Flawed system shouldn’t dictate teacher salaries

Dependant on Value Added Model, even 1% is too much, LFT says

(Baton Rouge – October 8, 2010) With a growing number of reports illustrating the chaos fomented by a new teacher evaluation system, Louisiana Federation of Teachers President Steve Monaghan asks school boards to limit the damage by minimizing the effect that the system has on teacher compensation.


Under Act 1 of 2012, school boards must design new teacher salary schedules by January 1, and have them in place by the 2013-14 school year. The law requires teacher effectiveness as measured by these evaluations to determine up to 50% of teacher compensation. The Louisiana Federation of Teachers has challenged the constitutionality of the new law.

“This is insane,” said Monaghan. “A broken system, a flawed model, will be used to determine the intrinsic value of teachers and their economic worth.

“We urge school boards to protect their teachers from unnecessary damage by minimizing the effect that the flawed system will have on teacher compensation,” Monaghan said. “We understand that the law requires a percentage; we’re saying make it one percent or less, until this is fixed.”

Recently, a major newspaper called Governor Jindal’s evaluation scheme unfair and concluded that it “borders on immoral.” Just last week, one of the governor’s chief allies and a strong supporter of Act 1 called the evaluation scheme “ridiculous.”

“We are learning that many of the state’s finest teachers will be labeled ‘ineffective’ because of a flawed rating system which squeezes teachers into predetermined results or outcomes,” Monaghan said.

“Evidence from around Louisiana demonstrates that the new evaluation program does not accurately reflect teacher effectiveness,” Monaghan said. “It is an inappropriate instrument on which to base any significant portion of a teacher’s salary.”

To read more of this article, please click here.

Is a Value Added teacher evaluation good for Louisiana?

Politicians believe the Value Added Model is right for Louisiana teachers. LFT isn't so sure.

Beginning in 2012-13, Louisiana teachers will be evaluated using a new instrument that incorporates what is known as a Value Added Model. The VAM makes judgments about a teacher’s performance based on student growth as measured by standardized tests.

From the beginning, LFT opposed passage of the bill that created the Value Added Model for teacher evaluation. But the bill had strong support from leaders as diverse as President Obama, Governor Jindal, Senators Landrieu and Vitter, the State Superintendent of Education, the BESE Board and the House and Senate Education Committees.

Aware of the strength of VAM’s support, LFT worked with lawmakers to improve the bill as much as possible, even as we continued to oppose its passage.

Some leaders in Baton Rouge want you to believe their new evaluation scheme is fail-safe. To find out why we disagree, and to learn much more about the Value Added model, please visit this Web page.

VAM promises a long and bumpy road

As expected, the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education rammed through, with very little debate, a new teacher evaluation system heavily skewed toward a Value Added Model on Tuesday.

Not that there wasn't objection. As this Associated Press article points out, there were plenty of reasonable objections made by expert teachers and their organizations. The lack of debate was on BESE's side - like obedient children, they did as they were told and approved the new model.

As LFT President Steve Monaghan said, there are significant reasons to question the evaluation tool and its scoring methods, as well as the grievance procedure approved by BESE. Those will be revealed in detail in the coming weeks and months.

But just as a pre-Christmas appetizer, consider these issues.

The algorithm used to determine teacher scores has not been revealed. But based on reports from other VAMs, it is possible that one in three evaluations will not be accurate because the margin of error is extraordinarily high.

No procedure has been produced for a teacher to appeal a VAM score.

The Value Added Model will only apply to one-third of all teachers, those who teach courses measured by standardized tests. All others - two-thirds of our teachers - will apparently be evaluated by a double set of subjective evaluations, which are still to be determined but will go into effect next school year.

Even the new system's supporters agreed that there will be significant problems with the new system. That may prove to be the understatement of the month.

Post-Thanksgiving catch-up

The education world did not stop turning just because teachers and school employees had a few days off for Thanksgiving. Here, briefly, are a few things you might have missed:

BESE election: Following the November 19 general election. Governor Bobby Jindal is in complete command of the state's Board of Elementary and Secondary Eduction. Candidates favored by the governor and others who believe in his style of "reform" swept all three BESE runoffs: Kira Orange-Jones won District 2, Chas Roemer took District 6 and Carolyn Hill won District 8.

According to this article by Advocate reporter Will Sentell, that means the governor "could have the support of nine or 10 members after months of 6-5 votes on key school topics."

The governor's only disappointment in the BESE races came in District 3, where St. Martin Parish School Board Human Relations Director Lottie Beebe defeated long-time incumbent Glenny Lee Bouquet in the October 22 primary.

In this article by Gannett's Mike Hasten, Gov. Jindal reports that he is happy with the new, right-leaning BESE. The new members seem to be struggling to maintain their own identity, but will that last when the governor applies pressure?

Expensive charter school: One charter school in Jefferson Parish spends $87,500 per student, according to this article by Times-Picayune reporter Barri Bronston. The school, which was established to serve students who have been expelled from middle schools for various offenses, has seven teachers and eight students.

That news prompted the Monroe News Star editorial writer to question, in very understated fashion, the wisdom of spending that much money on one school: "it's important to note that even charter schools require some close supervision."

"Within our local systems," the editorial notes, " you could ask Ouachita Parish Superintendent Bob Webber or Monroe City Schools Superintendent Kathleen Harris what they could do with $87,500 per student, and we are quite certain either one of them would respond that an investment of that much public money per student would result in a world-class school system."

Teach for America: The growing influence of Teach for America was explored in this article by Times Picayune reporter Andrew Vanacore.

Once seen as a sort of Peace Corps that brought idealistic young college graduates into hard-to-staff schools, Teach for America has become a political as well as educational force to be reckoned with.

Best known is John White, currently the superintendent of the Recovery School District and Gov. Jindal's pick to replace Paul Pastorek as State Superintendent of Education. But newly minted BESE member Kira Orange-Jones is also a TFT alum, along with the new executive director of BESE and Gov. Jindal's new policy advisor.

A little justice for some Filipino teachers: The Caddo Parish School Board has done the right thing and settled with the U.S. Department of Labor, awarding Filipino teachers in the parish some $1,300 each because of their entanglement with a crooked recruiting firm.

It is a small step to correct a much larger injustice. The settlement only applies to a specific charge brought by the U.S. Department of Labor against the Caddo school board. It leaves open U.S. allegations against other school systems, and does not deal with the LFT complaint, filed with the State Workforce Commission, that Filipino teachers were forced to pay fees that should have been paid by school boards under Louisiana law.

Value Added Model: As the state tests a new teacher evaluation scheme called the Value Added Model, questions are popping up about how fair it will be.

Reporter Sue Lincoln filed this story for the Southern Education Desk, in which LFT President Steve Monaghan questions how well the new system will actually measure teacher effectiveness.

The privatization of public education: In an epic article for The Nation, reporter Lee Fang exposed the "quiet but astonishing national transformation" of public education into a cash machine for big business.

Lobbyists, he writes, have "combin(ed) the financial firepower of their corporate clients with the seeming legitimacy of privatization-minded school-reform think tanks and foundations."

Focusing on virtual schools, he writes, "This legislative juggernaut has coincided with a gold rush of investors clamoring to get a piece of the K-12 education market. It’s big business, and getting bigger: One study estimated that revenues from the K-12 online learning industry will grow by 43 percent between 2010 and 2015, with revenues reaching $24.4 billion."

Local Federation chapters grow together: Educators in Caddo and Bossier parishes can expect to see their influence grow with the creation of the new Red River United Federation.

As reported here by Mary Nash-Wood of the Shreveport Times, the new organization combines the power of the Caddo Federation of Teachers and Support Personnel and the Bossier Federation of Teachers and School Employees.

"It will essentially be a super group over the two organizations," said CFT President Jackie Lansdale.

Value Added's epic FAIL in Tennessee

New York Times reporter Michael Winerip has written this expose of Tennessee's failed Value Added Model for teacher evaluation.

It's a devastating story of what happens when well-meaning politicians meddle in areas they know nothing about. We will soon see similar stories reported in Louisiana when our own politician-driven Value Added Model goes into effect.

As in Tennessee, our version of the VAM requires teachers to be judged according to their students' test scores. And as in Tennessee, a majority of our teachers have classes that are not subject to standardized tests.

Louisiana is in the process of devising a way to apply a VAM to non-core teachers that will probably wind up looking much like Tennessee's model.

Here's what reporter Winerip says: "Because there are no student test scores with which to evaluate over half of Tennessee’s teachers — kindergarten to third-grade teachers; art, music and vocational teachers — the state has created a bewildering set of assessment rules. Math specialists can be evaluated by their school’s English scores, music teachers by the school’s writing scores."

The result of Tennessee's bad experiment? Low morale, ill-will, micromanagement and loss of faith in the state's political leadership.

This story should be required reading for Governor Jindal, BESE members and the legislature.

Avoiding the ideological divide

When former Florida governor and presidential aspirant Jeb Bush convened his annual Foundation for Excellence in Education summit in Washington, D.C. , ideological fault lines trumped education reform. The evidence is in this article by Tom Marshall in the St. Pertersburg Times.

In part, the line fell along a pro- and anti- teacher union divide. As one of Bush's Florida colleagues put it, "There is no way in our state right now that the dadgum unions are going to agree with this kind of stuff. So you either bring them to the table and tell them what you're going to do, or you run over them."

The speaker, State Sen. John Thrasher, was the author of a "reform" bill that was universally despised by teachers and was ultimately vetoed by Bush's successor.

His comment might be great for red-meat conservatives, but the more reasonable tone was struck by an actual educator, Hillsborough superintendent MaryEllen Elia, who said of her district's new teacher evaluation plan, "This entire plan was developed with our teachers union. I can tell you that we work very hard and very collaboratively with our teachers."

It is, of course, better to work collaboratively with teachers and their unions than to try to "run over them." That's a lesson already learned in Louisiana, which is in the midst of an experiment with value-added teacher evaluations.

This EdLog post from last May, followed by this one, demonstrates how lawmakers and the union can work together if they are willing to ignore the ideologues and look for better solutions to real problems.

California teachers outraged over release of evaluations

Teachers in Los Angeles are outraged that a newspaper, the Los Angeles Times, has published evaluation scores, based on standardized tests, of some 6,000 teachers.

That issue arose in Louisiana during debate on legislation that created a "value added model" of teacher evaluation, in which half of a teacher's evaluation will, in the future, be based on student growth.

The Louisiana Federation of Teachers was adamant that state law protecting the confidentiality of teacher evaluations must be preserved. As a result, the law does not allow the release of data on individual teacher evaluations.

For the think tank Public Agenda, the Los Angeles controversy raised numerous questions about
the teaching profession and teacher accountability. Here is the article that appeared in the Public Agenda Alert for September 2:


When databases and disenchantment collide, the results can be explosive - as the debate over "value-added" grading of teachers showed this week.

The Los Angeles Times provoked a furious reaction from teachers this week when it launched a database of 6,000 elementary school teachers analyzing how they've done measured by standardized tests. The stories prompted debate around the nation on the methods used and at least one piece wondering "When Does Holding Teachers Accountable Go Too Far?"

We'd argue that you can't understand the debate over the database without understanding the disenchantment so many teachers feel over their jobs.

Public Agenda's research, conducted with Learning Point Associates, shows a stunning number of K-12 teachers, some 40 percent, appear to be disheartened and disappointed in their jobs. Only 14 percent of these "Disenchanted" teachers rate their principals as "excellent" at supporting them. Nearly three-quarters cite "discipline and behavior issues" in the classroom as a drawback to teaching, and 7 in 10 say that testing is a major drawbacks as well. More than half of the Disenchanted teachers (54 percent) work in low-income schools.

By contrast, the 23 percent of teachers who shaped up as "Idealists" and the 37 percent we termed "Contented" were more likely to say their principal was supportive, more likely to say their school was orderly, and more likely to say good teachers can make a difference in student learning. Only 34 percent of the Contented and 45 percent of the Idealists work in low-income schools.

The Teaching for a Living survey can't tell us whether the Disenchanted are bad teachers, or good teachers trapped in bad schools, or whether the Idealists are effective in the classroom or just more optimistic. But the survey does tell us something about what teachers believe their problems are. Regardless of how we try to measure success in the classroom, a better understanding of how teachers feel about their jobs can help explain why some things work and others don't.

Will value-added evaluations help Race to the Top?

Louisiana's education leaders are hopeful that passage of Act 54, the state's new value-added model of teacher evaluation, will help the state's application for federal Race to the Top funds.

As Advocate reporter Will Sentell writes here, enactment of the new model is the only big change in the state's application. Whether it will be enough to earn the state $175 million remains to be seen.

LFT left an impression on evaluation bill

The value of engagement over confrontation was proven this week when Gov. Bobby Jindal signed the controversial new teacher evaluation bill into law as Act 54 of the 2010 legislature.

Even though the LFT never endorsed the bill, the union was deeply involved in making a bad piece of legislation better than it would have been.

There was never any question that the bill would pass. It sailed through the House Education Committee without opposition, was overwhelmingly adopted by the House, was only opposed by one member of the Senate Education Committee, and was signed by the governor just half a day after adoption by the Senate.

With that kind of muscle behind it, the law could have been passed without any input from teachers. But because LFT President Steve Monaghan was willing to engage, and author Rep. Frank Hoffmann was willing to listen, the bill wound up substantially improved.

Because the Federation worked with Rep. Hoffmann, the bill ensures that teachers will have a process to challenge evaluations they believe are inaccurate. The evaluation will account for factors beyond a teacher's control, including the socio-economic status of the students. There will be an advisory committee, which includes a majority of teacher members, to oversee development of the evaluation instrument.

Most important, there will be a two-year phase in of the new system. If the advisory committee reports that it is not working as it should, the education committees of the House and Senate will be able to halt the program.

The very best news coverage of the bill's passage was by Times-Picayune reporter Bill Barrow, who wrote:

The end product is the result of considerable negotiations among the Jindal administration,
(Rep. Frank) Hoffmann, (Sen. Ben) Nevers and the Louisiana Federation of Teachers. LFT President Steve Monaghan never
withdrew his opposition of the bill, saying "value-added" methodology is still
too new to codify. But he helped craft a final version with considerably more
protections for teachers than the initial proposal.

The state's other teachers union, the Louisiana Association of
Educators, argued vehemently throughout the process against the bill and was not
an active participant in any alterations.

Barrow's full report is here.

The State Department of Education also acknowledged LFT's participation in this press release.

Value-added evaluation bill progresses

As a new form of teacher evaluation took another step toward becoming law on Thursday, it was clear that the Louisiana Federation of Teachers has played a major role in shaping the bill, even while remaining opposed to its adoption.

HB 1033 by Rep. Frank Hoffman (R-West Monroe) would make a new, relatively untested science called the "value added model" an integral part of teacher evaluations in Louisiana. The VAM would add a component to teacher evaluations that measures the progress made by students. While LFT believes there is merit to the concept, the Federation is concerned that writing it into law is premature. The union would prefer to see the VAM field-tested before becoming policy.

But it is obvious that the bill has strong support in the legislature and in the governor's office. After passing by a 68-26 margin in the House of Representatives, the Senate Education Committee approved it with just one member, Yvonne Dorsey (D-Baton Rouge) opposed. Its passage is almost universally regarded as assured.

Faced with that certainty, the Federation chose to engage with Rep. Hoffman in hopes of making it a better bill. In that, the union succeeded.

Because the Federation worked with Rep. Hoffman, the bill ensures that teachers will have a process to challenge evaluations they believe are inaccurate. The evaluation will account for factors beyond a teacher's control, including the socio-economic status of the students. There will be an advisory committee, which includes a majority of teacher members, to oversee development of the evaluation instrument.

Most important, there will be a two-year phase in of the new system. If the advisory committee reports that it is not working as it should, the education committees of the House and Senate will be able to halt the program.

Success of VAM focuses attention on “Red Tape” bill

The apparent success of the value-added evaluation bill makes it essential that lawmakers oppose another of Gov. Bobby Jindal’s education initiatives. HB 1368 by Rep. Jane Smith, known as the “Red Tape Reduction and Local Empowerment Waiver Program,” would conflict with the new evaluation system and result in very bad public policy.

While the value added plan attempts to impose a standard, unified evaluation in all school districts, HB 1368 would allow school systems to opt out of virtually all the laws and policies that govern our schools. The teachers in those systems would have no voice at all in determining how those waivers would affect teaching and learning.

If HB 1368 passes, teaching and learning conditions would vary greatly from district to district. But all teachers would be held to a single evaluation standard under HB 1033.

LFT President Steve Monaghan told the Senate Education Committee that it would be impossible to test the value added model if the state abandons consistency in other areas of public education. That collision course of conflicting laws adds up to very bad public policy, Monaghan said.

To learn more about HB 1368 and send to the Senate Education Committee a message opposing it, please click here.

The value of engagement

As a new form of teacher evaluation took another step toward becoming law on Thursday, it was clear that the Louisiana Federation of Teachers has played a major role in shaping the bill, even while remaining opposed to its adoption.

This article by Times-Picayune reporter Bill Barrow clearly explains why it is important to maintain a dialog with lawmakers.

Rep. Frank Hoffman's HB 1033 will make a new, relatively untested science called the "value added model" an integral part of teacher evaluations in Louisiana. While LFT believes there is merit to the concept, the Federation is concerned that writing it into law is premature. The union would prefer to see the VAM field-tested before becoming policy.

But it is obvious that the bill has strong support in the legislature and in the governor's office. Its passage is almost universally regarded as assured.

Faced with that certainty, the Federation chose to engage with Rep. Hoffman in hopes of making it a better bill. In that, the union succeeded.

Because the Federation worked with Rep. Hoffman, the bill ensures that teachers will have a process to challenge evaluations they believe are inaccurate. The evaluation will account for factors beyond a teacher's control, including the socio-economic status of the students. There will be an advisory committee, which includes a majority of teacher members, to oversee development of the evaluation instrument.

Most important, there will be a two-year phase in of the new system. If the advisory committee reports that it is not working as it should, the education committees of the House and Senate will be able to halt the program.

These changes were not enough to earn LFT support for the bill. But they make it much, much better than it was. That cooperation led to a moment of comity during the hearing. As Barrow writes, "Steve Monaghan, president of the Louisiana Federation of Teachers, said his group maintains its opposition to writing 'value-added' assessments in state law, saying the developing method is too new to codify. But Monaghan praised Hoffman for working on changes to the bill over the course of the session. Hoffman returned the praise. "

Literacy coaches make a difference

Here's an example of research-based education reforms that work. Education Week's Debra Viadero covers a study showing that literacy coaches in schools can increase reading scores dramatically.

Over thee years, she writes, literacy coaches in 17 states raised reading skills by as much as 32 percent.

"The study," she writes, "which was presented here on May 1 during the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, is as notable for its methods as for its results. It’s among the first of what many scholars hope will be a new generation of studies that offer solid clues not only to what works but also when, under what conditions, and to some extent, why."

Literacy coaches work with teachers, developing strategies individualized for their classrooms.

The EdWeek article says that the study is a success story for the value-added approach, which was used to evaluate the increase in students' reading proficiency.

Rationality in the teacher evaluation debate

One of the touchiest subjects in all of education right now is the evaluation of teachers. It's easy to understand why. Teachers have been the victims of curious instruments in the past - does anyone have fond remembrance of LaTIP/LaTEP in the late 1980s? That disastrous instrument scored teachers by how many "benchmarks" they were able to hit during observations scored by evaluators with checklists. Teachers aren't trained monkeys, but LaTIP/LaTEP treated them as if they were. It failed miserably.

Yet there are few who could honestly say that the current evaluation method, which depends on subjective judgments by administrators, is the best possible way to judge a teacher's effectiveness.

So how to proceed? Education Week reporter Susan H. Fuhrman has made an effort to cut through the fog and smoke and come up with a rational article about teacher evaluation.

Fuhrman starts with the observation that "value added" is the flavor of the moment, and likely will play a role in future instruments promoted at both the national and state levels. And the idea that teachers can be evaluated in part by measuring the progress of students in their classrooms is attractive.

The idea is not to base the evaluation on the outcome of a single test, but to determine how much student improvement is made. Thus a teacher whose students begin two years behind but end up just half a year behind could be considered a star.

But there are pitfalls, as the EdWeek article points out. That means we should tread carefully. And the political process, which can be very clumsy, has a way of highlighting flaws and codifying poorly thought-out processes along ideological fault lines.

We've been there before, and it didn't work. The right solution is to let research lead the way, with allowances for failure and missteps, and permission to change when necessary.

Weingarten shakes up the establishment

American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten shook the education establishment last week when she announced to the national Press Club that AFT is launching its own massive school reform effort.

She laid out a new approach to teacher evaluation, saying that a strong teacher
development and evaluation system is crucial to improving teaching, and is
essential for a fair and efficient due process system. Weingarten said the union
is prepared to work with any district willing to take both steps: to create and
implement a real evaluation system, and to establish a due process system
aligned to it.

Critics immediately pounced on Weingarten's speech. From the right, union bashers decried her initiative as a fake reform aimed at appeasing reform advocates.

But even teachers reacted with concern when the news media portrayed her speech as an admission that teachers should be evaluated based on their students' test scores.

That was an oversimplification that undervalued Weingarten's effort. Leave it to an actual reformer, Diane Ravitch, to put Weingarten's speech in context and explain what it really means:

She laid out a far-ranging plan for evaluating teachers, which I suspect most
teachers would find fair and reasonable. Here is what she said:
First, states should set out clear professional standards that describe clearly what teachers should know and be able to do. Then, to determine whether teachers meet these standards, districts should use "multiple means of evaluation," including
classroom observations, self-evaluations, portfolio reviews, appraisal of lesson
plans," and a variety of other tools, including student test scores. But the
scores should be based on "valid and reliable assessments" and they should not
be derived "by comparing the scores of last year's students with the scores of
this year's students, but by assessing whether a teacher's students show real
growth while in his classroom."

In her speech, Weingarten gave a nod to the "value added" approach to evaluation that is favored by U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, President Obama and Louisiana Superintendent of Education Paul Pastorek.

Thanks to efforts by the Louisiana Federation of Teachers, our state's Race to the Top application describes multiple means of evaluation. Those include a value-added model as well as a Learning Environment Index that considers conditions outside a teacher's control, such as student poverty and school resources.

EdWeek commentary: Is merit pay the answer?

Educator/author Kim Marshall has some food for thought about teacher merit pay in this Education Week commentary.

The piece offers good reasons to slow down on the lurch toward performance-based pay for teachers. It creates an understanding of why the organic approach favored by the Department of Education's Race to the Top application is better than Gov. Bobby Jindal's intent to pass laws mandating performance based pay (in this context, organic simply means that the concept should be allowed to grow and, if necessary, change and adapt if it does not work as planned).

One important argument offered by Marshall is that standardized tests can be "instructionally insensitive" or, as he puts it, "better at measuring students’ family advantages and disadvantages than the school’s or the teacher’s value-added effect."

The Department of Education's resident testing expert, George Noell, admitted as much when he told a joint Senate and House Education Committee last week that our current high-stakes tests are not well suited to a value-added evaluation system, but that they can be tweaked to suit the purpose.

To help resolve that issue, LFT insisted on including a "learning environment index" in the state's Race to the Top plans. That index takes factors outside of a teacher's control into account then measuring student achievement.

What is Marshall's alternative to test-based measures of value-added accountability?

In many of America’s most effective schools, principals make frequent
unannounced visits to classrooms and give informal feedback on what students
are learning and how instruction can be improved. Teacher teams in these
schools collaboratively design curriculum units, give common assessments to
their students every four to six weeks, immediately huddle to discuss what
worked and what didn’t, share best practices, reteach what wasn’t mastered, and help struggling students.

By frequently checking for understanding and fixing learning problems
before they snowball, these schools draw on teachers’ and administrators’
collective wisdom and keep everyone’s focus on the most important questions: Are
students learning, and, if not, what’s our next move?

In schools which operate on that model, Marshall says, "...students in these schools are making dramatic gains, and achievement gaps are being closed. Small wonder that teachers in these schools are continuously improving their craft."

Louisiana called value-added "model"

According to the Washington Post, Louisiana is among the first states attempting to link student performance to their teachers and even to the education schools attended by the teachers.

As reporter Nick Anderson puts it, "Louisiana has become the first state to tie student test scores into a chain of evaluation that reaches all the way to teacher colleges. Those that fail to perform on this new metric someday could face shake-ups or, in extreme cases, closure."