New evaluation system finds less than 1 percent of teachers are ineffective

Under the state’s prior teacher evaluation system, less than 1 percent of teachers were rated as unsatisfactory. So, the state used some of its Race to the Top millions to create and pilot a new evaluation system that was  purportedly more comprehensive and more honest in its assessment of how effective teachers were in their classrooms.

While the old evaluation system rated teachers as satisfactory/unsatisfactory and didn’t judge them by students’ academic progress, the system being piloted contains four different ratings: exemplary, proficient, developing/needs improvement and unsatisfactory.

The AJC has a good story today about the initial findings of the pilot, which the newspaper obtained through an Open Records request.

Even under this new system, less than 1 percent of Georgia teachers were classified as ineffective and one in five earned the top rating of exemplary.

The story notes that identifying and removing bad teachers has taken on increasing importance, with research showing that three years under bad teachers can negatively change a student’s academic trajectory.

Teachers in DeKalb, Gwinnett, Cherokee, Clayton, Henry and 21 other school districts participated in the pilot from last January to May and resulted in 0.32 percent of teachers being classified as ineffective, 5.95 percent as developing/needs improvement, 74.4 percent as proficient and 19.3 percent as exemplary, according to a state Department of Education report obtained by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution under the Georgia Open Records Act.

Sandi Jacobs, vice president of the National Council for Teacher Quality in Washington, told the AJC that she was most surprised that the pilot results showed so few teachers in need of improvement. “If we only had 6 percent who were anything less than perfection, student achievement would probably be off the charts,” Jacobs said.

One of the main impediments to comprehensive teacher evaluations in the past has been a lack of adequate observation. Principals did not have time to go into classrooms to watch teachers in action.

That remains a problem with a new evaluation systems being piloted through Georgia’s Race to the Top grant, according to many teachers and principals on this blog.

If you were part of the pilot, please tell us about your experiences.

Here is an excerpt of the AJC story: Please read the full piece before commenting:

The state’s new teacher evaluation system needs some work. That’s the lesson Georgia education leaders are drawing from a pilot study that unexpectedly showed only a tiny fraction of the state’s teachers are ineffective.

A report from the state Department of Education found ratings of about 5,800 teachers in last year’s pilot study “skewed to the positive,” with less than 1 percent of teachers classified as ineffective and one in five getting the top rating of exemplary.

State officials say they expect more realistic outcomes as teachers and principals are better trained and have more time to adapt to the new evaluation system, which is to roll out statewide in the 2014-2015 school year.

Senate Education Committee Chairman Fran Millar, R-Dunwoody, said the preliminary results — particularly the finding that less than 1 percent of teachers are unsatisfactory — raise serious questions.

“Statistically, this flies in the face of our academic achievement levels. These numbers just doesn’t jibe with reality,” Millar said. “If the Georgia evaluation system is going to be based on these type of statistics, I wouldn’t see us going forward with it because, just statistically, it can’t be valid.”

A major component of teachers’ evaluations — the measure of students’ progress — is not included. State officials said that’s still being analyzed and will be reported later.

The report acknowledges the pilot results did not meet state officials’ expectations and points to the need for more training. James Stronge, a nationally known education consultant who was hired to help develop the system, said he doubts that only about 6 percent of teachers need improvement.

“We’re not aiming to get people,” Stronge said. “But in an honest evaluation, that’s likely too low for the percentage of teachers needing assistance to improve their performance.”

Avis King, the state’s deputy school superintendent for school improvement, said the report on the pilot was “very honest, and that’s what we wanted it to be.”  Martha Ann Todd, associate state superintendent for teacher and leader effectiveness, said she expects more realistic results as educators receive more training and become more accustomed to the new process.  “I think it’s going to be a culture shift until we get a true measure,” Todd said.

Ten percent of teachers scoring at the extremes of exemplary and unsatisfactory likely would be more accurate, Todd and King said.

Initially, only the 26 local school districts that partnered with the state on its successful bid for a $400 million federal Race to the Top grant in 2010 were obligated to use the new teacher evaluation system.

But as a condition of its waiver from requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind law, Georgia has since had to commit to using the new evaluation system in all 180 local school districts effective with the 2014-2015 school year. An expanded pilot program is taking place this year, involving about 50,000 teachers in 50 school districts.

–from Maureen Downey, for the AJC Get Schooled blog

115 comments Add your comment

Michael Goike

January 7th, 2013
9:03 am

The evaluation had one question on it. Do you think you are ineffective check yes or no. One percent of the teachers are stupid too.

Digger

January 7th, 2013
9:12 am

The blind evaluating the blind. Only in education.

Beverly Fraud

January 7th, 2013
9:14 am

Yet the same people who complied this report concluded “the training for evaluators was successful”.

Guess we can’t hold educrats accountable for anything, even as we try to hold teachers accountable for everything.

Beverly Fraud

January 7th, 2013
9:17 am

I wonder what Socrates would get under the evaluation system? Yet 200 years from now, we will still recognize Socrates and the Socratic method. 200 years from now, will we recognize anyone who came up with this newest, latest, greatest evaluation system?

Fericita

January 7th, 2013
9:27 am

Why is it so unbelievable that less than 1 percent of teachers are ineffective? So much more goes into student success than the teacher; why do we insist on pretending otherwise?

Grob Hahn

January 7th, 2013
9:35 am

You have our children for most of their waking hours, far more than we have them.
Grobbbbbbbbb

Once Again

January 7th, 2013
9:36 am

And yet kids still can’t read or write when they are done with their 12 year prison sentence. Maybe the problem is the top-down, bureaucratically-managed, no accountability government run system? You can guarantee that there would never be an adequate evaluation of government schools that would identify the “system” as the inherent failure it is. Way too much money and power vested in controlling all of these billions along with the minds of the next generation. But it is certainly nice to see that millions were wasted on yet another effort to make it seem like the system is trying to improve itself. That should keep the gullible parents in tow for a few more years.

Michael Moore

January 7th, 2013
9:46 am

What’s so hard about reading a script? Who really gets to teach anymore?

RJ

January 7th, 2013
9:48 am

The current evaluation tool is much too time consuming. It would be great if administrators had the time to evaluate teachers the way it’s set up right now. I find the new tool to be even more time consuming for teachers. We’re submitting, or re-submitting paperwork just to prove that we’re effective. The amount of paperwork that’s being passed down has become ridiculous. And while I’ve never complained about my pay, after losing 3 weeks of pay this year, I am tired of being expected to work 60+ hours and not be properly compensated. Who has time for all of this? I would much rather spend my time preparing to teach my students, grade papers, input grades, contact parents, oh wait, I already do that plus the ridiculous paperwork that nobody is really reading. Gotta love education!

dc

January 7th, 2013
9:50 am

maybe the problem is that the people doing the evaluation are being too lenient on the bad teachers…..which makes perfect sense, as the incentive to be hard on teachers just isn’t there. Once again, proof that an objective, Value Added measurement using standardized test results, may be the best approach. Again, not a fool proof approach, but the best one.

Clearly, given the results from this “new” system, it isn’t working either….. Since those of you who teach know very well how many ineffective teachers there are in your department alone.

Lindsey

January 7th, 2013
9:55 am

I wonder if we used this evaluation on our current Congress members what percent would be found as ineffective?! GA has a lot of great teachers, I am married to one and they work really hard for what they do.

Attentive Parent/Invisible Serfs Collar

January 7th, 2013
10:04 am

This teacher eval system is looking for teacher compliance with a desired behavioral model. It is designed to coerce compliance with Charlotte Danielson and others outcome based education classroom practices and prevent the old “close the door and teach the content” dynamic that impeded the 1960s and 90s efforts.

So guess what? When teachers are being observed they perform consistent with the desired behaviors. You can be quite ignorant of the subject and still perform adequately and proficiently based on the model. In fact that is one of the primary benefits of performance assessments for both students and teachers, being stupid or ignorant is no barrier to performance.

http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/coercing-teachers-to-be-social-and-political-saboteurs-what-can-be-done/ is a story I did several weeks ago on this compliance system and why it is so crucial to the Social Reconstruction efforts for education envisioned by Dewey and all his 21st century acolytes.

It gives the links to both the CCSSO’s Model Teaching Standards and Linda Darling-Hammond’s recent report on what behaviors will be deemed effective teaching.

I classify the whole “we are not telling teachers how to teach” PR campaign of Common Core as totally bogus. Along with the new forms of measurements that are not tests of knowledge, changing classroom behaviors is the whole point of Common Core.

The rather talkative Hewlett Foundation had admitted precisely that. Not about standardizing content at all unless very low levels counts.

fedup_11

January 7th, 2013
10:09 am

In any organization, there is likely 10% dead weight. Just observing the language skills of teachers, too many fail in their native language and yet, they play the role model for students. Get the government out of the school systems and allow these schools to be competitive in attracting students. Yes, there are great teachers. And then, there are many bad teachers.

Lindsey- ever heard US Congresswomen Corrine Brown speak? Google her. You’ll fall out of your chair. Listen to her, as she took up valuable tax payer’s time, ranting nonsense about her University of Florida. Scary.

Mary Elizabeth

January 7th, 2013
10:10 am

On December 28, 2012, I had the following dialogue exchange with “Redweather” on this blog regarding “blaming teachers”:
===============================================

Redweather: “And if we are going ‘to stop blaming students,’ we should also stop blaming teachers.”

Mary Elizabeth: “Amen to that! ‘We’ should simply change the instructional design of our schools to accommodate a realistic, continuous progress, mastery of curriculum, model for every student in grades k – 12 (or more), in the ways that I have tried to explain, and then ‘we’ should educate teachers, administrators, parents, and students as to how that effective design would operate, in practice, for each student.”

For more on this Continuous Progress Educational Design Model, k -12+, see the following link: http://maryelizabethsings.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/the-case-for-continuous-progress-for-students-in-grades-k-12/
——————————————————————————————

NOTE of information for readers: State Sen. Fran Millar is a member of ALEC, and he has been – and perhaps remains – a member of ALEC’s Educational Task Force, as well as functioning as Chair of Georgia’s Senate Educational Committee.

Private Citizen

January 7th, 2013
10:17 am

Kudos to Serf’s Collar for accurate and relevant information. I have been put through the Charlotte Danielson brainwashing while having to work with little support materials and then being critically evaluated on unpredictable teacher requirements that are basically if you are following a script or not, and how well you repeat back to the bosses the required script. This is like having to play-act while teaching without materials. The organization of curriculum supply materials from the bosses is completely disorganised and derelict. Bullying teachers is just a cover for there being no organized curriculum methods. I have attended a district curriculum meeting where downtrodden teacher leaders where asking “Where’s the supply materials?” and the one honest boss basically said “Go steal stuff from the internet and use it to teach with.”

This is the real reality. The tsunami of propaganda and “fault the teacher” etc. does not, repeat, does not represent reality. Why the over-emphasis on evaluating teachers? Because it is a cover for dysfunctional system.

10:10 am

January 7th, 2013
10:19 am

A half century after test scores headed south … education reform still remains a joke, and the teachers’ unions (and their media shills) still treat parents and taxpayers like fools.

Jerry Eads

January 7th, 2013
10:21 am

As long as we think in terms of “the beatings will continue until morale improves,” teacher evaluations will be “skewed” and no change will happen. When the beaters are replaced with people who know at least something about teaching, actually care about kids, and who think in terms of building better schools rather than keeping them as concentration camps, we will begin to see better teaching from every teacher and better learning from every child.

Just Sayin.....

January 7th, 2013
10:22 am

particularly the finding that less than 1 percent of teachers are unsatisfactory — raise serious questions.

FAIL.

Any system that evaluates 99% of teachers as effective has failed. Can anyone look at student achievement and, with a straight face, say that 99% of teachers are effective?

But now I will play devil’s advocate: if 99% of teachers are effective, then it is the classroom structure (tossing kids of all abilities into the same classroom, expecting the smarter kids to help the weaker kids, new math, etc, etc) that is failing. And if that is the case, then schools have been wandering down the wrong path for the better part of the last 25 years.

indigo

January 7th, 2013
10:23 am

Does anyone honestly believe that only less than 1% of Georgia teachers are ineffective?

Ernest

January 7th, 2013
10:26 am

I found this statement most interesting:

One of the main impediments to comprehensive teacher evaluations in the past has been a lack of adequate observation. Principals did not have time to go into classrooms to watch teachers in action.

Aside from the metrics that exist on an evaluation form, I would think the greatest weight of a teacher evaluation would be the observation. This also assumes the person doing the evaluation knows what good instruction is along with how to help with a remediation plan if they believe a teacher needs assistance.

Given the demands placed on many principals these days, would it make sense to have certified retired educators perform the evaluations, in conjunction with a school based staff member? IMO, factoring that some principals have not been in the classroom very long before moving up the ladder, there is reason to question the quality of the observations.

LoganvilleGuy

January 7th, 2013
10:29 am

I don’t understand why people refuse to acknowledge the HUGE role that environment has on educational success. When you have students that come from predominately low-income and high-crime areas, the success of the school is often going to be impeded by these factors. They are external factors that teachers can’t control. Add compulsory attendance and federal/state policies that prevent you from effectively dealing with troublemakers, and you lower the achievement bar even more.

You can see it every day… The more affluent the area is, the better the school performs. If you think that is based solely on teacher quality, I’d be willing to wager that you are wrong.

Also, I recognize that there are outliers… Yes, you will be able to find high poverty schools that do well.

Concerned Mom

January 7th, 2013
10:32 am

My kids have teachers in high school who do not teach. Period. They hand the kids a textbook and a sheet of paper and tell them to take notes. No hands on, no discussion. One of the teachers has the title of “Dr.” but has classes in which the average grade is failing. I find that completely unacceptable.

Attentive Parent/Invisible Serfs Collar

January 7th, 2013
10:32 am

Mary Elizabeth’s model of Continuous Progress is Outcomes Based Education. And the mastery of curriculum is the ability to apply what is provided, not necessarily know it within the privacy of your own mind. The emphasis of application keeps the focus on the concrete and in context. The idea is not to provide a body of facts that bolsters the abstract mind. Or what I call the Axemaker Mind after reading James Burke’s book The Axemaker’s Gift wanting to shut down that rational, logical, independent mind.

It is the same impetus behind both the reading and math wars as well. Symbol systems are magical tools that let the human mind forge its own way. At least for some talented or determined people. No longer permissable.

All outcomes based education tracks back to Ralph Tyler’s work where he invented the term assessment back in the 30s as part of the * Year Study. His friend and student Benjamin Bloom called OBE Mastery Learning.

http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/if-standardsoutcomesobjectives-what-is-the-real-common-core/ is a good oversight of Tyler and Bloom’s work and how it links to the real Common Core implementation.

Teachers are familiar with Tyler’s work whether they recognize it or not. Grant Wiggins based Understanding by Design on Tyler’s template of designing backwards based on the outcome or objective desired in student.

ME-on ALEC, if I allege a conspiracy, I describe it and provide links and discuss it factually. ALEC is just another interest group that recognizes there were supposed to be limits to federal power. From Millar’s comments, I would not give ALEC any awards for accuracy in their understanding of the REAL Common Core either.

I have chatted with Senator Millar before. Whether you agree with him or not, he does intend to do right by Georgia’s schoolchildren and desperately wants to raise academic achievement.

Which is quite different from the definition of student achievement in that NCLB waiver. I am quite sure on that too as I raised it with Martha Reichrath on what that definition coupled with the reality of group performance assessments a la projects really meant. You will be able to get diplomas while knowing virtually nothing and it will not be readily apparent anymore.

Wilbur

January 7th, 2013
10:34 am

Why should taxpayers and parents be surprised if the system is unable to recognize ineffective teachers. In the education world where everyone gets a trophy of course there are no ineffective teachers. They just need more money and less pesky questions about accountability. Oh…and legal protection of their monopoly from alternatives to the monolithic public school system.

Maureen Downey

January 7th, 2013
10:34 am

@Jerry, Are you interested in expanding your comment to about 575 words for an AJC op-ed?
Let me know, Maureen

Robert Ryshke

January 7th, 2013
10:36 am

It is important to report on the entire Quality Counts document from Education Week. Saying that Georgia is ranked 7th is not giving readers a clear understanding of what the report shows. For example, while the teaching profession gets a B- grade, student achievement gets a C- grade. In addition, only 58% of GA high school students graduate. Teachers inspire students to learn and achievement. How can only 1% of GA teachers be evaluated as unsatisfactory, when 42% don’t graduate from high school and our student achievement results give the state a C- grade. While the full responsibility for student achievement does not rest with schools and teachers, schools and teachers need to take full responsibility for students not learning or being inspired to learn. Parents and society need to also take their fair share of responsibility. Nevertheless, there have to be more than 1% of GA who are not satisfactory. The data tells us so.

Mary Elizabeth

January 7th, 2013
10:51 am

@Attentive Parent, 10:32 am

You may be interested in reading the following excerpt from the link below:

“ALEC’s model legislation reflects parts of the Kochs’ agenda that have little to do with oil profits. Long before ALEC started pushing taxpayer-subsidized school vouchers, for example, the Koch fortune was already underwriting attacks on public education. David Koch helped inject the idea of privatizing public schools into the national debate as a candidate for vice president in 1980. A cornerstone of the Libertarian Party platform, which he bankrolled, was the call for ‘educational tax credits to encourage alternatives to public education,’ a plan to the right of Ronald Reagan. Several pieces of ALEC’s model legislation echo this plan.

The Kochs’ mistrust of public education can be traced to their father, Fred, who ranted and raved that the National Education Association was a communist group and public-school books were filled with “communist propaganda,” paranoia that extended to all unions, President Eisenhower and the ‘pro-communist’ Supreme Court. Such redbaiting might be ancient history if fifty years later David were not calling President Obama a ‘hard-core socialist’ who is ’scary.’

The Kochs have not just multiplied the wealth of their dad; they’ve repackaged and amplified his worldview.”

http://www.thenation.com/article/161973/koch-connection

HS Public Teacher

January 7th, 2013
10:59 am

Why are teacher ratings skewed? This is the real question. It has nothing to do with the evaluation tool but rather WHO is doing the evalution.

I am sure that tons of money was spent for this Race-to-the-Top mess to transform the evaluation tool. But the bottom line is that the same people will be doing the evalution.

So then, the question becomes – Why are these people that do the evaluations skewing the results? The answer to this question highlights the same problem that I feel is the core evil in Georgia education.

Because the people doing the evaluation:
1. are related to the worst performers. They are the cousins, the nephews, and so on.
2. are close friends to the worst perfomers. They have known these people for years. Sometimes in a professional setting and sometimes not.
3. need these faculty members that are the worst performers. These are the coaches, the club sponsors, the people that donate their time in many ways to keep the school functioning in non-academic areas.
4. don’t want to cause trouble. They won’t give low performers poor ratings because these are the people that will lawyer up. It is easier to simply say that they are satisfactory and let sleeping dogs lay.

pilot program

January 7th, 2013
11:02 am

Here’s a place to ask a question, Ms. Downey. How were the teachers selected for the pilot program? In my school, it was on a volunteer basis. Based on the names of those whom I know to be teacher participants, they are some of the best teachers in the school. So the question to ask in order to understand the results of the pilot program is: How were the teachers selected? Was it by random sampling or targeted?

10:10 am

January 7th, 2013
11:03 am

Maureen, if you’re looking for op-ed writers here’s one who could shed some actual light on what’s ailing public education: http://tinyurl.com/bp879×7

Dr. Monica Henson

January 7th, 2013
11:06 am

I’ve seen the pilot report, and my school is executing a full implementation of TKES and LKES this year. I also wrote my dissertation on teacher supervision & evaluation, and the findings in the report confirm what is already clear in the research stream: most administrators will default to positive teacher ratings, for many reasons that have nothing to do with the reality of what is occurring in classrooms.

There needs to be substantial training of administrators to apply the criteria honestly, and more importantly, administrators need to be themselves evaluated on how they evaluate their teachers. Do they wait until the last minute, then treat it as a checklist, with everyone scoring high because the administrator feels guilty for not spending the time needed to give honest feedback? This behavior is an indication that the administrator doesn’t place teacher evaluation high on the priority list of day-to-day time commitment–and the truth is, most of them don’t. Does the superintendent spend the time necessary with principals talking about evaluation of teachers, how to do it effectively, and then review some of the observation reports, offering critique and honest feedback to the administrator on the quality of them? I’d wager that 90% or more of superintendents do not do this–because they themselves on not evaluated on whether they do.

It’s not the instrument itself that is faulty–it’s the folks applying it.

Beverly Fraud

January 7th, 2013
11:08 am

@Mary Elizabeth, I think Attentive asks some fair and legitimate questions in the 10:32 post.

As a passionate advocate of Continuous Progress I hope you will comment on the comments, particularly the following:

***And the mastery of curriculum is the ability to apply what is provided, not necessarily know it within the privacy of your own mind. The emphasis of application keeps the focus on the concrete and in context. The idea is not to provide a body of facts that bolsters the abstract mind.***

10:10 am

January 7th, 2013
11:15 am

@ MaryEliz: the Koch brothers you demonize ad infinitum are American citizens every bit as entitled to opinions as the teachers’ union you shill for.

Your side’s chief private paymaster, George Soros, is a foreigner.

pull my other leg

January 7th, 2013
11:28 am

So let me get this straight. It is statistically impossible for there only to be 1% of teachers failing…. but there is supposed to be 0% of students failing. How is this possible?

Old Physics Teacher

January 7th, 2013
11:40 am

Attentive Parent/Invisible Serfs Collar @ 10:04:

Boiled down to Red-neck language:

When I have no control over what I’m being evaluated on, and my boss tells me to do stupid things that aren’t effective, I’ll do exactly what the boss says; even if it is stupid!

Yep! Sounds just like “Education” to me!

ex-teacher

January 7th, 2013
11:40 am

why is it hard to think high-educated people can’t “game” a test(evaluation)?? Teachers have 4-7 years of college and can do the dog-and-pony show for 30-50 mins when you schedule a visit. I taught last year in Henry and they tell you when they are coming and what key phrases to say to pass all 21 objectives!

echo

January 7th, 2013
11:50 am

Pull my other leg & Old physics teacher both just simplified what is wrong with the evaluations and education. There should be some sort of award for that.

Teacher Experienced

January 7th, 2013
11:52 am

Since they spend so much money every 2 to 4 years coming up with new eval. systems then we must assume the old eval. system were bad. Otherwise why spent so much money to change. That being the case they should go back and change every teacher that got a bad evaluation on the old system to a good evaluation. They were eval. on a faulty system.

oldtimer

January 7th, 2013
11:52 am

As with the TCT in the late 80s…teachers did better than anyone expected. Maybe teachers are better! Does not mean the process is flawed. After 30 years, I only worked with a couple of teachers I would not my children to have. The vast majority are hard working and lovely people. They cannot fix all the disfunction coming from most homes.

Mary Elizabeth

January 7th, 2013
11:52 am

@Beverly Fraud, 11:08 am

I think that Attentive Parent has set up a false dichotomy in his/her statement. Yes, mastery of the curriculum is “outcome-based,” but that simply means that assessment will prove whether or not the student has mastered certain specific concepts, within the curriculum, over time. First, there is an introductory level to concept learning, and at that introductory level, concepts can be fleeting in the student’s mind. Once reinforced, however, concepts are mastered and assessment will determine if mastery has been achieved by the student (which means that the concepts will be sustained in the student’s mind).

Now, consider the range of the reading continuum of concepts, which begin with basic word attack skills, all the way up to higher level comprehension skills. Thus, the beginning “outcome” of mastery learning might be whether or not the student can correctly identify prefixes and roots words which are contained within certain vocabulary words. These rudimentary reading concepts of word etymology are assessed in concrete ways. Mastery outcome is determined easily with these basic reading concepts. However, the top of the reading concept continuum will contain more abstract comprehension reasoning, and of course that reasoning will start “within the student’s mind.” The student may be asked, upon assessment, of the concepts learned to compare and contrast the literary work of Tolstoy with that of Dostoyevsky, or to explain the influence of Freud on Dostoyevsky’s body of work. Of course, the student will hold these abstract thoughts in his or her mind before he or she is able to present his or her thoughts on an assessment test which will determine if the student has achieved mastery of higher level ideas. Assessments of basic reading skills, on a continuum through higher reading comprehension skills, will give concrete results as to mastery learning.

The higher level of any curriculum’s continuum will call for more abstract thinking on the student’s part, but that thinking can be tested in outcome for mastery, just as the more basic concrete concepts are tested for mastery. That is why I believe that Attentive Parent has presented a false dichotomy.

GAOLDEDUCATOR

January 7th, 2013
12:06 pm

@HS Public Teacher: You hit it on the head! As a principal I have been criticized by my school board for being to hard on teachers and for expecting too much from them. Teachers often circumvent the change of command to go directly to their connected board member to whine and complain that they are being asked to do too much; as we know, that then rolls down hill. Local politics drives our school systems, especially in South Georgia. Who knows who is a major factor on who gets employed and stays employed.

It takes a very strong administrator to withstand the pressure from above when they attempt to apply effective evaluation skills to the process.

living in an outdated ed system

January 7th, 2013
12:32 pm

While there is a need to review the results and the underlying teacher evaluation program, I think what is really going on here is that the NEW system is flawed and not really identifying ineffective teachers. With our graduation rates near the bottom of the nation, it’s clear that we’re not really making the appropriate changes to align funding towards innovation as well as improving accountability systems. Teacher evaluation is one part of a comprehensive set of reforms that needs to happen, and the results of the pilot study raise serious questions on whether we’ve really changed anything.

I’d say the DOE who are in charge of RTTT will be very disappointed in this outcome and it should put some of our $400M award at risk.

I’d also say that Dr. Henson may be correct in her initial suspicions and they deserve further investigation.

AlreadySheared

January 7th, 2013
12:33 pm

Yes, 1% unsatisfactory seems unreasonably low. Absent from this judgment, however, is any recognition that something like 50% of all new teachers are goners by the end of 5 years of service. That might skew the “unsatisfactory” rating of the survivors by quite a bit.

good leg

January 7th, 2013
12:44 pm

leg puller, you have an outstanding point: 100% by 2014

BRILLIANT

Hall Mom

January 7th, 2013
12:52 pm

The true value in any assessment lies in what the teacher can learn about herself. A secondary benefit can be had if administrators are able to (1) improve teacher weaknesses and (2) play to their strengths.

It isn’t very hard to believe only 6 percent of teachers need improvement. Parents are usually quite willing to let administrators know which ones are ineffective. With the cut back in school budgets, I imagine most ineffective teachers have already been ’scrubbed’

living in an outdated ed system

January 7th, 2013
12:54 pm

@Maureen, I would like to think that most commenters on here would find George’s post to be worthy of removal for its hostility as well as poor grammar.

Maureen Downey

January 7th, 2013
12:56 pm

@living: Gone

bootney farnsworth

January 7th, 2013
12:59 pm

@ george,

kinda early in the day for hitting the bottle, isn’t it? I know its 5 o’clock somewhere, but really…..
consider the comments of dean Wormer about the pitfalls of life

bootney farnsworth

January 7th, 2013
1:00 pm

awww, bring him back.
I was looking forward to the carnage he was gonna receive.

bootney farnsworth

January 7th, 2013
1:05 pm

on serious business:

I find the whole situation flawed. there is no way less than 1% of faculty are ineffective. just not possible in any arena of life. not even the SEALS.

that said, it seems really curious this report gives ole red meat Fran exactly the sort of pulpit he might want considering the new stick and whip approach by the legislature towards education.