Monday, October 22, 2012

Value added methods for evaluating teachers

On another post Anonymous wrote:

New topic:


Anonymous said...

Why doesn't Central Office come up with a system to evaluate themselves to see if they are truly supporting the schools in an effective way to promote student learning? Do they think that the ONLY aspect of student learning is teacher efectiveness???? How about all of the times that we change curriculum based on who got a free trip somewhere or got wined and dined the most? OR, how about who got to keep their department in tact because of the Gates Grant even though it hasn't produced an idea yet that has worked? OH, and there are also the jobs created or filled by nepatism (most recently Librarian Sheila Stein) after nearly 200 teachers were laid off? SOMEDAY upper management will FINALLY figure out that there is much more to the educational equation than the peformance of teachers. I would challenge each and every person who works in central office to come and spend one week in a school and maybe then their eyes would finally be opened up. If they did that, they may find that they have gained a lot of respect for their ideas when they recomend changes at the building level. All we ever here is "research shows this" or "research shows that". Well as one of my former principals used to say to me "the proof is in the pudding". Meaning, show examples of positive results occuring in districts that are similar to ours and not using examples of districts that we have NOTHING in common with. How about we do our own THINKING for a change and not recomendations that come from people that don't know our student population? After all, don't we pay central office staff enough to think on their own or are they just collecting research and throwing it at us hoping that something positive will stick? JUST the way, I no longer work for the district but do have children who attend PPS and believe me the decisions being made by central office look no better to me as a parent then it did when I was an employee.

Anonymous said...

It's really a shame that Mr. Gill doesn't bother to disclose that he made a pile of cash from PPS first through the Rand Corporation and then through Mathmatica. In fact, when Gill moved from one to the other, PPS switched big dollar research firm.

The public will never know if family ties came into play or not. Brian's father Paul Gill was a graduate of the Broad Superintendent's Academy.

It makes no sense to spend so much money developing what the State itself is working. There's not a single superintendent in the State without the Broad virus that would even think of doing so.

aparent said...

From the article: "And the perspectives of students ----who observe their teachers more than anyone else does---can be taken into account."

Cumbersome is an appropriate way to describe what the final process of evaluating teachers will be like when all is said and done. Not to make it more difficult, but to make it more objective, we should look to the students who are either employed in a decent job for a high school graduate or who have gone on to post-secondary education or training, to provide grades for the teachers who got them where they are. Depending on students currently in PPS offers too many issues and current students may not posess the maturity to answer honestly and without emotion. Malice might be too strong a word, but it is reality that a kid who had a detention or suspension as a result of a teacher enforcing a rule might be influenced to rate a teacher harshly.

The Pittsburgh Promise office could be a resource for keeping in touch with grads who will likely be able to score a teacher based on how well the student is doing in school. There must be other ways to reach out to kids gainfully employed too.

This evaluating teachers is serious business to parents. We all have our stories, and stand around any bus stop to hear one parent praise a teacher and the one standing next to him tear the same teacher apart. We are skeptical because we have not heard of anyone designing these processes say that they have ever been in a position to go through a similiar evaluation. Does anything exist for any other profession?

Anonymous said...

Sigh. There is no question that family ties came into play, or for that matter friendships. Cate Reed and Sam Franklin hired friends and friends of friends into the district. They all either went to grad school together or worked together somewhere else or went to high school together. No exceptions, oh wait one, Errika Jones who used to work for the city. Seems silly to have an hr department recruiting when you can just hire a friend.

Anonymous said...

Pure unadulterated propaganda that seeks to divert attention from carpetbaggers who cash in. These people are thieves, pure and simple.