The Math Formulas Behind High School Teachers' State 20% This Year

As folks who have gone through the process will you, quitting cigarettes is one of the most difficult things a person can try to do. Yesterday, I was able to get through a full day without them. But then I had trouble sleeping. After a few hours of not being able to fall off, I stalked the internet hoping to find something very technical and boring to read, as being bored often helps me sleep. I was lucky enough to find this from NYSED, which explains how my Growth Scores (the state 20% of my performance review) will be calculated at the end of the school year.

I grabbed some screen shots of the math formulas that the state will use to calculate growth scores for high school teachers and thought I'd share some.

Here is the formula used to *calculate* each student's Student Growth Percentile (SGP). 

Here is the formula used to calculate the final score for teachers (our Mean Growth Percentile)

There is actually some good news here. The test scores from each of our students will be placed on  their own bell curve (measured against the test scores of other 'similar' students). That's what all of this crazy math is supposed to be about.

As I alluded to in a separate post, this means that, when considering the state 20%, our performance as teachers will be the result of student performance along several bell curves. So if we find ourselves on the bottom of one bell curve (let's say our students from low-income families with learning disabilities performed poorly that day),  then we may find ourselves closer to the top of another bell curve (let's say our  students from low income families without learning disabilities performed better). This might have the result of everything evening itself out at the end of the day (and by the end of the day, I mean to say our Mean Growth Percentile. I really need to get a better hobby).


No matter though. After reading this, I ran right out to the store and picked up a pack. Oh well. I'll try again in a week or so.

Why NYC Will Never Be Syracuse

News this week that the Syracuse Teachers' Union has sued the state's Education Department over the new teacher evaluations came with a bit of a thud and then just sort of vanished.  At the heart of the lawsuit is this allegation:

The evaluation system led to about 35 percent of Syracuse teachers getting "developing" or "ineffective" ratings in 2012-13 after appeals were decided. Those are the two lowest ratings in the four-tier system.

About 5 percent of teachers across the state got those ratings. In Onondaga County outside of Syracuse, only 1.8 percent of teachers were rated in the lowest two categories.

Specifically, the STA said the Education Department failed to recognize the full impacts of poverty on students when it set the standards on student improvement on the state's fourth- through eighth-grade math and English language arts tests.

The decision to sue NYSED over teacher evals should, by rights, be a pretty big deal. This is, after all, the first major lawsuit SED has faced over the APPR system that has been put into place in districts across the state. The reality, however, is that lawsuit brought by the Syracuse school district won't much effect districts from other parts of the state.  This is because the method Syracuse chose to evaluate student test scores is different from the way other New York State school districts chose.

In selecting what way student test scores would be used to measure teachers, districts across the state had a choice. They could select option A and have NYSED set target scores for each student. Under this target method, districts would send their student's biographic data up to NYSED. SED would examine the background of each student (as well as how he or she had performed on previous exams), then return target goals for each student to the district. Teachers were held responsible based on whether or not they had reached those targets. Option B, however, used a method called SGP, or student growth percentiles. Under this option, each student would be compared with other district students who:

1) Scored the same on the state assessment
2) Had scored the same on the previous, baseline, assessment
3) Had similar biographic information (such as ethnicity and socio-economic background)
4) Had been with the teacher for roughly the same period of time and
5) Had roughly the same attendance in school during roughly the same period of time.

I know, it sounds confusing (you can see NYSED's video, which I posted here), so let's boil it down to this: Under Option B, SED is comparing similar students to one another, and then placing the performance of all of those "similar students" on a large bell curve. So if your low-income beginner level ESL student performed better than 65% of the other *beginner level ESL students*, than it reflects well on you. The same thing goes for that the affluent boy that sits next to the low-income beginner level ESL student. If he performed better than 55% of other affluent male students across the state, then that reflects well on you too.

After they're  measured along other similar students a bell curve, your Mean Growth PErcentile (MGP) is calculated. You, as a teacher, are then placed on a bell curve along other teachers who taught the same assessment throughout the state.

If you're confused about that, then don't worry! Because the only thing you need to understand is the Bell Curve. I'm no math genius, you see, but whenever a bell curve is used, it is not possible for over one third of a group to be at the bottom of the bell curve. If 35% of Syracuse teachers are rated in the lower two categories of the APPR, then it's clear that no bell curve was used.

And if a bell curve wasn't used, it means that they had let the state set the targets for their students. This is why

About 5 percent of teachers across the state got those ratings. In Onondaga County outside of Syracuse, only 1.8 percent of teachers were rated in the lowest two categories.

It's because the overwhelming majority of those districts chose to go with the option that uses the bell curve. Say want you want about this APPR system. But if it uses multiple measures (including measuring the performance of each student in multiple ways)  it means that each and every measure has a bell curve. And in order to rated "SUCKS EGGS" you would have to be unfortunate enough to find yourself at the bottom of the majority of the bell curves that you're being placed on.

Your luck would have to be so bad as to be in a plane crash and be run over by a car on the same day (that's like Jack Bauer bad luck).

NYC offered their schools' MOSL committees the option of going with "TARGET" scores (the option that Syracuse went with) or "GROWTH" scores (the option that I described as Option B here). Many schools in New York City chose to go with growth scores.

Don't get me wrong; I think Syracuse has a pretty strong case. 40% of Syracuse students live in poverty. If SED set targets that 35% of the teachers didn't 'measure up' to, then it's plain that King & Co. weren't setting realistic goals. They should pay for that.

 I'm just saying that sticking with the bell curve gives SED less of a chance of screwing up teachers' careers. That's what many schools did here in New York  City. And that's why what happened in Syracuse will never happen here.

The Pattern of Arresting Teachers

There has been a policy change down at the Department of Education regarding how to address teachers who seek to air their employee grievances in a public manner. That policy is to have teachers arrested so that they spend the night in jail.

Norm Scott's reaction:

"The nest of vipers that is DOE legal has grown like a cancer and infested the NYPD where cops arrest fellow unionists for protesting abusive administrator tactics." 

 Francesco Portelos' reaction:

"Another teacher falsely arrested by @NYCSchools - Bronx teacher thrown in jail after criticizing principal"

And coverage from the

Bronx teacher thrown in jail after criticizing principal

After years of being embarrassed by teachers who just won't shut up, the New York City DOE has apparently embarked on a new HR policy of having teachers arrested on charges that he DA declines to press. This policy was first used against Francesco Portelos back in February when he published a post advertising the online Backpay Calculator he and I and James Eterno created.  The post satirically advertised that DOE employees could 'hack' their Payroll Portal system and give themselves a raise. Readers were further advised to use a password that Francesco claimed (again, satirically) was former Chancellor Dennis Walcott's (the password was something about Kittens being cute). As satire often is, almost everything in the post was completely untrue (you cannot hack into a payroll system and please do not try), but the DOE official had him arrested -placed in jail- anyway. This new instance is against a teacher and is for aggravated harassment. She sent a letter to the chancellor and the principal who discontinued her asking about improprieties committed at the school. Being arrested and held in custody for a over a day was her response.

The policy, as it appears to be unfolding, seems to be fairly codified and easy to explain. It is commenced when a teacher speaks out a little too much against the department or a practice or policy of the department. Once that's done, the DOE engages in the following actions:

1. A department official will reach out to a member of the NYPD. That official will file a minor misdemeanor charge against the employee. NYPD is provided with contact information of the employee (obsentively from the employee's personal file) and a police report is issued.
2. A representative from the police department will then contact the employee asking him or her to come in. In Mr. Portelos' case, the request was made to 'come in and answer a few questions'. In this teacher's case, it seems as though the representative simply asked her to come right in and surrender herself. 
3. Once appearing at the precinct, the teacher is then arrested and held -in custody- until a DA reviews the charges. Mr. Portelos' was held for 33 hours before a DA saw the charges against him and dismissed them entirely. It seems teacher B was in jail for a little under 24 hours before a DA dismissed her charges.  
4. The teacher then walks away without being charged with anything. The hope seems to be that the shock of being arrested is enough to prevent the teacher from ever publicly speaking out publicly.

While the policy has thus far been carried out against lone teachers who act as whistleblowers, it should be noted that it can also be legally carried out against union actions. While being convicted of a crime related to union activities is clearly illegal, being ARRESTED for such a crime and held in jail for a short period of time is a perfectly legal tactic. Members of MORE, and ICE and New Action; be warned.

 Since a principal made the claim against a former teacher, it must also be understood that this policy can be applied to any teacher, working under any principal, who speaks his or her mind a little too much at his or her school. This would apply to all 1800+ schools in the city and at least all 64,000 teachers who are represented by the United Federation of Teachers.

This would be the part where I say something funny or offer some type of commentary. Instead, I'll just say 1)  per the Federal NLRB position and precedent, am writing these words with the intent of improving my working conditions. Please do not arrest me for attempting to improve my working conditions. and 2) I can't believe I'm writing about teachers being arrested.

Growth Scores Explained

I consider myself a fairly well-informed guy. That's why I was a little surprised to discover that this video, explaining how growth scores under the new evaluation system are calculated, was posted way back in August.

Now I don't teach grades 4 - 8 ELA & Math, so this doesn't directly apply to me. But the NYC DOE places high students into one of ten groups (called deciles) based on their Eighth Grade assessment. It then assigns each student with his or her corresponding 'decile' number. You can see a full description of what deciles are and how they are compiled on pages 17 - 18 of this document. But the point I'm making is this: High school students are already grouped the way this video describes (by demographics and student assessment) so everything you're about to watch  can easily be transferred to a high school teacher's Measure Of Student Learning. 

Growth Scores Explained from EngageNY on Vimeo.

Warning: Global Regents Approaching (And It's an Uneven Playing Field!)

By now we've all heard -ad nauseam- how charter schools perform better than traditional public schools on standardized exams. This performance, though not always true, has been held up as an example of how charters are better suited than public schools at serving students.

Just beneath this mantra lies a fact that can only happen in the perverse bowl of politics that is New York State: While traditional public schools are banned by law from grading state exams that were taken by their own students (particularly their high school state exams), charter schools -and even charter teachers themselves- grade their own students' exams each and every year.

This is according a conversation I had with two charter teachers, who teach in two different charter networks, this past week.

And there is no oversight whatsoever for these grading practices. Charter networks benefit from a perverse type of benign neglect from local and state districts that permits them to grade their own exams without oversight. At the same time, these networks embrace the business model approach which rewards employees who perform well and lets go those who do not. I would imagine the types of pressure placed on my colleagues from these schools in order to make sure the scores were up -and, without oversight, the networks are free to exert that pressure, if they wish, in total and complete secrecy.

And although these normal practices continue, no one calls them out on it.

It's not as though anyone would care. As our own governor as just recently demonstrated, charters are a very powerful political entity. The hedge fund managers who support them have great influence over the decisions that effect schools. If New York City public schools must have someone else grade their exams while charters get to grade their own in secrecy, then it's clearly because the powers that be have decided it. Our own state education Commissioner, John King -who championed the law that prevents public schools from grading their own exam but allows charters to do it in secrecy- is a charter school advocate and veteran himself.  Assessing the deck that is stacked against public schools, is it any wonder why some charters do better on tests?

I teach Global History in a traditional public school. I've asked to teach only students with lower skills than most (mainly because I like those students more than other types of students), yet I know that my results on New York State's most difficult mandated exam -the Regents' Exam in Global History and Geography- will not be as good as the results in some charter schools throughout the city.

 In June, I will be asked to accept that charter schools teachers, with their bonuses and work ethics (and fear of constantly being fired) are better than I. My reply, as always, will be that I wasn't aware that this was a competition. But deep down inside, on the level where everyone feels at least a little competitive, I'll grunt about how I just never had a level playing field to measure whether or not that was true.

Three Reasons Why the State Budget Isn't As Bad As It Looks

Activists are up in arms. The press has declared de Blasio got creamed and Eva is the true winner this year (put herself a governor right there in her back pocket,s he did. Yes she did!). Nevertheless, here are three reasons why the new state budget isn't as bad as it seems.

1. New funds for pre-k. There are 694 school districts in New York State. 693 of these districts must pay for Universal Pre-K from their own budget if they wish to offer it. One of those districts gets it for free. That district? The the New York City Department of Education. $300 million in new funds. Great job BDB

2. The city pays no actual money for charters. There is a lot of fury over the city paying rent for charters schools. The fact of the matter is that every dime NYC must pay (and the city must pay), the being provided by state.. If you take all of the new funds the city is getting (above and beyond what the city is going to receive for UPK) you'll find more than $40 million in new funds to pay for these. Andy wanted to please Eva? Fine. But Andy is the one who is pleasing Eva. The city isn't doing that with its own money. 

3. More than enough money for a raise With the new commitment of new funds, the city coffers are now in a position to dole out the dough for a teacher (and administrator) raise. No one is talking about that right now. They will perhaps never discuss it. But the fact remains, that the city is committing no new funds to anything edu related this year -except our raise. 

Now watching charters win more protections here than anywhere else in the nation was an extraordinarily painful thing to watch. But I happen to think that people who support traditional public schools have yet to come face to face with a painful reality: That traditional districts and leaders have failed to connect with, and even serve, the disaffected communities that charters say they seek to serve. We who support the traditional public schools don't deserve to get rid of charters unless we grapple with that reality. I am of the opinion that we sort of deserve to have a few of those painful moments until we do.

Warning: Global Regents Approaching (And You'll Get No Help From Us!)

High school Global History and Geography teachers have a tough job. Not only must they  motivate children to love History, Economics, Government, Anthropology and Geography (the five major social studies). They must also teach along what is currently a two-year course of study. And they are responsible for getting their students to pass the most difficult mandated New York State Regents Examination there is; the Global History and Geography Regents. So difficult is this exam that it has the "lowest pass rate of any of the five Regents tests currently required for graduation" (accurate statistics are difficult to find, but the New York Post reported that, in 2011, the pass rate was only 56% (here)). So troublesome is the exam for school officials that NYSED, the state education department, has been trying to alter or change it for three full years now. So intimidating is it for high schoolers that each year in June, the hashtag #globalhistoryregents -a term that applies only New York State students- trends for two full days on Twitter. 

These realities are compounded by another truth. Global history courses themselves are populated with mainly young teachers who have not yet fully learned their craft. The typical routine in a typical high school social studies department is to have a first year teacher teach twelfth grade and second year teacher teach ninth grade (the latter being the beginning track of the two-year  Global History course that leads to this terribly difficult regents). This means that the Regents' Exam in Global History and Geography is being taken by students taught by teachers who are not yet at the top of their game. 

And while the Global History teachers require most of help in bringing world history to students, the city's DOE provides what can only be described as a paltry amount of resources to help teachers teach their students. The city's DOE website, which has an extensive section for teacher professional development, has no trainings for people who teach world history (see here). The DOE Common Core Library has just one instructional unit that can be used in a high school Global History class (see here). (The mere presence of the other units, which can be used in a 9th and 10th grade US History course, are almost comical as our state requires no US History courses to be taught in grade nine or ten) (see here). 

The resources page on the DOE website is, perhaps, the most disappointing. The section of the website advertises resources for teachers to use in the classroom. Each discipline has a collection of links that are intended to be classroom resources for teachers. The section for Social Studies contains 35 links in all. Yet many of them are useless for a Global History and Geography Teachers. Some are intended for US History courses. Others have links that point to the wrong page, are repeated. Still more point to websites where a teacher can buy, with his or her own money, the very resources (s)he came looking for in the first place. Still more are broken links that lead to nowhere at all.

 On that page, I found 12 links that just don't work (broken links), 13 that help teachers with American History, 4  to help teachers with New York History (city or state), 2 links to professional organizations (where you can buy a membership and get resources),  2 to help you buy your own resources (gee thanks folks), yet only 5 -5- that actually help a teacher of Global History and Geography (including zero to actually help that teacher with primary or secondary source document based questions (all of those were broken)). 

Now there are some resources up on ARIS. But that is a result of crowdsourcing for resources; many are teacher submitted and the submissions are overwhelmingly comprised of curriculum maps, pacing calendars and scope and sequence documents. These aren't really classroom resources in the sense that a teacher can find some really great documents about, say,  Climate Change, or favorable balance of trade in Japan (or even the history of the internet). 

So why is the Regents' Exam in Global History and Geography the lowest scoring test in New York? At least part of that reason has to do with a lack of commitment to get help to the teachers, many who are new, who teach it.

Here's a breakdown of every link there on the teacher resources page for social studies, as well as a request to the DOE to please update it. 

1. Kathy Schrock's Guide for Educators - broken link
2. National Center for History in the Schools  - links to a website where teachers can pay for their own resources
3. National Council for the Social Studies Model Lessons  - American History only
4. New York State Assembly Teacher Resources - New York State History Only
5. Smithsonian Institute - Works (nothing CommonCore aligned though).
6. KET Social Studies Resource Sites - Broken Link
7. NEH Humanities Resources - Works!
8. National Geographic - Works!
9. Leadership in American History Resources - broken link (actually doesn't even point to a website. Instead it points to a parking space). 
10. The New York Geographic Alliance (NYGA) - It's the website of a professional organization. Members of the PO can have access to the resource. But if I were a member, would I really be looking at the NYCDOE Teacher Resource page?
11. The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History - It's Gilder Lehrman. It's awesome. But it's for American History. 
12. History Now Newsletter - Broken Link (plus it's a newsletter, not a resource. 
13. History Matters - American History only
14. The African-American Mosaic - Is, was and always will be wonderful. American History only, but who cares. NO lesson plans or anything like that, but still. 
15. African Studies Association -It's the website of a professional organization. Members of the PO can have access to the resource. But if I were a member, would I really be looking at the NYCDOE Teacher Resource page?
16. Black History Quest - works! But it's American History only and it really doesn't count as a teaching resource site.
17. American Folklore - American History only
18. American Social History Project - Ah, CUNY. I love this project. But it's American History only
19. Asian-Nation - works, but not many resources for actual teachers who actually, who know, teach.
20. Hispanic America USA - broken link. Oh, and American History only
21. C.A.R.T.S. - Cultural Arts Resources for Teachers and Students - broken link
22. Smithsonian Institute - National Museum of the American Indian - broken link
23. Flushing Remonstrance - the only actual teacher resource on the page! The only link on the page that points to the actual office of teaching and learning. Too bad for me, though. It's American History only.
24. Gotham Center for New York City History - New York History only (plus it's nowhere near a teaching resource).
25. New York History Net - New York History only
26. Lower East Side Tenement Museum Educators Guide - broken link (can you believe that. They can't even link to the NYC Tenement Museum!). Ohk plus it's New York City History only.
27. The Bill of Rights Institute - American History only
28. Scholastic Election 2008 Lessons - False link (takes you to Scholastic's website where you can, you know, buy your own resources).
29. Making Sense of Primary Sources - Repeated link! (This links to the 'History Matters' website which they already linked to). Oh, and it's American History only.
30. Teaching With Documents - Takes you to a site where you can buy your own documents
31. Document Based Questions - broken link (and it's from NYSED!!!)
32. Yonkers Document Based Questions - broken link. Funny thing; it takes you to the website of a health provider called YORKERS. If you fix their typo and try to go to YONKERS.ORG, it still takes you nowhere. Can it be a broken link twice? hmmm ...
33. Primary Source Materials and Document Based Questions - broken link
34. Understanding World Events - it does work, but I couldn't find use in it for world issues.
35. Facing History and Ourselves - works!
36. Morningside Center for Teaching Social Responsibility - works; although it's not social studies

Please, oh please, update this.