{"id":21318,"date":"2010-09-10T10:31:42","date_gmt":"2010-09-10T16:31:42","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nmpolitics.net\/index\/?p=21318"},"modified":"2010-09-10T10:31:46","modified_gmt":"2010-09-10T16:31:46","slug":"why-not-a-sunshine-portal-for-teachers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/2010\/09\/why-not-a-sunshine-portal-for-teachers\/","title":{"rendered":"Why not a Sunshine Portal for teachers?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>

Thomas Molitor<\/p><\/div>\n

Usually this time of year in Southern California it\u2019s the Santa Ana winds that fan regional fires along the dry inland coastal areas, causing emergency-response havoc.<\/p>\n

This year, it is the recent release of a series of articles<\/span><\/a> by the Los Angeles Times examining the use of student test scores to estimate the effectiveness of district teachers that has set off a controversial conflagration between parents, teachers, teacher unions and reform advocates.<\/p>\n

Why do some students in the same school, studying the same lessons, sitting in the same classroom size, outperform students just down the hall?<\/p>\n

Seeking to shed light on the problem, the Los Angeles Times obtained seven years of math and English test scores from the Los Angeles Unified School District and used the information to estimate the effectiveness of L.A. teachers \u2013 something the district could do but has not.<\/p>\n

Six thousand elementary school teachers in Los Angeles have found themselves under scrutiny this summer after the Times published a series of articles about their performance, including a public-access searchable database on its website that rates them from least effective to most effective.<\/p>\n

Value-added analysis<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Working with an education economist from the Rand Corporation<\/span><\/a>, the Times used a statistical approach known as \u201cvalue-added analysis.\u201d Proponents of the value-added approach say it identifies and can predict the effectiveness of a teacher by looking at the test scores of the teacher\u2019s students over time. Each student’s past test performance is used to project his performance in the future. The difference between the child’s actual and projected results is the estimated “value” that the teacher added or subtracted during the year.<\/p>\n

In statistics, it\u2019s called \u201cpredictive modeling.\u201d For example, if a third-grade student ranked in the 60th\u00a0percentile among all district third-graders, he would be expected to rank similarly in the fourth grade. If he fell to the 40th\u00a0percentile, it would suggest that his fourth grade teacher had not been very effective, at least for him. This would mean the fourth grade teacher \u201csubtracted value\u201d from the student\u2019s level.<\/p>\n

Conversely, if the student rose to the 80th\u00a0percentile in the fourth grade this would mean the teacher \u201cadded value\u201d to the student\u2019s level.<\/p>\n

The Times examined the performance of more than six thousand third- through fifth-grade teachers for whom reliable data were available. Among the findings:<\/p>\n