have had of holding higher position at state or national levels.  Calling out a player in the "industrial-educational" machine may limit his post-education employment options.  But, perhaps for these reasons he will also be taken seriously.

Virginia now stands on the verge of facing an increasing growth in the importance of standardized testing and the resources it will require of schools for administration and reporting.  It is not a secret that the state is on the "value-added" teacher evaluation bandwagon.  The secretary of Education, Gerard Robinson, belongs to the "Chiefs for Change" coalition supported and promoted by former Florida governor Jeb Bush. The group focuses on issues such as creating "value-added" evaluations for teachers and principals, stronger standards and testing, and expanded school choice.

Allowing for the "common sense" thinking that "value-added" is a reasonable method of teacher evaluation, we should consider the serious misgivings of the approach.  Just a few criticisms of the approach can be found on the blog of Harvard Education Publishing, at the National Academy of Sciences, and the Economic Policy Institute.  Full texts of the reports and studies can be found at the links above.

Further bringing Virginia into the realm of "value-added," Governor Bob McDonnell has implemented a pilot merit pay program in the state.  Closer examination of this program reveals that teachers working in "struggling schools" who succeed in raising achievement will be eligible for up to $5000 in additional pay.  The identification of deserving schools in this case does not seem clear to all, but even more problematic is the sublime move toward a value-added model on which to base this reward.  At least 40 percent of a teacher's performance evaluation must be tied to student academic performance. This includes improvements in standardized test scores.   As a "pilot" program, this appears innocuous enough, and framing the terms (a la Race to the Top) in such a carrot and stick fashion might cause  districts to run for the money.

Educators have two choices in situations like this. 1) Take the money and run, don't rock the boat, and accept this as the future and get on board early.  2) Take a stand, speak up for what's good for education, and refuse to play a role in implementation of bad policy.

I am encouraged to hear the news that district leaders in Fairfax and Loudon County are not likely to apply for this program.  I hope they follow through.  I also hope that the school board and administrators in my own county of Albemarle will not accept the advent of value-added as inevitable and take the opportunity to stand against it by refusing to apply for the funding.  To the public, refusal of this funding may appear confusing at first, but it provides an excellent opportunity for school leaders to communicate what responsible reform should look like.  Change is needed in American education, but reform such as this is no reform at all, it is more of the same "carrot and stick" motivation driven by standardization.

We would love to hear other opinions regarding the movement toward "value-added", merit pay, and especially this new Virginia policy even if you disagree.  Click the comment link below to add your thoughts.

Value Added is THAT teacher

I have read quite a bit recently about pay for performance plans in our schools. The Feds continue to push states to tie teacher evaluation and pay to student data. States have struggled to keep up creating suspect standardized tests. Resources continue to flow towards large testing companies like Pearson and away from local schools.

I have yet to read a more appropriate response to the Value Added Model being adopted of rating teachers. It comes from Superintendent John Kuhn of Texas who was testifying in front of Public Education Committee in the Texas House of Representatives. He was asked "teachers give students grades all the time...why shouldn't they be graded?" Below is the response he wishes he had given and it is how many of us feel and I encourage you to read up a bit more on these issues.

Representative, you make a good point. The state has adopted the role of teacher, and teachers are the students. And this is the root of the problem--you are a bad teacher, and that is why we students are getting rowdy now. That is why we are passing notes to one another saying how mean you are. We are not upset that you grade us. We are upset that your grading system is arbitrary and capricious. We are upset at the way you hang our grades on the wall for everyone to see, instead of laying our papers face down on our desks when you pass them back. We are upset because when you treat us unfairly there is no principal we can go to, to report you for being unjust. There is no one but you and us, ruler and ruled. Your assignments are so complicated and sometimes seem so pointless. You never give us a break, never a free day or a curve. And we heard you in the teacher's lounge talking about how lazy we are. You stay behind your desk, only coming out to give us work or gripe at us. You never come to our games; you didn't ask me how I did in the one-act-play.

Representative Hochberg, the problem isn't that Texas wants to grade us; the problem is that Texas is THAT teacher, the one who punishes the whole class for the misbehaviors of a few bad apples, who worries more about control than relationships, who inadvertently treats all kids as if they are the problem kids. This approach has made you the teacher all the kids dread. The one who builds fear instead of trust, who never takes late work or asks how our weekend was. You are the teacher and we are the student, and if you want us to mind, you should create a happy classroom, work with us, relate to us, build trust with us, seek our input, and ask our opinions once in awhile. Give us choices. Give us room to experiment and permission to risk new things in your classroom, permission to try and fail without disappointing you.

I again take the opportunity to remind folks it is not just me who thinks this is a bad idea. I am not an obstructionist, really. I am not afraid of being held accountable. I am just scared of how we are choosing to do it. I wish others would express this opinion more often. Arne Duncan and any other politician getting mileage out of this plan might want to rethink it when all is said and done. Myth and emotion are powerful forces in public debate and sometime truth and accuracy can take a backseat to political will and motivation. In Chicago for example the jury is still out just as it is in Texas, New York, Colorado and elsewhere. This conclusion is not unique and one shared by many. Love to hear other thoughts on such plans.