DC Schools moving forward

Yesterday I was going to blog about the outstanding opinion piece by Colbert King in the Washington Post on Saturday appropriately titled “Beyond Publicity, What is Rhee Producing”. King makes a great point that seems to occur with every rock star superintendent of schools – they make changes and are immediately canonized before we even see the results. Education reformers start drinking, and even making, the kool-aid because we are so desperate to see any progress that anyone who actually makes a change must immediately be worshipped. Then, because of the superintendent’s fame for making changes, they leave before anyone can really see results. In theory they could be a disaster, but no one will really know because the results never catch up to them.

However the nasty flipside is also true. King advocates for an independent auditor to see if all these changes provide results but it is difficult to see solid results in a short period in a school system that has been mired in sub-par performance for so long. While I applaud the need to really understand the results of these disruptive innovations, I am fearful that her detractors will see the results and find ways to say that her methods are not working. People will try to reverse what she has done before we have a chance to see what she can achieve. This happened most recently in Philadelphia.

Had I blogged yesterday, I would have been a lot more harsh about the fame thing and the education reformer fawning that occurs at every conference. It is as if every education reformer signed a pact never to have a conference unless Michelle was a keynote speaker with angels singing in the background. I would ask that everyone tone it down and not make a huge deal until the results are in. Our critique of the status quo is they focus too much on inputs and not enough on results – yet every superintendent we worship is because of their inputs, not results. Plus we set the expectation so high that they are doomed to disappoint.

But then I read this and I am drinking the cool-aid again. The key element in true reform is great teaching and Michelle is going to provide a laser focus on improving the District’s teaching corps. She is dumping National Board because it is too costly and does not get results, setting high expectations for students and trying to eliminate bottom performing teachers. She is eliminating teacher training which does not produce results, in favor of a program that is getting results in Montgomery County and she is going to improve mentoring.

This is a huge, much needed step to get DC Schools back on track. If we can combine that with King’s idea of an accountability measure – with very reasonable goals – I think the attention Michelle is getting will be justified in two years when we see DC finally become a place where kids come to learn.

Teacher Bonuses on the chopping block

The numbers are getting worse on state budgets which means teacher bonuses are going to be in trouble. I have already heard this in Minnesota and now find the same thing in Utah. Plus Florida has cut way back eliminating the reimbursement for the cost teachers must endure to go through the program in the last round of budget cuts and this year they will have even more.

This will be a ridiculously tough year for performance pay and an even tougher year for National Board.

Here at ABCTE we have put our Distinguished Teacher program on hold due to budget constraints in our own organization and in the states.

The first step in a successful performance pay system is to lock down the funding. It is so detrimental to morale to have a program, get the excitement about the program and then have it vanish two years later.

Education Research Shows Nothing but High Price Tags

Two articles this week on education research with no real winner or loser in either. Shocking. The first study is the result of an exhaustive study of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. Ed Week says that the results show that “National Board Teachers found to be Effective”. Wow – not exactly a resounding victory.

Next up was a study of supplemental education services (SES). In this case the results were mixed with a Rand study showing some improvement but other studies showing no real improvement. Not exactly a resounding defeat.

Notice a trend. It costs a lot of money to conduct a study to determine student achievement yet we cannot really see any truly significant results. In the case of the National Board, the effect size was .04 – this means that only 4% of the gains made by students can be attributable to the fact that the child had a National Board teacher. Even if the results are better, the samples sizes are small due to the cost and the detractors of a program will call it out based on sample size even if it is statistically significant.

There is no slam dunk in studies of student achievement. It is sad but true that the costs are too high and the variation seems to be too great to really get a feel for the success of one program or another. Maybe we need a new measure?

Is there only one right way in education?

The last few months we have been working in Utah to help them develop a way to recognize great teachers. Some of their more forward thinking legislators put forth a modest bill to provide $275,000 to teachers who complete our Distinguished Teacher program. That program recognizes teachers based on student achievement through value add analysis (40%), live observation (30%), subject matter mastery (15%) and principal evaluation (15%).

The bill was defeated in the last few hours of the Utah session as the House succumbed to UEA pressures. The union did not want a performance pay plan that has a student achievement component in it. They did want bonuses for National Board Teachers but that bill did not even make it to the floor.

In the sad arena that is education politics, had they offered a compromise right from the start, the $275,000 could have been made available to both National Board and Distinguished Teachers. Legislators would then be able to determine which program worked better for Utah schools or have two choices for recognizing great teachers.

But I continue to see that NEA affiliates will not compromise whether it is alternative certification or performance pay. In Utah they were happier to see both bills fail rather than both potentially split the win if it meant that we might have a little victory for student achievement performance pay plans.

Interesting - - I am sure the 140 teachers who could have received $3,000 a year extra for their great work would certainly disagree with the union making a political point with their money.

News stories:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695259898,00.html
http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_8485854
http://deseretnews.com/article/1%2C5143%2C695258534%2C00.html

2008: Education Changes Ahead

My safe prediction for 2008 is that it will be a wild year for education. It is a safe prediction because more people are getting involved, more people are becoming disillusioned, more state legislators are finding their voice and there is so much more data available to help drive change. Our schedules for January are pretty busy - so we know we will be helping drive more change.
For the new year, I resolve to blog a minimum of twice per week. There are so many more issues out there and so much to think about and I have no excuse not to.

I will start with a quick recap of my first bold prediction that states would be in some serious pain this year with declining tax revenues. Now from Florida, we hear that lawmakers are questioning bonuses for National Board teachers. Florida lawmakers want to ensure that they are getting a solid return for their very large investment. I expect that we will go down there and let them know more about our Distinguished Teacher program that rewards teachers based on results.

It was funny to hear lawmakers initially say that they were not going to touch education when they needed to make budget cuts. I think we will see more lawmakers looking to find ways to cut everything as budgets get lean and Florida may just be the tip of the iceberg.

Distinguished Teachers

There is an outstanding paper about pay for performance written by Joan Baratz-Snowden, formerly of AFT and who now sits on our board of directors. She clearly states the issues with current pay programs for teachers in saying; “it has not produced competitive salaries in the current job market, it does not respond to market forces, and the evidence linking teacher education and experience to improved student performance is weak.”

She has nailed it. But she also nails current pay for performance plans, with the exception of Denver, as weak and struggling. Reading this paper you should be able to see why we asked her help us.

We are currently creating the Distinguished Teacher program for veteran teachers that can be a part of a pay for performance program. Like many things at ABCTE, this has undergone extensive changes by listening to people, like Joan, who were very critical of the first iterations. The program now includes a live observation by trained veteran teachers using UVA’s CLASS observation system, recommendation letters from the school, scoring at the distinguished level on our subject matter exams and demonstration of student achievement through value added analysis.

As Joan points out, development of a solid program takes time. Having constructive criticism instead of political posturing has helped us create a much better program. People criticized Joan for joining our board but working together from the inside gets things done a lot faster than working against someone from the outside.