Teachers are just now getting their evaluation reports for the prior school year and for many the score cards come as a shock. That’s because those reports are based on a new evaluation scale that also considers expectations for student performance.
The Value-Added system is based on what the state thinks students should be doing, versus what they actually are doing. It’s what the department of education calls a “prediction” that makes up approximately half of a teacher’s evaluation. And according to the department’s Kathy Hebda, “the value added results are completely independent from whatever standards are set for passing or proficiency on the state assessment.”
That's throwing teachers like Margaret Goodwin, for a loop. She’s a third grade teacher at St. Petersburg’s Westgate Elementary School, and has been teaching for almost 40 years. Goodwin says she’s always gotten high marks, but not this time.
“My assigned score was an 11.27. It’s only receiving 11.2 points out of 50. It was a full half of our evaluation. My other part was effective and highly effective. The Value Added model negated all of that, and put my overall score as “Needs Improvement," she said during a press conference organized by the Florida Education.
Goodwin says such a score has been demoralizing for her, and other teachers feel the same way. The value-added system was introduced last year as part of a bill that revamped the state’s teacher evaluation process. Critics of the old system said it was subjective and relied too heavily on things like classroom observation. The new system takes into effect student performance and learning gains, along with the predictive value-added system. The state is using a formula to calculate value added that is so complex, you have to see it to believe it.
“If you look at the formula, its rather complicated and challenging to understand the formula, and even more challenging to explain it to someone," says Senator Bill Montford, D-Tallahassee. He also heads the Florida Association of District School Superintendents.
"And what makes it more difficult, is that it seems to be a lack of consistency in the correlation between the scores, and what we’ve customarily determined to be highly effective teachers. It seems totally unrelated. And that’s caused quite a bit of concern.”
Montford said the concerns being expressed over the current evaluation system aren’t new. They’ve been there since the state passed Senate Bill 736 two years ago, which was Florida’s attempt to comply with the requirements of a $700 million federal education grant, called Race to the Top. The state’s largest teachers union, the Florida Education Association, wants state officials to back away from the value added model, something union president Andy Ford calls “unscientific.”
“The timing isn’t right. It doesn’t appear the formula is accurately factoring out all the things it needs to make it a fair system. We need some time to catch up. I’d rather get it right, than to just get it done.”
Criticisms of the value-added model also aren’t new. A research group convened by the U.S. Department of Education recently urged caution on how value-added models are applied because they tend to be subjective, complex and hard to understand. And not every model tracks the same thing.
And a lot is riding on the system here in Florida. Tenure for new teachers is no longer an option. In the next few years, the evaluations will be used to determine whether teachers keep their jobs and how much money they’ll earn. And it’s not only teachers like Westgate’s Margaret Goodwin who have concerns. One-time Yulee High School teacher of the year Natalie Faulk, got an effective rating. But just like Goodwin, when it came to the value-added side of her evaluation, her scores plummeted too:
"There’s no consistency within a school, the district or the state of how VAM [value-added model] is impacting teachers. It’s hard even to have it explained to you," Faulk said.
The Department’s Kathy Hebda says most of the calls it’s received have been from teachers outside of the state’s heavily tracked and tested subject areas. Unlike reading and math, which have been evaluated for years, no one really tests subjects like French. And Kindergarteners and first-through-third graders don’t take an FCAT, which makes the value added process for teachers in those subjects, a bit more murky. In cases like Goodwin and Faulk, their value added scores are based on other students at the school in various subjects and aren’t limited those they teach. It’s called Instructional Team Data, and the department of education’s Hebda says that’s an area where districts had flexibility to decide how to shape their value-added system:
“You have to look at team data a little bit differently than you do an individual teacher’s data on her subject and her class.”
Hebda says the first year for anything is always a shock and she believes the scores will improve as teachers become more familiar with the system. Still, the teachers union has written letters to Governor Rick Scott and Interim Education Commissioner Pam Stewart asking to put the system on pause but the responses have been noncommittal. Senator Montford says he believes the issues can be addressed through rules, and state lawmakers won’t have to get involved. As of now, this year’s evaluations will become part of the first set to be used when the state begins linking them to teacher salaries and employment.
For more news updates, follow Lynn Hatter on twitter @HatterLynn
