Teachers: Reviews threaten their jobs

Educators at top schools fear new reviews will cost their jobs

An increasing number of educators say Louisiana’s new evaluations make it more likely that teachers at high-achieving public schools will get poor reviews, which would threaten their job security.

“You are looking at trouble,” said Norma Church, principal of Westdale Heights Academic Magnet School in Baton Rouge, one of the top-rated schools in the state.

But state Superintendent of Education John White said data show the concerns are mostly misplaced and that teachers in the state’s best schools are better positioned to get good reviews than most of their colleagues.

“And I have the statistics that show that,” White said.

The issue surfaced initially earlier this month when a state lawmaker said that South Highlands Elementary Magnet School, the highest-rated elementary school in the state, was seeing teachers rated as “ineffective” even though students scored among the highest in Louisiana.

The problem, they said, is that even high-scoring students whose results drop from the previous year can result in a teacher being rated as ineffective, which they said showed up in trial runs for the new job evaluations.

Under the new review system, teachers rated as ineffective for two years in a row can be fired.

White contends South Highlands is an isolated case.

However, teachers and leaders at Westdale, the LSU Laboratory School and two others in Shreveport said they are seeing problems similar to those at South Highlands.

The change, which stems from a 2010 law, is supposed to improve student achievement through more rigorous teacher reviews.

Critics call the new system unreliable.

Under the change, half of a teacher’s evaluation starting this school year will be linked to the growth of student achievement, which insiders call value added, rather than by relying largely on classroom observations.

Students who show gains based on state models, regardless of where they started, generally mean their teachers will get satisfactory ratings.

But Church said it is hard for teachers at high-performing schools to produce that growth, especially when students have scored well in previous school years.

She said she is especially concerned about her fifth-grade teachers, which is one year after students take the all-important LEAP test where passage is required for promotion.

Fifth-graders are not required to pass a standardized test to move to the next grade.

“It is harder for them to get that momentum going,” Church said of fifth-graders, which can mean lower test scores and lower ratings for the teachers.

“That is the one I worry the most about,” she said.

White said that, based on three years of test data for teachers who have been at Westdale for three or more years, all were put at various levels of effectiveness.

Wade Smith, director of the LSU Lab School, said educators there started looking at test scores and evaluations after they heard about the concerns at South Highlands since both schools are highly ranked.

“We are seeing that trend as well,” Smith said.

Based on pilot projects, he said, three teachers out of 10 or 12 included were rated as ineffective.

White said that, based on a review of three school years, only 30 teachers statewide out of about 55,000 were rated as ineffective even though a majority of their students scored at the top two levels on standardized exams.

He said teachers at magnet schools have only a 5 percent chance of being rated as ineffective while 10 percent statewide are expected to fall into that category.

However, White repeated his view that, while the concerns represent rare cases, state officials might need to make “adjustments” on the annual evaluations to ensure safeguards.

Erin Darwin Pizarro, who taught at highly ranked Caddo Middle Magnet School in Shreveport last school year, said that while 37 of her 38 gifted students scored in the two highest levels on their sixth-grade iLEAP exam, one dropped a notch and some fell slightly within the top two levels.

The result, Pizarro said, was that she received a 40 percent rating on a 100 percent scale.

In a two-page letter to The Advocate, she said that while she loves teaching, evaluation worries have “made me consider quitting forever because of an assessment which could eventually label me ineffective and cost me my job.”

Leisa Hurst, who teaches gifted fourth- and fifth-graders at Claiborne Fundamental Elementary School in Shreveport, said she was rated as ineffective in trial runs even though her students generally fared well.


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (14)


1) Comment by deutsch29 - 16/10/2012

30% of math teachers and 35% of ELA teachers were misclassified in the lowest 10%. Their teaching did not get them there-- random error did.

2) Comment by deutsch29 - 16/10/2012

According to the pilot study, only 46% of math teachers and 38% of ELA teachers in the study initially classified in the top 10% remained there the next year DESPITE NO CHANGE IN THEIR TEACHING. (Teaching was controlled in the study in order to test the stability of the standardized test. It fared poorly.) 2% of math teachers and 5% of ELA teachers dropped from the TOP 10% to the BOTTOM 10% DESPITE NO CHANGE IN TEACHING. VAM is erratic. Most of what it captures is random error. (Pilot study document available at http://www.regents.doa.louisiana.gov/assets/docs/TeacherPreparation/LegilsativeValueAddedReportFeb2011FINAL.pdf

3) Comment by deutsch29 - 16/10/2012

I attended the BESE meeting today with the intention of presenting data from the pilot study-- very important, because the data shows that a teacher can be easily misclassified, that the teacher has little control over the standardized score results of their students (a truth those with common sense already know). I spoke to Lottie Beebe and Walter Lee about this. I also left the information with Steve Monoghan and the president of the La superintendents assn.

4) Comment by Txpayer - 16/10/2012

The goals are simple: give the taxpayers money to private operators, many of whom are for profit. And make taxpayers pay for teaching religion at parochial schools. The methods are simple too: Mess up every school, no matter how good it is. Send all Louisiana teachers to Texas and bring in TFA's. How much money is TFA collecting in LA from taxpayers pockets ? Promote the franchise model with cheap, untrained labor. Fire all who know anything about education from the Department of Education. Just keep the lawyers and "communications" people.

5) Comment by 1ryben - 16/10/2012

This entire enterprise is a rouse to rid the system of "expensive", experienced teachers to make way for Teach For America "wonderkinds" to provide cheap labor to maximize profits for these charter operators and other croonies. IF it were about increasong student performance, all this money spent on testing would be spent on...oh, I don't know....instruction. Nowhere, and I mean absolutely nowhere where this type of evaluation system has been implimented has there been an increase in student achievement. NOWHERE! ok, maybe DC & Atlanta, El Paso...oh wait...nope, they were just caught cheating, that's all.

6) Comment by 1ryben - 16/10/2012

Please, please, please understand that it is not the teachers or the teacher's unions that are to blame for this farce of an evaluation system. Nor or they to blame for the perceived failure of your school systems. No one wants to rid the profession of poor teachers than the good teachers. Everyone wants to see a system in place that identifies these teachers. Oh wait, there was a system. Though not perfect, there was a system in place. It was the lazy administrators that did not do their jobs properly that allowed the truly poor teachers to remain. No, you are wrong, tenure does not protect poor teachers. Or maybe (and this is my belief) there really arent' that many truly terrible, irredeemable teachers. They cull themselves through attrition. This evaluation system is junk science. It is not not not reliable in any way. Teachers are not against being evaluated...FAIRLY! And most will agree that student performance should be a factor. To say that this VAM counts for 50% is a LIE. As stated earlier, if you are deemed "ineffective" even if by one kid not getting one question correct you are on track to be removed for any other reason that they see fit. You have no protections and no recourse. NOTHING! Your certification is stripped as well. LIVES WILL BE RUINED! (no, I'm not some wack job that cries foul or that the sky is falling)

7) Comment by Concerned_Parent - 16/10/2012

Sandy....What if a student scores 4 Advanced ratings on the iLeap in 3rd grade and then the following year scores 3 Advanced and 1 Mastery on the LEAP in 4th grade. And say that student missed their 4th Advanced by 1 question. Woud you say that the 4th grade teacher is deserving of losing their job? That is what the state dept is saying. However, a teacher with a student that scored 4 unsats on the iLEAP, and then scores 3 unsats and 1 approaching basic on the LEAP is looked at as effective b/c that student "showed growth". It's the same arguement Mr. White is trying to use for the RSD. He wants to say "Look at how much they have grown! " However it is simple math. 1 + 1 = 2, which is double of where you started, and 10,000 + 5,000 = 15,000 which has grown by only half of where you started. If given the choice, would you choose $2 or $15,000?

8) Comment by Noel Hammatt - 16/10/2012

@Sandy: The problem is that teachers who are doing a fantastic job are being falsely labeled "ineffective" while those who are perhaps not doing a good job are labeled "effective" in a totally random pattern. Yes, random. If the state would only release the detailed info on evaluations so far, and not with teacher names, but with details about student achievement, then everyone would see the failure of this accountability system to DO what you claim it should do!

9) Comment by Noel Hammatt - 16/10/2012

Also missing in all these discussions is the FACT that teachers in high poverty schools, and not just the elite selective magnets and "Laboratory" schools, are even more likely to be evaluated (totally without any basis in fact) as ineffective. There is nothing in this accountability system that accounts for the FACT that these tests are designed to focus on the KEY DIVIDING POINT, that is to say, the questions are mostly focused on discerning the difference between students who are BELOW BASIC and those who are BASIC. Test questions that discern this distinction are far more prevalent than those that distinguish between "Mastery" and "Advanced" or between "Unsatisfactory" and "Approaching Basic" at the other end of the spectrum. So students missing just a couple of questions on the tails of of the distribution of questions (most being around the Approaching Basic to Basic threshold) are more likely to impact teacher VAM scores. And lead to totally ineffective labels, and the loss of excellent teachers! And the Department of Education and the "reformers" WERE WARNED about this! They chose to ignore it. THE SYSTEM is a failure, as are those trying to support it against our students and teachers!

10) Comment by Sandy - 16/10/2012

Of course the reviews threaten teachers' jobs. Isn't that the whole point of having the reviews? To be able to get rid of teachers that are not doing their jobs?

11) Comment by Concerned_Parent - 16/10/2012

Mr. White keeps saying "isolated cases" yet you keep hearing from more and more schools across the state with the same exact issues/concerns. What hasn't been clearly pointed out is that the principle's will also be labeled as ineffective b/c of the teachers being wrongly labeled as so. They will also be on the chopping block. And if any teacher is rated a 4(the highest rating) the state dept is going to send in their own evaluator to reexamine the teacher. If for some reason there is an unrully child in class that day that causes the lesson to not go as smoothly, that teacher's rating can be dropped to whatever the state dept evaluator deems it to be. It doesn't matter what the principle who is at school every day thinks, if this one lesson goes bad that teacher will suffer for it. As the teacher in this article stated, why would she want to continue working in that type of environmnent? The focus is NOT on the children. It is on the teachers. You have news articles about communities afraid to be outside once school dismisses b/c of all the fighting and violence that occurs in the streets, but I'm sure Mr. White thinks that's b/c the teachers failed those students. Those students are clearly not going home to study or do homework. Those parents clearly don't have control over their kids, but I guess the teachers should be responsible for raising them 24/7. I see lots of "ineffectiveness", but the vast majority of it is NOT taking place within the walls of the schools.

12) Comment by Noel Hammatt - 16/10/2012

I keep reading this: "Under the new review system, teachers rated as ineffective for two years in a row can be fired." While it is factually true, the real important truth lies hidden. A masterful, caring, high quality, and experienced teacher who is dedicated to changing the lives of her students for the better, will lose any protection she has after ONE year. That's right. If only one year in the Value Added Measurement (and remember, she can get a top rating from the principal portion of the over teacher evaluation, but that is TRUMPED by the wholly invalid VAM score) and she is rated INEFFECTIVE. Once she has this rating, ONE TIME,she is subject to removal for any reason, and her only recourse is that she is allowed to write a letter to the Superintendent to challenge his position. IF, there are "statistics" that show that all these teachers are incorrect, perhaps Superintendent John White could actually release all of the data on the evaluations, WITHOUT NAMES ATTACHED, of course, and let us see for ourselves what the data show, unfiltered by the department. In fact, if the system is so effective, why not allow the public, for the first time, to actually see the evaluation instrument. After all, it was paid for with our tax dollars!

13) Comment by lovemykids - 16/10/2012

Jindal and White believe that all you have to do to be a good teacher is follow a workbook and of course not want a decent paycheck or benefits. Teachers give our children more than Jindal and White combined can give them. A future.

14) Comment by mikedeshot - 16/10/2012

So we should be surprised when an improperly tested evaluation system being run by people with zero qualifications already looks like a disaster? Another article in this edition shows that all the takeover/charter schools in the Baton Rouge area are such failures that parents are pulling their children out in droves. Why don't we have an evaluation system for Whte and Jindal based on the "value lost" by our school systems since they took over. Jindal better hope he gets a cabinet position because he won't be able to run for dog catcher in Louisiana after his education and healthcare reforms run their course. I am really concerned about the lasting damage this will do to our teaching profession as good teachers retire early and bright new teachers go to other states!