IMPACT and compensation - does it really look like this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:17:39, please explain why the test scores didn't go up over 10% as promised by Rhee and her staff on the Race to the Top application.

I don't know, and I don't care why. I don't know how they could make such a promise since the scores are really out of their direct control. But I do think the only way to improve scores is to improve your pool of teachers. And if that means terminating the bottom 5%, I don't see why that's such a problem.

Also, even assuming the 5% of teachers DCPS terminated were completely ineffective, and assuming DCPS successfully replaced them with effective teachers (two big assumptions), then that's only a drop in the statistical bucket and likely would lead to only a small improvement in scores across the entire District. Maybe what DCPS was counting on to improve scores was a huge jump in "minimally effective" teachers using their second chance to work really hard and improve themselves, so they will become "effective"?

Ludicrous.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:But I do think the only way to improve scores is to improve your pool of teachers.

I disagree. There are a number of ways to improve scores. You can improve the student body. You can cheat. It's been documented that we've seen some of that. Even improving facilities can help. Also, keeping the same pool of teachers but providing better support can improve scores.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But I do think the only way to improve scores is to improve your pool of teachers.

I disagree. There are a number of ways to improve scores. You can improve the student body. You can cheat. It's been documented that we've seen some of that. Even improving facilities can help. Also, keeping the same pool of teachers but providing better support can improve scores.

You can have smaller class size, a better curriculum, more involved parents encouraging their kids to do homework, more two-parent families, better nutrition and medical care, less neighborhood violence.

It is indeed ludicrous to think the only way to improve scores is to improve teachers. Except maybe if you're in the business of recruiting teachers, as Henderson and Rhee were.

[Anonymous]

Have to work with what you have: The things DCPS have control over are smaller class size, a better curriculum, etc. and teachers.

Other large cities such as Chicago and NYC are implementing similar ways to evaluate teachers. Teachers' unions are obviously fighting it as to be expected.

[Anonymous]

If firing teachers is the road to success and we're clearly stalled and if IMPACT is wonderful, then why didn't it identify more ineffective teachers? Why just 5%?

Maybe effective teachers aren't lining up to work in DCPS.

[Anonymous]

"I don't know, and I don't care why. I don't know how they could make such a promise since the scores are really out of their direct control."

So then you're admitting that Rhee and Kaya flat out lied to get Race to the Top funds?

Excellent. There has to be lawyer reading this, right? Let the investigation begin! (Plenty o' time too, since Kaya isn't interested in investigating the cheating.)

You Rhee-formers just crack me up. You love to apply the rules/screws to everyone but your own damn self.

Rhee/Kaya/Kamras are a failure. Despite huge churn and great sums of cash, the only way you can get test scores up is a case of pink pearl erasers. What a big, fat joke.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But I do think the only way to improve scores is to improve your pool of teachers.

I disagree. There are a number of ways to improve scores. You can improve the student body. You can cheat. It's been documented that we've seen some of that. Even improving facilities can help. Also, keeping the same pool of teachers but providing better support can improve scores.

Not ludicrous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But I do think the only way to improve scores is to improve your pool of teachers.

I disagree. There are a number of ways to improve scores. You can improve the student body. You can cheat. It's been documented that we've seen some of that. Even improving facilities can help. Also, keeping the same pool of teachers but providing better support can improve scores.

You can have smaller class size, a better curriculum, more involved parents encouraging their kids to do homework, more two-parent families, better nutrition and medical care, less neighborhood violence.

It is indeed ludicrous to think the only way to improve scores is to improve teachers. Except maybe if you're in the business of recruiting teachers, as Henderson and Rhee were.[/q]

A lot of teacher have good teaching 'chops' and need further training and support. You see it all the time in 'new' teachers--a little wobbly, but man they have 'it' (je ne se quois). I would argue that teachers at all stages can evidence the magic, and can all benefit from training, support, and yes...some pressure so they don't go too far off the grid. But there is nothing inspirational about IMPACT. If anything, it's deadening. How does that not imbue to your kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Have to work with what you have: The things DCPS have control over are smaller class size, a better curriculum, etc. and teachers.

Other large cities such as Chicago and NYC are implementing similar ways to evaluate teachers. Teachers' unions are obviously fighting it as to be expected.

Class sizes have not gotten smaller, a curriculum is coming in for the first time in the FIFTH year of reform, and the only way they've thought of improving teaching is by firing the teachers they have and replacing them with total unknowns. Also demeaning current teachers by going around the country calling them crappy. and scores are flat. Nearby Montgomery County has a successful evaluation system, developed by the union and school admin, which was totally ignored when DPS was developing IMPACT

They call this reform.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But I do think the only way to improve scores is to improve your pool of teachers.

I disagree. There are a number of ways to improve scores. You can improve the student body. You can cheat. It's been documented that we've seen some of that. Even improving facilities can help. Also, keeping the same pool of teachers but providing better support can improve scores.

You can have smaller class size, a better curriculum, more involved parents encouraging their kids to do homework, more two-parent families, better nutrition and medical care, less neighborhood violence. It is indeed ludicrous to think the only way to improve scores is to improve teachers. Except maybe if you're in the business of recruiting teachers, as Henderson and Rhee were.

I'm the PP of the first quote. Some of these are good comments. You're right; my original statement was too broad.

Some are sort of silly and likely facetious: improve student body, cheat. Some of the others make sense, but are not really things DCPS can feasibly change: more involved parents, more two-parent families, better nutrition, less violence. But some are good ideas: smaller class sizes, improved curriculum, better support.

But I still think that terminating ineffective teachers is one valid way to improve the situation. Maybe we can argue about whether IMPACT accurately identifies ineffective teachers. But how can you really be against removing ineffective teachers? How does protecting ineffective teachers make sense?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[
I'm the PP of the first quote. Some of these are good comments. You're right; my original statement was too broad.

Some are sort of silly and likely facetious: improve student body, cheat. Some of the others make sense, but are not really things DCPS can feasibly change: more involved parents, more two-parent families, better nutrition, less violence. But some are good ideas: smaller class sizes, improved curriculum, better support.

But I still think that terminating ineffective teachers is one valid way to improve the situation. Maybe we can argue about whether IMPACT accurately identifies ineffective teachers. But how can you really be against removing ineffective teachers? How does protecting ineffective teachers make sense?

The silly facetious comments unfortunately reflect what DCPS was doing - trying to improve scores by recruiting more high SES families and by cheating.

I know no one who is against removing ineffective teachers - here or anywhere. What's doubtful and in fact unproven, is that large numbers of ineffective teachers are the cause of poor performance in DCPS and that a draconian system like IMPACT is needed to identify them.

Considering that in DCPS, as in schools across the country, achievement is related to socio-economic status, to ignore this is insane -- unless, of course the goal here is to fire teachers, irrespective of its effect on student learning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But I do think the only way to improve scores is to improve your pool of teachers.

I disagree. There are a number of ways to improve scores. You can improve the student body. You can cheat. It's been documented that we've seen some of that. Even improving facilities can help. Also, keeping the same pool of teachers but providing better support can improve scores.

You can have smaller class size, a better curriculum, more involved parents encouraging their kids to do homework, more two-parent families, better nutrition and medical care, less neighborhood violence. It is indeed ludicrous to think the only way to improve scores is to improve teachers. Except maybe if you're in the business of recruiting teachers, as Henderson and Rhee were.

I'm the PP of the first quote. Some of these are good comments. You're right; my original statement was too broad.

Some are sort of silly and likely facetious: improve student body, cheat. Some of the others make sense, but are not really things DCPS can feasibly change: more involved parents, more two-parent families, better nutrition, less violence. But some are good ideas: smaller class sizes, improved curriculum, better support.

But I still think that terminating ineffective teachers is one valid way to improve the situation. Maybe we can argue about whether IMPACT accurately identifies ineffective teachers. But how can you really be against removing ineffective teachers? How does protecting ineffective teachers make sense?

What I don't understand is why do you think that improving test scores is a worthy goal? Why don't we work on improving the quality of educational opportunities for all students? That seems like a much more important goal to me. Why this fixation on test scores? I just don't get it.

[Anonymous]

DCPS can't control the home life of its students, and teachers can't overcome it. They are expected to, however.

Teachers know it's BS.

DCPS admin doesn't - or won't admit it. They are desperate, because they have no other solution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But I do think the only way to improve scores is to improve your pool of teachers.

I disagree. There are a number of ways to improve scores. You can improve the student body. You can cheat. It's been documented that we've seen some of that. Even improving facilities can help. Also, keeping the same pool of teachers but providing better support can improve scores.

You can have smaller class size, a better curriculum, more involved parents encouraging their kids to do homework, more two-parent families, better nutrition and medical care, less neighborhood violence. It is indeed ludicrous to think the only way to improve scores is to improve teachers. Except maybe if you're in the business of recruiting teachers, as Henderson and Rhee were.

I'm the PP of the first quote. Some of these are good comments. You're right; my original statement was too broad.

Some are sort of silly and likely facetious: improve student body, cheat. Some of the others make sense, but are not really things DCPS can feasibly change: more involved parents, more two-parent families, better nutrition, less violence. But some are good ideas: smaller class sizes, improved curriculum, better support.

But I still think that terminating ineffective teachers is one valid way to improve the situation. Maybe we can argue about whether IMPACT accurately identifies ineffective teachers. But how can you really be against removing ineffective teachers? How does protecting ineffective teachers make sense?

What I don't understand is why do you think that improving test scores is a worthy goal? Why don't we work on improving the quality of educational opportunities for all students? That seems like a much more important goal to me. Why this fixation on test scores? I just don't get it.

B/c standardized tests are an objective measure of what kids are learning. If you don't consider test scores important, you are in the minority. Parents who have a choice will not send kids to schools with crappy scores where most children are not performing at grade level in reading and math. No one is against improving quality of education opportunities but there is no way for parents to know these educational opportunities are being implemented successfully without these tests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But I do think the only way to improve scores is to improve your pool of teachers.

[cutting out many interim posts]
What I don't understand is why do you think that improving test scores is a worthy goal? Why don't we work on improving the quality of educational opportunities for all students? That seems like a much more important goal to me. Why this fixation on test scores? I just don't get it.

I'm not fixated on improving test scores. My original quote above was part of a longer response to someone who was criticizing IMPACT by pointing out that it had not improved test scores by 10%. She may be fixated on test scores, but I am not.

I agree with you that "improving the quality of educational opportunities" is a good goal. And I think that part of the path to that goal is for DCPS to be willing and able to terminate ineffective teachers. And although there is much debate about the best way to spot ineffective teachers, I think that one part of the analysis can be an evaluation of whether their students are improving their scores on standardized tests over time.

But do I care in the abstract that DCPS is improving its test scores relative to other school districts? No not really. I assume DCPS test scores will always be defined by factors like the SES of DC's population, just like every other school district in the nation.