Roughly 6 percent of city teachers were deemed ineffective last year based solely on their students’ scores on state math and reading tests, new city data shows.
The data stemmed from a trial-run of just one segment of a new teacher evaluation system that will be implemented at public schools here this fall.
That segment -- which only looks at state math or reading scores for students in grades 4 to 8 -- will only count for 20 percent of a teacher’s overall performance rating in 2013-14.
Local assessments and principal observations will count for the remaining 80 percent of teachers’ ratings.
The test-based reviews deemed twice as many teachers to be sub-par as the city’s current evaluation system -- which rated just 3 percent of teachers “unsatisfactory” last year.
The current rating system doesn’t account for student test scores.
The trail-run of the test-based ratings found 8 percent of teachers to be “highly effective,” and the bulk of teachers -- 76 percent -- to be “effective.”
The remaining 10 percent of teachers -- of the 10,544 who were rated -- were considered to be “developing.”
These breakdowns were nearly identical for the city and state.
Teachers with two years of “ineffective” ratings can be subject to fast-track termination hearings under the new evaluation system, which was imposed on the city by the State Education Department June 1.
Remember that a teacher found "ineffective" on the test-based part of the evaluation and the "local growth" part of the evaluation has to be found "ineffective" overall.
Given how shoddy the grading process is for the state tests, anybody deemed "ineffective" based on this component should lawyer up and sue the city and the state over the rating.
There is nothing in the least scientific, objective or fair in how that part of the evaluation is being done and it will not stand up to scrutiny in court.