Letters: Students deserve effective teachers

The Advocate article “Teachers claim new evaluation system has flaws” suggests that the new teacher evaluation system is flawed because some educators with high-performing students earned an “Ineffective” rating on the student data portion of the assessment.

Before making broad generalizations that the system is flawed, we need to take a close look at the data from the school in question, South Highlands Elementary Magnet School. While “mastery” students across the state increased their score an average of 31 points, “mastery” students at South Highlands declined by 32 points. At a similar school in Baton Rouge, “basic” students grew by 11 points and “advanced” students grew by 45 points.

In contrast, “basic” students at South Highlands decreased by 40 points and the “advanced” students grew 10 points. In fact, at South Highlands, 7 percent of students who were “advanced” in third grade had dropped to “basic” by the fourth grade. Seven percent doesn’t equate to just one or two students who had a bad day. It indicates a systemic problem, and if I were a parent of one of these students, I would be asking a lot of questions.

Let’s be clear: Ineffective teachers don’t just have a hard time making growth with their students. They actually decline their students’ scores by an average of 10 points. If I had been one of those students, I know that my parents would have been asking questions and with good reason. As a young student growing up in Louisiana, I was often at the top of my class, yet my teachers pushed me hard to regularly advance my learning. My teachers could have chosen to let me coast in their courses, but they refused. I was a high-achiever, but they pushed me to be a higher achiever. And my parents wouldn’t have settled for anything less.

It’s understandable that it would come as a shock that a school such as South Highlands has teachers rated “ineffective.” We have long taken for granted that our teachers were being properly evaluated and supported. We assumed that teachers who teach in high-performing schools must be great teachers, and that teachers who teach in low-performing schools are ineffective. However, new sources of data indicate that we need to rethink our assumptions about good teaching.

I think that we can all agree that an essential part of good teaching is being able to help all students regardless of their background and regardless of their incoming knowledge level to grow. That’s why we must work hard not to create a system that lets teachers of high-performing students off the hook. Those students deserve effective teachers as well. It’s what every Louisiana child deserves.

Monica Candal, policy and data analyst

Stand for Children Louisiana

New Orleans


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (22)


1) Comment by InPVille - 10/19/2012

Comments such as - - -"Stand for Children is really Stand for Corporations, just a front for the charter movement. Ms Candel's bio stated that she taught 6th grade, but did not state how long she actually taught. I wonder why? I’d bet a dollar she was a Teach for America “teacher”" - - - "And Tea_Slayer is correct about the unions being used as boogiemen. Those who think like Piyush and his legislature use the unions to mask their own nefarious agenda, and that is to utterly gut public education and turn it over to private interests, a la ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, that is funded by large corporations and billionaire right wing extremists like the infamous Koch brothers." - - - "Stand for Children has a catchy title like Students First. Both have very little concern for children but do have an invested interest in pushing charters, privatization, union busting and teacher bashing! As Mr. Hammett said, it is an astroturf organization backed by big money!" might sound like an effective argument when preaching to members of your particular choir. However, it will be immediately rejected as a valid argument by the members of the other choir. Anyone not affiliated with either particular choir is not likely to view them as valid arguments. These types of comments are what I would consider a weak arguments, ad hominem., and/or flaming.

2) Comment by InPVille - 10/19/2012

Also importantly, what of VAM testing models. Is the model reliable and how difficult is it to achieve reliable statistics using it? This is controversial. I looked at several articles written by critics - from different viewpoints. One of them was from a maven of the American Enterprise Institute which some might think would favor VAM. He didn't. http://www.kyepsb.net/documents/Stats/Journals/Heterogeneity%20of%20regression.pdf "VAM models, by their nature, are very complex, and a high level of statistical expertise – far beyond that held by a typical administrator at the school, district, or state level – is required to understand them. This lack of intuitive simplicity has contributed to their premature implementation as normative evaluation models, as statisticians with an interest in selling the methodology have glossed over some very real theoretical problems in the interests of simplifying the results so that they can be understood by the consumer." -[**]- "As a result, legislatures, administrators, and other policy-makers often make implementation decisions without an understanding of the limitations of these models. There are a number of different models in use in this field. Differences in the models stem from efforts by statisticians to resolve the various technical problems that have arisen as the field has developed. None of the models solves all of the known technical problems, and some problems have proven intractable. As a result, while some of the models have proven useful for specific limited purposes, no one can claim to have developed a VAM model of general applicability whose results can be trusted implicitly for the purpose of rank-ordering teachers or schools with enough precision to justify their use in a high-stakes environment." -[**]- "We should not attempt to use these models to apply rewards and sanctions on a broad scale to any large number of teachers or schools. We could use them productively to identify teachers and schools that are especially effective or egregiously ineffective. If VAM measures were used in this way, it would be advisable to use them in conjunction with other measures of school or teacher performance." http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational_leadership/nov05/vol63/num03/Challenges_of_Value-Added_Assessment.aspx "A large body of research, however, suggests that year-to-year curricular variation is significant (Schmidt, Houang, & McKnight, 2005). Other researchers have demonstrated that the process used to create the vertical scales is a statistical challenge in itself and can actually introduce more error in longitudinal analyses (Doran & Cohen, 2005; Michaelides & Haertel, 2004)." "These findings suggest that value-added modeling may need to evolve into newer forms. The research emerging in this area is too new, however, to allow solid conclusions." http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic245006.files/Kane_Staiger_3-17-08.pdf Are Teacher-Level Value-Added Estimates Biased? http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2004/RAND_MG158.pdf Evaluating Value-Added Models For Teacher Accountability http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/rick_hess_straight_up/2011/01/beyond_value-added_modelsgetting_the_mechanics_of_high-stakes_teacher_effectiveness_policies_right.html Education policy maven Rick Hess of the American Enterprise Institute think tank offers straight talk on matters of policy, politics, research, and reform. Follow Rick and AEI's Education Program on Twitter. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/leading-mathematician-debunks-value-added/2011/05/08/AFb999UG_blog.html

3) Comment by InPVille - 10/19/2012

With respect to Noel Hammatt's most recent contribution to this discussion, the 2012 Spring LEAP Criterion-Referenced Test results are now available here. http://www.doe.state.la.us/topics/leap_results.html - - - I took a look at the school in question's percentages from 2007 through 2012. South Highlands is Site Code 009057. In 2007, 20088 & 2009, the school had 0% of students in the Approaching Basic(AB) & Unsatisfactory(U) groups. In the AB category 1% was in Science in 2010. In 2011 there were 3% in AB in Science and 1% in AB in Social Studies. In 2012 there was <=1% in the AB and U groups in all four categories. The percentages in the Basic group over these years are declining and moving into the Advanced(A) and Mastery(M) groups. This isn't an indication of failure from what I can glean from the data. I am not an expert on this subject matter. But as an interested citizen, I don't see any support for Ms. Candal's argument here. Scanning the columns for all state schools listed on the charts, it is even harder to see based on what is in these LEAP Result Reports.

4) Comment by Bwaites985 - 10/18/2012

This lady has no idea what she is talking about. She is a mouthpiece for a politically funded group. Not only is this new system flawed it has failed in multiple other states. It seems only right to figure that Louisiana would adopt what has failed in other states.

5) Comment by Jack_Cause - 10/17/2012

I agree with the comments below regarding the data. Ms. Candal states, “Before making broad generalizations that the system is flawed, we need to take a close look at the data...” I agree, we need to take a close look at the data! Where is the data? Does Ms. Candal have the data? Why won’t the DOE make the data available? I agree with @1ryben, and believe someone in their organization is reading these comments. Their lack of a response says it all!

6) Comment by timesright - 10/16/2012

Stand for Children has a catchy title like Students First. Both have very little concern for children but do have an invested interest in pushing charters, privatization, union busting and teacher bashing! As Mr. Hammett said, it is an astroturf organization backed by big money!

7) Comment by 8.3 - 10/16/2012

"...new sources of data" etc. etc,. Great, so lets let the public see it and experts analyze it, if the data is so compelling no need to keep it secret, right? How about impartial experts though, not political hacks?

8) Comment by 1ryben - 10/16/2012

Mrs. Candal, Please provide us with your sources. I would like to read the reports for myself. many of the issues with your summary has been detailed on previous comments. I, like many others do not see where the lower scores are the result of poor teaching or a lack of student learning. It shows the results of one test given on one day. If anything, I would say that your letter illustrates the fallicy of using teasting as a means of guaging student achievement or teacher effectiveness. It is a tool, certainly, but a snap shot of one test on one day. Again, I respectfully request that you provide us with the source of your data. (Don't tell me you or someone in your orginization doesn't read these comments. Based on your and previous letters to the editor we know you or someone in your organization does)

9) Comment by coachblades - 10/16/2012

Mrs. Candal, you said it all when you said "and if I were a parent of one of these students, I would be asking a lot of questions." Let me ask you, would any of those question be directed toward your child? "Son why did you drop? Why did you not put forth as good an effort for this test? Maybe you should ask your son if they got bored during the extremely long test. Maybe you should ask yourself "Did as a parent do everything to ensure success? No your questions were probably only for the proffessional, the teacher. You question the person that has dedicated their life to children, been to college for years and was trained to teach, passed many tests to become certified. You are the reason so many leave the job of teaching everyday. You blame no one but the teacher, never once looking at your own child or even yourself and taking the blame for their underacheivement. Are all teachers great?!? Absolutely not! But this evaluation system IS FLAWED and will result in many Great teachers being wrongfully labeled ineffective, some will get fired others will give up and leave!

10) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 10/16/2012

"Chem's comments didn't add any data either and as such there was no reasons on the table to blame the parents or the socio-economic area the school was located in for the problem" Come on, InPville, you are usually better than that. If you want to find that data, try the google ("parental involvement socioeconomic education" should be a good start)

11) Comment by InPVille - 10/16/2012

@Noel Hammatt: Thanks for the clarification. My post began with the qualifier that my questions were based on the possibility that the figures were accurate. There clearly wasn't enough information provided to assume based solely on the statements whether they were or weren't. My "If we are talking about..." should have been clearly in line with that beginning. Chem's comments didn't add any data either and as such there was no reasons on the table to blame the parents or the socio-economic area the school was located in for the problem. . . hence my questions.

12) Comment by chem - 10/16/2012

thanks Noel Hammatt. That was the point I was making. The writer, Ms. Candal, gives no data at all that can point to a cause for this drop in student performance, if indeed there is a real decline. •••• And Tea_Slayer is correct about the unions being used as boogiemen. Those who think like Piyush and his legislature use the unions to mask their own nefarious agenda, and that is to utterly gut public education and turn it over to private interests, a la ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, that is funded by large corporations and billionaire right wing extremists like the infamous Koch brothers.

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

@InPVille & @Chem: This school in 2011 (2012 data is not yet out) had 99.6% of its students at or above grade level. So, in 2011 one student failed to meet the grade level criteria. (Kindergarten, 1st and 2nd don't actually have standardized tests giving "grade level") This is NOT a high poverty school, since it is a Magnet with only 15% of the students qualifying for free or reduced meal prices. As far as your statement @InPVille: "If we are talking about the same students, how likely is it that the parenting of 40% of the "basic" students went south at the same time?" First, the actual "data" she provided does not indicate if it is the same students, which she cannot know unless the Department of Education is actually releasing data to "friendly" sources that it claims it cannot release to researchers. Second, nowhere in the article is there ever a claim that 40% of the "basic" students went south at the same time. In fact, I have NO IDEA what she is claiming, since she jumps from "points" to percents and fails to ever provide a context. I can point out that in 2011, in English Language Arts, that 3% of the students were scoring BASIC and that in 2012, 9% of the students were scoring at basic. Given the school's student body of 469 students in 2011, we might infer (without a strong basis, however) that there were around 100 students in each of these grades. So, once could, perhaps decide that there were six students moved from "advanced" to "basic." To put this in context, it means absolutely nothing! Different test, different year, and it could mean that each of these students missed one single question more than the year before! We don't really know ANYTHING to make ANY DECISIONS on! Neither does Monica Candal, and she has proven it with her statements... made in defense of an indefensible system that she apparently knows nothing about, but is paid to ONLY support it! Once can well imagine that she would be fired if she didn't "report out" this way!

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

Working with students and learning isn't quite the same as studying "eelgrass." Unless Ms. Candal has actually received some data that no other researchers in the state actually have, and cares to share it, her numbers mean nothing at all. One should remember that "Stand For Children" is a classic "Astro- Turf" organization profiting a few paid employees, and at the cost of many, many students. Paid for almost totally by a few major players, all who stand to gain from the success of their ALEC inspired "reforms," Stand For Children is a full time lobbyist group pushing for the "reforms" mandated by those who pay their bills. For a moment, let's explore her "data." First, note that it was NOT the Department of Education who is challenging the reports (or, is it?) that the VAM system has flaws. After all, the Department of Education actually has all of the data. They won't release it to independent researchers, or ever college professors who actually examine these matters, but they released it to Stand For Children? (Stranger things have happened, for example, the State Department of Education actually sends people to Stand For Children to read about its own flawed Teacher Evaluation system, the one that led everyone involved in it to run after it was approved. ) "I In fact, at South Highlands, 7 percent of students who were “advanced” in third grade had dropped to “basic” by the fourth grade. Seven percent doesn’t equate to just one or two students who had a bad day. It indicates a systemic problem, and if I were a parent of one of these students, I would be asking a lot of questions." Keep in mind that only if Ms. Candal has INDIVIDUAL STUDENT DATA SETS can she make the assertions she has made. First, students are not labeled as "Mastery" or "Basic" overall, but only in subject areas. So which subjects was she writing about? Second, unless she knew exactly which students were in the classes, for each teacher, each year, she has absolutely NO IDEA whether a 7% change is a one or two or three students. This is because the actual VAM scores are based only on these students who have consistent data for two or more years, and who were in the classrooms for the requisite length of time. Basically. You KNOW nothing more about the situation faced by teachers than you did prior to reading her "paid for" letter to the editor. The state is getting desperate, trying to find something to muddy the narrative. The narrative is, truly, that VAM is a totally flawed system designed to empty the schools of dedicated, experienced teachers and fill them with low-paid TFA and other "five week wonders" who will not stay around long enough to make a difference in our communities. Part of a larger narrative which is that the entire "reform" agenda is being exposed for what it is. Have no fear though, many are fighting for it. Follow the money! And, check out the links between Stand For Children" and "The Urban League." More to come on that! Follow the money. Almost forgot... the reference to "eelgrass" above? Ms. Candal studied eelgrass in her undergraduate program. After noting that one are met all the requirements for successful eelgrass transplantation, this is how she explained the failure of the eelgrass transplantation: "This suggests that other factors not considered in this study may be affecting eelgrass transplantation success." Guess what, Monica? Even more factors impact student learning!

15) Comment by InPVille - 10/16/2012

-{-{IF the figures provided by Ms Candal are accurate}-}- As per Chem: Sure there can be more than one reason a school's results decline. But if a school is in a low socio-economic area one year, it is probably in the same low socio-economic area the following year. If we are talking about the same students, how likely is it that the parenting of 40% of the "basic" students went south at the same time? Is there no evaluation system for the performance of school administrators? Some people consider not receiving annual salary step increases a pay cut. But given the current economy, it could be unavoidable. It happened to state employees several times in memory. It doesn't say much for the professionalism of teachers IF their performance was the cause of the decline in results AND IF not getting a step increase was behind it. . . or was their a pay cut that I am unaware of?

16) Comment by Scrooge - 10/16/2012

Revealing the funding for Stand for Children Louisiana might be interesting, it appears that the actual unstated intent is privatization according to efforts in other states. Stand for Children holds that inexperienced teachers are just as good if not better than experienced teachers. There are about 100 very wealthy individuals who are basically buying politics with all sorts of groups with catchy, tear jerking names to pursue a profit driven agenda and increase their wealth. Why? How much is enough?

17) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 10/16/2012

Traveler: well stated, especially considering that only 11.6% of all teachers in LA are members of either union. Unions are just one of the boogiemen of the RW. ---http://teacherunionexposed.com/state.cfm?state=LA

18) Comment by Traveler - 10/16/2012

To jdk944: I am a member of neither the Louisiana Federation of Teachers nor the Louisiana Association of Educators (the two teacher unions in our state); however, I have considerable information and insight into their work. Both unions have striven to assist public school boards in revising procedures for moving ineffective educators on to other occupations outside the field of teaching. The problem is, with a few exceptions throughout the state, the unions have very little respect from those school boards----the school boards mostly just ignore the unions' attempts at input. Why? The unions have no collective bargaining rights! As far as the school boards are concerned, the unions are simply an "irritating flea on a dog" (and about as significant). This picture is not going to change until (and unless) the two unions figure out a way to resolve their philosophical differences and come together as one strong group. Teacher members of each union have a right to ask why that hasn't happened. So you see, jdk944, you are crediting the teacher unions with much more clout than they actually possess.

19) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 10/16/2012

Stand for Children is really Stand for Corporations, just a front for the charter movement. Ms Candel's bio stated that she taught 6th grade, but did not state how long she actually taught. I wonder why? I’d bet a dollar she was a Teach for America “teacher” One clue is that her undergraduate degree is in Environmental Science

20) Comment by jdk944 - 10/16/2012

The teachers unions have, for years, had an opportunity to provide recommendations to deal with ineffective teachers. Instead they continued to defend a system based primarily on seniority to protect them. Tweeking any new system is usually required. But this continuation to cry "wolf" at every turn because now some accountability is being required is getting old!!

21) Comment by spqr - 10/16/2012

Monica, Teachers also deserve caring, hard-working students who go to school regularly and not worship at the alter of American barbarism. The teachers are not delivered effective students and cannot turn them into scholars if they do not want it. Parents? Today's parenting? I am still laughing. Stay in the office, dear. You do not know what really goes on.

22) Comment by chem - 10/15/2012

Ms. Candal offers no data that shows the teachers are at fault. Could it be that the administrators are to blame? Perhaps everyone's morale is quite low because of how that particular school is run. Was it hit harder than other schools with cuts in pay and supplies? Is this school in a particularly low socio-economic area? There could be many reasons for this school not doing well which has nothing to do with teachers. But teachers are an easy target. Let the administrators, politicians and parents off the hook and go straight to the teachers.