The Union Fights Back Against Value-Added Assessments

Howard Blume
Teachers Union Challenges LA Unified's New Evaluation Process (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-utla-challenge-20110508,0,3954012.story)
LA Times
May 8th, 2011

Summary: The union is accusing the school district of violating contractual language by failing to "engage in good faith negotiation" regarding evaluation methods. They have filed a grievance with the board that oversees public employees. This is the latest development in what has become a bitterly divisive battle over teaching and testing standards in LA.

Key Points: Union attempting legal challenge to what they see as "unfair" assessment methods.

Relevance: An update on the evolving assessment situation in LA. Will have broader implications for national standards of assessment--LA Unified is one of the largest districts in the nation.

Value-Added In Depth

Teresa Watanabe
'Value-Added' Teacher Evaluations: L.A. Unified Tackles a Tough Formula (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-adv-value-add-20110328,0,3903343.story?page=1)
LA Times
March 28th, 2011

Summary: An in depth look at the ins and outs, criticisms and arguments in support, and the math behind the value-added analysis we have discussed a few times in passing. It turns out, fun fact, that the formula used is PhD level math.

Audience: Those interested in standardized testing on either side of the argument

Key Points: 1) There are issues with value-added analysis, including inconsistencies, and apparent racial biases; 2) Supporters insist that it is the most objective method of evaluating teachers.

Relevance: It was very interesting to hear some debate on the issue. It was even more interesting to look at a formula and spend 20 minutes on google trying to figure out exactly what all the variables and numbers actually mean.The fact is that we WILL have to deal with testing as a part of our evaluation as teachers. It will be good to have a more in depth understanding of the issues regarding the specifics of how we will be evaluated.

Conflict Between Budgets and Standardized Testing

Jason Song
State Education Officials Decry Funding Veto (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/10/state-education-officials-decry-veto-of-funding-.html)
L.A. Times
October 28, 2010

Summary: The Governator vetoed approximately $7 million that was supposed to go to a "student data tracking system" called CALPADS. Opponents of the veto claim that it could hurt California's ability to comply with federal regulations and create difficulties implementing the fan favorite value-added analysis at a state-wide level.

Intended Audience: General Public

Key Points: 1) The Governor vetoed a large sum of money intended to go toward the creation of an objective system of student assessment; 2) There is some debate over the proper way assess both students and teachers.

Relevance: Funding is a huge issue right now and so is teacher and student assessment. This article serves as an example of how the two interests can conflict with one another. Implementing systems of data tracking of student scores costs money. States must pay for servers, software engineers, test developers, etc. This all costs money--something that most states are in an extreme shortage of right now. It will be interesting to see how all of this plays itself out over the next few years. Do we go with more standardized tests, more "objective" assessment methods, and spend more money, or do we continue to cut funding for all areas of education?

Value Added Measurement: Talking Points article

"Neither Fair Nor Accurate" by Wayne Au

Rethinking Schools, Winter 2010 pp. 34-38 http://www.rethinkingschools.org/archive/25_02/25_02_au.shtml

Au introduces the recent history of basing teacher performance evaluation on test scores, or "Value Added Measurement," and introduces six "critical issues" from the research that demonstrate problems with VAM.

Intended Audience: anyone interested in discussing this recent emotionally charged education issue with other people; Au intends the article as a starter and a list of "talking points"

Key Points:

• a statistical study from the USDE finds the error rate when using VAM to assess teachers in the 25-35% range, meaning that a given teacher has a 1/4 or better chance of being mistakenly rated as "below average"
• a second study finds that test scores vary so broadly that a teacher ranked highly by VAM one year may be on the bottom of the heap the following year, and vice versa
• a third study, or "research report," finds that an enormous percentage of variability in students' test scores (improvement or decline) can be attributed to factors entirely outside of teachers' control, including things as simple as whether or not the student had breakfast that morning
• the fourth cited report finds that nonrandom student assignments (grouping students into race, socioeconomic class, etc.) when assessing using VAM, while it may seem like a traditional statistical control method, greatly skews results by ignoring the most salient factors of those groupings
• student performance may not reflect the abilities of the teacher in the subject she scored highly (or lowly) on: her history teacher may have taught her the writing skills that her English teacher gets credit for
• "The social safety net is the responsibility of a much broader socioeconomic network-- not the sole responsibility of the teacher." To think that teachers can overcome whatever obstacles students' face is an unrealistic expectation when assessing them with VAM.

Relevance: This is another interesting article in our continuing consideration of Value-Added Measurement. Au succinctly introduces several valuable studies to use as jumping-off points for further discussion, and laments the fact that neither the Bush nor the Obama administration seem interested in taking any research into consideration when forming education policy. As educators entering the field in the midst of the possible rise or fall of widespread VAM -- which is of course tied closely to budget and salary reform -- it will be interesting and valuable to keep tabs on it.