The L. A. Times published the school district’s test scores by teacher, by name, on or about August 14, 2010. The picture accompanying the article was of John Smith, a “bad” teacher. This struck me at the time as being gratuitous teacher bashing. After all, no Politician ever lost a vote, no Pundit ever failed to gain circulation or air time, no Polemicist ever lost devotees, no Professor ever lost his bid for tenure by denigrating the nation’s public schools and by bashing its teachers for their own respective political and career agendas. Perhaps it has moved beyond that and become a favorite sport, like cyber-bullying seems to have become among youth.
September 28, 2010, the Idaho Statesman reported the apparent suicide of a teacher who, according to friends and colleagues, was distraught since the publication of his rating as a “less effective teacher,” based on his students’ math test scores.
The L. A. Times defended its publication of teacher ratings because “”because it bears directly on the performance of public employees who provide an important service, and in the belief that parents and the public have a right to judge the data for themselves.” “…the type of teacher rankings published by the Times, known as ‘value-added,’ shouldn’t be used as the sole criteria to measure effectiveness,” said district Superintendent Ramon Cortines. Boys and girls, can you say “disingenuous?”
To borrow a turn of phrase, for what it’s worth, “There’s something happening here. What it is ain’t exactly clear.”
Read more: http://www.idahostatesman.com/2010/09/27/1357650/union-low-ranking-a-factor-in.html#ixzz11Lfbpt5s
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-teachers-value-20100815,0,2695044.story