As NYC Educator posted this morning, NYC teachers will now have 20% of their evaluation based upon "local" measures of student performance.
For many teachers outside of academic subjects, this means they will be evaluated based on scores of students in subjects other than their own.
For example, art teachers may be evaluated on the scores of their students' ELA or math Regents exams.
Same goes for vocational teachers, physical education teachers, music teachers.
It is possible that even science and social studies teachers will be evaluated on ELA or math exams if schools pick the "default" option provided by the DOE for the local measures component.
How will the city calculate these scores for all these teachers?
They're going to come up with a growth model that they'll reveal in October or November that will align PSAT math scores to math Regents exams and PSAT verbal scores to ELA Regents exams.
Were those tests designed to be used to find "growth" for teachers? Should teachers who don't teach either math or ELA be evaluated using math or ELA scores?
Sure, why not!
Because it totally makes sense to use math and/or ELA scores for social studies, science, art, music, physical education and vocational teachers to evaluate how well these respective teachers teach social studies, science, art, music, physical education and vocational classes.
Totally makes sense.
As NYC noted in his post, UFT President Mulgrew told the DA last year that this growth model stuff they were creating for the local measures of student learning component was a totally fair and excellent way to evaluate teachers because "In any class...you ought to be able to move kids from point A,
wherever they began, to point B, someplace that showed some progress."
How will Mulgrew defend his assertion that growth is the way to go because any good teacher ought to be able to show how their students progressed when most schools are going to be forced to use math and ELA scores for all teachers?
What do ELA and/or math scores have to do with a social studies teacher showing how much progress she/he made with her/his students in social studies?
Why, little to none, of course, certainly none that can be directly attributed to that individual teacher.
And yet, under the APPR system passed by the NY State legislature and signed into law by the governor, under the system that was imposed upon NYC teachers by NYSED Commissioner John King with the approval of UFT President Michael Mulgrew, that's exactly how teachers are going to be evaluated.
There is much more insanity to this system than I can cover in one post, so I'll come back to this over the course of the week and explore more of the mess that is MOSL, the disaster that is APPR.
For today, I just want to remind you that Michael Mulgrew stood on stage with Governor Cuomo, Regents Chancellor Tisch and NYSED Commissioner King in February 2012 to hail this system.
I also want to remind you that Mulgrew was absolutely fine with King being named the "independent arbitrator" who got to impose the local measures component of the APPR system when the UFT and the NYCDOE came to an impasse.
Leo Casey isn't ollecting his double pension at the UFT anymore to come around and shill for this mess, but when critics like Diane Ravitch and Carol Burris were pointing out all the flaws in the APPR system, Casey attacked Ravitch and Burris rather than the system.
That's when you knew that this is the UFT's teacher evaluation system as much as it's Governor Cuomo's or Regent Chancellor Tisch's or NYSED Commissioner King's.
The UFT leadership was in at the development of this system, they hailed it when the impasse over the test score component was "resolved" back in February 2012 and they smiled when NYSED Commissioner King was given the power to impose whatever local measures he wanted to impose as part of the APPR system.
The UFT leadership isn't going to get us out of this mess anymore than Cuomo, Tisch or King are going to.
Teachers are going to have to band together and explain the insanity of this system to parents and to the public over and over and over until we get this system shelved for good.
It starts by educating yourself about the MOSL and APPR systems, then communicating that information to parents and the public.
Let's start with, should science, social studies, art, music, physical education and vocational teachers have their teaching abilities and skills evaluated by using scores their students receive on their ELA and math exams?
Governor Cuomo called this APPR system "scientific" and "objective".
Tell me exactly what is "scientific" and "objective" about evaluating the teaching abilities and skills of science, social studies, art, music, physical education and vocational teachers with scores their students receive on their ELA and math exams?