Hey L.A.: San Diego's Not Rating Their Teachers on Student Test Scores

News site VoiceofSanDiego.org's recent article explores the pros and cons of value-added analysis in educational testing data. "Value-added analysis" means that when using test scores to monitor school and teacher performance, it makes more sense to monitor an individual student's test score growth over time than to hope each crop of third graders outperforms the previous crop of third graders (read: No Child Left Behind).

But in San Diego, teachers are not rated based on those scores. Not only was this data not publicized as it was in the Los Angeles Times, but apparently "the San Diego Unified school board, which is strongly backed by the teachers union, has panned the idea of rating teachers with test scores, saying it reduces teaching to test prep."

The L.A. Times' controversial decision to publish 6,000 teachers' students' test scores and rate teachers based on that information is provocative and misleading at best. Sure, to blame one teacher's suicide on a newspaper is sensationalist and unfounded. But many education professionals argue that the very concept of value-added analysis is bogus, given its huge margin of error and its growing preponderance in the circles of education administration and assessment.

 Broadcasting these types of "ratings" as the Times has done doesn't take into account the fact that, as the Voice of San Diego reporter writes, "statisticians debate whether it is technically possible to tease out how a teacher impacts a student from a multitude of other factors" and "teachers unions say tests are a shoddy way to measure teaching in the first place."

On one hand, we have the Times to thank for their gutsy move -- at least it got us all talking, and stirred up the righteous ire of teachers, teachers unions, and those who support teachers everywhere. In other words, don't shoot the messenger.

On the other hand, the Times' project is drawing far too much attention to the idea that teachers can, are, and will be accurately and completely assessed based on student test scores (which is, in my opinion, completely off-base) and that the failings of the public education system can be blamed on "bad" teachers.

Whatever your thoughts on this, it helps the debate to voice them. Since the Times is doing what good journalism should do -- generate discussion -- you can tell them what you think.

If you want to let the Los Angeles Unified School District know that this kind of data should not be the be-all, end-all of teacher evaluations, however, please sign this letter to Superintendent Ramon C. Cortines.

Photo credit: madmolecule