Oh No! Teacher Performance Analyzed

Last week the LA Times released an in-depth analysis of LAUSD teacher performance data which shows a wide variance in teacher quality that can greatly detract from a child’s education.

The analysis angered the teachers unions, who have spent decades lobbying to hide teacher performance data from the public in order to protect bad teachers. As retribution for the LA Times’ disclosure of public information, the unions are attempting to organize a boycott of the newspaper.

State Assemblyman Chris Norby, who was a teacher himself for 17 years, sent out an email blast encouraging these disclosures and asking the public to pay attention to this story.

“Shielding poor-performing teachers hurt both the kids and the teacher. Recognizing and emulating high performers will help us all,” wrote Norby. He also highlighted another major find in the report: the discovery that the educational disparity between¬† teachers within a given school is much greater than disparities between schools, suggesting that education can best be encouraged by holding teachers more accountable, rather than just pouring money into under-performing schools.

Perhaps someone will attempt disclosure and analysis of teacher performance in Fullerton school districts, although the unions would probably fight it every step of the way. For the good of the children, of course. What we really need are school boards and state legislators who will fight union efforts to coddle bad teachers.

8 Replies to “Oh No! Teacher Performance Analyzed”

  1. Grading teachers is a good idea, maybe Chris Thompson can make that the core of his school board campaign theme.

  2. I recall that Norby was in fact an excellent school teacher (i.e. he got various legitimate, awards for the quality of his teaching – as oppossed to the gazillions of “awards” which government employees and Teachers Union members award to themselves in spite of how pathetic and horrid their work product actually is shown to be).

    An excellent teacher is a wonderful and essential asset in any community.

    Government employees’ Union thuggery and Leftist propaganda “loyalty oaths” have all but destroyed the credibility of government schools teachers’ ranks.

  3. when criticized by the media, teachers’ unions always blame administration lack of support for their efforts. The truth is no matter how well you teach, if the majority of students are 3rd or 4th generation living in poverty, maybe the low test scores are not due to poor teaching but due to the simple fact that natural distribution demands some people will always be found on the left side of the bell curve. After all the social engineering projects for the last fifty years, what excuse is there for poverty and lack of opportunity in the inner city(I exclude recent immigrants and their children)? Longitudinal studies show a connection between poverty and low intelligence. If teachers want a better reputation then they must teach in affluent areas

    1. Alas it’s true, demographics have not been kind to student achievement and standardized test scores, and it’s only going to get worse – and I don’t mean worse before it gets better. It will not get better.

  4. I believe the Times’ study method looks at the performance of the same students as they pass through various grades and teachers, monitoring the changes in performance rather than overall performance itself.

  5. What I don’t get is that if value-added tracks percentile ranking how do you know if real progress is being made?

    I mean with a big enough pool there will always be a 1st and a 99th percentile score, and everything in between, right?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *