Grading DC's Teachers: Michelle Rhee and IMPACT

[Anonymous]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-tipler/grading-dcs-teachers-mich_b_311032.html

[Anonymous]

An overly simplistic op-ed piece on the Huffing Poo focused more on personalities than details by a wide-eyed optimist with no personal stake in the outcome?

Yawn.

[Anonymous]

Well everyone here hates Rhee so if it's not a negative article then it must be bullshit. Keep your optimistic op-ed's to yourself OP. No room that that nonsense here!

[Anonymous]

The writer, a former DCPS teacher, has not seen the actual IMPACT documents so he's basically talking through his (insert base orifice here). If he were a Group I DCPS teacher with 50% of his evaluation determined by test scores, I wonder if he would be as excited about IMPACT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well everyone here hates Rhee so if it's not a negative article then it must be bullshit. Keep your optimistic op-ed's to yourself OP. No room that that nonsense here!

Everyone here doesn't hate Rhee. Here's the problem, Sherlock. Did you notice the article was dismally lacking in specifics? Or are you so mathematically and scientifically illiterate that neither statistics nor reproducible results are necessary in order for you to commit other people's children (and money!) towards your pet project?

Don't be such a dumb*ss, you dumb*ss.

[Anonymous]

I thought it was a decent piece. The guy likes what he's seen -- and he has seen some of it -- but worries about how it will be applied. That sounds reasonable to me.

[Anonymous]

IMPACT is the logical end point of NCLB number crunching lunacy. Someone rein in the metricians and bring back curriculum tied professional development and evaluations tied to reflective practice. It is not rocket science to spot and put a crappy teacher on a ninety day plan; how about nurturing and encouraging the rest, so they do the same with the children ? Such the punitive, twisted 'gotcha' set-up right now. Who would want to breathe that air?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought it was a decent piece. The guy likes what he's seen -- and he has seen some of it -- but worries about how it will be applied. That sounds reasonable to me.

Unfortunately the author is totally wrong about IMPACT. There's nothing simple about it. There are 20 categories of school personnel, each with a different evaluation formula. I have a 64-page document describing all of the ways I will be evaluated as a Group I Educator and the consequences for not receiving an evaluation of "effective". The individual value added component (IVA), which counts for 50% of a Group I teacher's total evaluation is, to quote the document, "a sophisticated statistical measure of your impact on your students' achievement, as measured by the DC CAS." The document does not share how this "sophisticated statistical measure" is calculated.

IMPACT is neither simple, nor is it transparent. It is also grossly unfair because the only teachers who are measured by IVA are those that teach English and Math in certain grades.

The Teaching and Learning Framework, which is based on observations, sets out a highly formulaic script for teaching which will discourage us from implementing strategies such as Reader's and Writer's Workshop, because these strategies call for more flexibility than the TLF formula allows.

I have no doubt that this evaluation instrument will help to remove teachers. I also have no doubt that it will stifle teacher creativity and have a chilling effect on classrooms.

[Anonymous]

As a DCPS parent, I have real fears it will drive good teachers out to the suburbs.

I have never seen our teaching staff so down. They work under tough situations every day and this seems to be making them demoralized.

As one bright, highly qualified teachers said to me after an afternoon being jerked around at 825, "Maybe charters are the answer."

I would be crushed if she left our school, but I couldn't blame her for walking away from DCPS.

[Anonymous]

To PP, let your Councilmembers know how you feel. And it is not just her--OSSE is a ridiculous organization as well. DC needs a sane state Board and a sane Chancellor working in sync. Right now they are actually managing to make Unions look good. That takes a lot of hard, destructive energy to do!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well everyone here hates Rhee so if it's not a negative article then it must be bullshit. Keep your optimistic op-ed's to yourself OP. No room that that nonsense here!

Everyone here doesn't hate Rhee. Here's the problem, Sherlock. Did you notice the article was dismally lacking in specifics? Or are you so mathematically and scientifically illiterate that neither statistics nor reproducible results are necessary in order for you to commit other people's children (and money!) towards your pet project?

Don't be such a dumb*ss, you dumb*ss.

Next time you try for an insult you might want to do it in English. Otherwise it just comes off as drivel. Not that it would matter. Psycho posts get zero consideration.

[Anonymous]

Hey, if people are looking for specifics, you might want to try this article:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/EricaJacobs/Michelle_Rhee_and_teacher_training_gone_awry.html

[Anonymous]

PP, thanks for the link to that Examiner piece--for those who've not read it, it was written by a (former?) teacher with knowledge of the teacher training system Rhee is advocating these days. It gives specifics, rather than just denouncing. I'm posting a quote to give others a taste of it & maybe encourage them to read the whole thing as well:

I attained the highest level in “The Skillful Teacher” hierarchy even though the lessons taught me little (beyond the concept of “wait time”--giving students a longer time to answer a question--which is a good idea.) When merit pay was abandoned early in the 1990s, I thought “Skillful Teacher” was dead.

Yet now it’s being resurrected by Chancellor Rhee, even as she abandons support for National Board Certification. It’s true that the National Board model is not practical for system-wide dissemination; it requires hundreds of hours of reflection and student observation instead of only six “Skillful teacher” workshops.

But it remains the only teaching professional development model I have ever admired. I was the first Fairfax high school teacher certified in “Adolescent and Young Adult English Language Arts” in 1999, and helped facilitate the county’s first support groups for teachers completing their certification, so I am familiar with its tenets.

Unlike “Skillful Teacher,” the terminology involved in Board Certification is not silly and is based on realistic classroom expectations. It recognizes that teaching involves failure as well as success, and asks that teachers evolve and learn from mistakes. For every lesson we do, the certification process asks us to analyze how what we do impacts student achievement, and how we would do it differently next time.

[Anonymous]

The fact that Rhee is certification crazy, but not supportive of National Board Certification (for those who wish to go this arduous route; I certainly didn't...not for everyone!!!) is CRAZY. National Board Certification is certainly the paragon of reflective practice, Just not cheap and quick the way Rhee likes it.