The controversial teacher performance-pay bill crafted by Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools staff and introduced by state Rep. Ruth Samuelson moved another step toward approval today in a 25-17 House committee vote. But some legislators were wary, noting the huge amount of criticism they've heard from constituents. One called it "an example of ready, fire, aim."
Superintendent Peter Gorman told the committee what he's been saying here in Charlotte: The performance-pay plan is a good one, but he and his staff haven't communicated it well. MecklenburgACTS, a local parent group that opposes the bill, countered with an open note to Gorman on their Facebook page: "The problem here is not ineffective communication. The problem is that parents do not support the massive expansion of high-stakes standardized testing that pay-for-performance, as currently conceived, will require."
Reporter Jane Stancill of the Raleigh News & Observer was there; here's her report from the Under the Dome blog:
A House education committee gave the OK to a bill to allow Charlotte-Mecklenburg schools to create a new program to pay teachers according to their performance.
Charlotte-Mecklenburg is the only N.C. district that has been approved to alter the state pay schedule under a 2007 performance-pay pilot bill that would require approval of a majority of teachers. The current House Bill 546, which applies only to CMS, would grant the district freedom to change the way teachers are evaluated and paid -- without teacher approval.
The bill, which was drafted by CMS staff, has been greeted by outrage from teachers and some parents, who object to the dozens of new tests the district is rolling out to help generate teacher ratings, reports Ann Helms of the Charlotte Observer.
The bill passed the committee 25-17, largely on party lines. One of the bill's sponsors, Rep. Ruth Samuelson, a Charlotte Republican, urged passage Tuesday but said the district had work to do to win support from the community before a final version is approved. That will take time, she said, but in the meantime the bill needs to pass one chamber to stay alive before a key deadline next month.
Several lawmakers said they were uncomfortable moving forward with a problematic bill on an issue that is so heated.
Rep. Mickey Michaux, a Durham Democrat, said it had been years since he received so much e-mail on any one issue. Rep. Ray Rapp, a Mars Hill Democrat, said he was surprised at the intensity and the volume of the e-mails. He suggested a study committee be formed to look into the issue further. "I think this is an example of ready, fire, aim," he said. "It just seems terribly premature to go ahead with this."
Rep. Tricia Cotham, a Matthews Democrat and former teacher, said a third grader had called her during Easter weekend to oppose the bill. There are serious trust issues in the school district, she said. "You cannot do this to teachers, you must do this with teachers."
Teacher performance pay is a major part of Superintendent Peter Gorman's plan to improve student performance; he believes rewarding teachers for results, rather than longevity and credentials, will help attract and keep good teachers.
Speaking to the committee Tuesday, Gorman said he wanted to work with teachers to smooth out problems, and stressed that various measures other than tests would go into the evaluation of teachers.
"We have not done a good job of communicating," Gorman said. "We are committed to do that."
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
CMS teacher-pay bill moves forward amid criticism
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
51 comments:
The ironic thing about Gorman's comment is that all of these "other" forms of evaluation must align with test scores. Principals that evaluate teachers highly who do not have high test scores get called on the carpet.
When testing begins next week, I will be out of my classroom for 1 whole week to test. My class will be covered by an assistant. Every K,1, 2 student at my school will loose 1 whole week of instruction so we can issue a 15 question test that is suppossed to measure how much they have learned all in the name of pay for performance. Every study done regarding pay for performance thus far has proved that pay for performance does not significantly improve student performance. Gormans response is that no long term study has ever been done... well maybe thats because no one wants to pay for a long term study when no short term effects are noticed...that's common sense right? Well apparently the people supporting this bill not only lack listening skills (parents, teachers, students are against bill and pfp), but they lack common sense too!!!SMH!
Communicate this Gorman: bbbbbbbbbbbbbllllllllrrrrrrrrrrrpppppppppppp!
Dear NC legislators, be careful who you side with on this issue. Dr Gorman doesn't have to pay a political price, but you will.
Gorman must be stopped.
Gorman needs to go - If he was any good, another system would have stolen him away. This is not a good idea that has been poorly communicated - it is a terrible idea that he has attempted to move on surreptitiously. Good communication will not improve a bad idea that has been rammed through the legislature (to this point) because he KNOWS the teachers would not go for it. THEY have some common sense. Gorman does not. He does not deserve the job. He is disingenuous and dishonest. I wish there were adequate time to point out all of his misstatements - and that is a generous term. he knows fully well what he is doing, which is why he does it in the dark. The testing has cost students about three to four weeks of quality learning time as teachers are pulled from classes to administer them. Gorman says the time is minimal - I think Gorman's capacity as an educator is minimal. Teacher morale is at a serious low. The concept of unionizing is starting to gain acceptance - and it can be done! Please CMS Board - fire him before he does further damage that may not be undone for decades. Enough is enough.
How can anybody prove the students are losing quality teaching time by taking these tests? Should I just accept individual teachers oppinions? I ask any teacher who opposes pfp to prove they are doing a good job teaching our youth. I would be out of my job if I told my boss to not worry about my performance because I am doing a good job.
This whole initiative rests on the premise that the tests being used to evaluate teacher performance are scientific and accurate.
Readers, they are not.
When such high stakes are attached to the tests, teachers, schools, districts and even entire states pull every string possible to teach to the test. This artificially inflates the scores, reduces their usefulness as diagnostic tools and severely damages students' actual education.
My own situation as a high school English teacher illustrates this point. The state E.O.C. exam consists of a either definition essay or a cause & effect essay. Guess what we teach for six straight months? Those two types of essays. You can forget about personal narratives, persuasive essays, longer research papers, literary analyses, creative pieces and poetry. They're not tested, so they're not taught, at least not until after the test is over when both the students and the teacher are thoroughly burnt out.
Moreover, the essays themselves get a score of 1, 2, 3 or 4. That is all the information we get. There's nothing about the grade that tells me specifically what I did right and wrong as a teacher. Every year I have to guess what exactly my kids' strengths and weaknesses were. Every year I have to guess what to adjust and what to focus on in future lessons. How will tying my salary to this test help me do that?
Moreover schools themselves spend enormous time, energy and manpower "adjusting" students' statuses (grade level, official socio-economic group etc.) to minimize the number of low-performing kids who are required to take the test. In addition I have a distinct hunch that the state is lowering the benchmarks a little each year to create the illusion that more kids are passing. This wastes resources, hurts children's education, and is unavoidable when such high stakes are attached to the tests.
Please do not tie our salaries more directly to tests. This will only exacerbate an already terrible situation.
To the ridiculous person thinking that a test is going to make it possible to see what is going on in a classroom you should first step inside of one. And yes I realize that you went to school "back in the day" and I understand that you can't just say "hey boss, I'm doing a good job. I promise." There is accountability in every classroom and it shouldn't be based on a test. If you feel that's how it should be based then you have issues that you need to work out. We as teachers deal with more than just working with the students and educating them. Is the fact that so many of the students are going to come to the test hungry, or having been abused the night before, or living out of a car going to be taken into account? I really don't think so. I am teacher in SE NC and just see this kind of thing happening and can't believe it. The world has so many different things going on right now that you can't help the variables. Along with all of the previous things many of the kids parents are being sent to war, going through divorce or any other number of things. You can't possibly say that it is all because of a lack of instruction. There are always bad seeds in every occupation, including whatever occupation you have, but don't think that we are babysitters who have nothing outside of teaching the students to care about. We are teachers because we love education. We are teachers because we love the students. We deal with more than most outside of the profession will ever deal with.
I also agree that Gorman is doing a horrible job and that this PFP plan is highly suspect. However, instead of fighting Gorman about his plan, why don't a small group of teachers get together and offer a viable alternative plan; something that teachers can accept and something that will address what PFP is supposed to solve. Gorman just doesn't get it. He can ram through anything he wants and its NOT GOING to WORK without the support of Teachers. That's Leadership 101!
It is fundamentally unfair to a pay a teacher based on a student's performance - especially when the teacher has no control over much of what determines the student success!Pay the teacher for the TEACHER'S performance - not the student! This bill is about the TESTING - it's killing school!
Sadly 7:14, Dr. Gorman doesn't believe in collaboration except in the sense that you need to agree with his ideas. He's never accepted an idea that didn't start with 'his' people. The contempt he shows the Board (not just the people he's supposed to lead) is astounding.
Under PfP much of a teacher's rating and pay will be based on the whim of children. Students will take tests and fill out surveys. How would the average worker respond if their livelihood was based on what a 6, 12, or 18 year old decided.
Or a herd of radioactive Broad Zombies.
He will never be stopped ntil the Observer tells the story straight without the little twists and turns trying to spend the negative ,positive. They are afraid to write about hoe Gorman mislead the Mecklenburg delegation withe his bull about the Gates foundation money being tied to HB546.
Sadly, the real victims here are the students of CMS, especially the youngest learners, who will forfeit hours of instruction for testing. That is the problem that no one in the Accountability Department will ever own - schools must choose between instruction and giving the test in an ethical and valid way. The most humane way (and is it ever a good practice to give high stakes tests to children this young?) to test 5 - 8 year olds is by their own teacher. Switching teachers or having teacher assistants administer these tests is wrong. So, do we do the best we can to administer the tests correctly which means giving up instruction for 25 hours of testing? Or do we give the tests in an invalid manner, just do it quick and dirty, so that instruction continues?
What began as a budget issue cleverly disguised as a learning issue has now become a broader moral issue. Dr. Gorman's reluctant pseudo-admission that things became clouded by "poor communications" came to light only after he realized that the scheme had been outed by teachers and the public at large. His use of "poor communications"--doublespeak for "lie"--comprises the core of his moral dilemma. Its harm for all concerned is made worse by his continual denial, evidently generated in part by an oversize ego, which simply refuses to admit exactly what has been done and by whom. Academic studies refute the validity of this whole program, and the appearance of the recent article in The Washington Post calls the method and the man into question. Hopefully soon, Dr. Peter Gorman will be forced to defend his plan and moral questions surrounding it to a broader national audience as more media sources beyond our borders decide this odd situation that seems to be causing such a stir in Charlotte is quite newsworthy.
As parents it is OUR job to know if the teacher is teaching our children but talking with our kids about their day, asking what they did/learned in school today and use the best money spent in CMS the Parent Assist site. As parents it is us who should be allowed to take the pfp test that Gorman wants our kids to take. Who's to say that my child doesnt' like a teacher then they will try to get all their friends to do poorly on the test if they know that the test will hurt the teacher's pay and review.
My question to Pete is if we the parents can do survey's concerning our schools safety and principal why can we do the same concerning teachers and Pete himself.
I would love the chance to rate Pete's performance I will be rating the BOE's performance at the polls come November.
Pete ask the parents what we think of you and your performance.
We the parents will foot the 1.4 million bill for a survey concerning your performance.
I hope the national Media continues to put the spotlight on Gorman. The School Board seems totally clueless. As someone said very well a few weeks back, they can't make a move without his hand up their back. Eric Davis is the chief puppet.
If student surveys might be one of the "measures" of teacher effectiveness, wouldn't it make sense for teachers to complete a survey measuring Dr. Gorman's effectiveness as the leader of our school system?
Does anyone know what "measures" are being used to rate Dr. Gorman's PFP that is going into effect this year?
I agree with the suggestion of a survey to be completed by the teachers regarding the effectiveness of Dr. Gorman as the leader of our district. I have worked under 6 superintendents, and there has never been the lack of trust and the lack of respect for our leader as there is today. Upcoming elections will give citizens of Mecklenburg County the opportunity to express our opinions about both the BoE and the state legislators who have ignored our pleas. Parents and teachers should have an opportunity to share how we feel about the highly paid leadership of CMS as well.
An over 90% no confidence vote by his districts teachers landed the new school leader of Chicago a job. The only solution is the SCHOOL BOARD and the November elections. Otherwise Eli Broad and the brainwashing will continue.Gorman is a BROAD puppet that is allowed to pull the strings in Charlotte. FOLLOW THE MONEY. It will come out eventually about compensation Gorman is receiving from the FOUNDATION.
This bill is not about helping students- it is about advancing an idea that is fundamentally flawed. Millions of dollars spent on tests that could be better spent paying more teachers more money. We the public and parents are livid with the entire idea of pay-for-performance and the toll it is taking on our children and their teachers.
Broad Fellow #1 Accountability $92,000
Broad Fellow #2 C&I $90,000
Broad Fellow #3 Building Services $90,000
Paid by Broad Foundation to do what exactly?
Bottle the Kool Aid?
I am still very lost... what was the "purpose" of tonight's BROAD meeting? Was it me or did they all seemed confused? Did the BOE approve Pete going to Raleigh without their approval? Does he count these trips as school business/mileage? Is Pete Gorman CMS? Is the tail wagging the dog? WHO is in charge here? You ALL looked ridiculous tonight as Pete and his staff giggled to themselves. CMS Board of Education just bend over and don't forget to smile!
I am disturbed about the amount of money private foundations (Broad and Gates) are pouring into our district. These foundations are setting CMS education policy. A previous poster identified Broad Fellows in high ranking positions in various CMS departments, the BOE has attended Broad workshops. Gorman, Clark and Avosssa are all Board converts. 60 Minutes did a piece on Eli Broad on Sunday, focusing on his arts and science contributions. Maybe we should invite the TV show to Charlotte to see what else Eli is doing.
@ 10:21 AGREED. Something is beyond not right and the tax payers are 2 steps behind because everything is being done in secrecy. The Board seems clueless as well - but supportive out of ignorance. I want answers. Legislators do not return calls or emails. BOE members give no educated responses, just more rhetoric. Board members - GET A CLUE! You look like fools. Dr. Gorman the public sees you for what you are and we're catching up to you. You want a battle - you will get one.
I was turned on to this animation by a fellow co-worker and showed it to my wife who is a teacher in CMS.
She was so impressed with the message behind this video and how it applied to the Pay-For-Performance plan.
I urge you to check this video out on what motivates us and unlike Pete's plan... more money doesn't mean more success.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc
Please take the opportunity to watch this video, I promise it will be well worth it.
If you know anyone in the school system pass it along and maybe it will make it's way to Gorman's office!
In reference to the last poster, I still fail to comprehend why so many folks are so eager to "get things to Gorman's desk" or "let Gorman know" this or that. If you are an employee of CMS and you have something to say to Dr. Gorman or anyone else in the leadership of CMS, schedule an appointment with his administrative assistant and have a conversation with the man and tell him what you think, why you might disagree, and what you think might be a better approach to tackle a particular issue CMS is facing. It blows my mind to see how many people are flabbergasted by the fact that the leadership doesn't value the "opinions" of employees that don't feel strongly enough about their beliefs to schedule a meeting, shake the man's hand, look him in the eye, and tell them how they feel. If you can't do that, I wouldn't listen either.
You obviously don't work in CMS. He does not have an open door policy - and there is retribution for anyone who steps out of line. Principals hate him but are terrified of him.
So if you called his secretary to schedule a meeting as a CMS employee, you would be denied such a meeting? I don't believe that.
@11:46 When I worked for CMS and tried multiple times to speak with Dr. Gorman all I got was a subordinate call me back to see the issue was - then after that no response. So give me a break with what you would do - I think the employees that work in the district know the game well.
Teachers haven't gotten any raises in 3 years under the current structure. Where is the money coming from to give the "pay" in "Pay for Performance" in this plan?
In all of these articles, not one person in CMS admin or government has answered this question.
So really, other than students having to take test after test, what else is this really accomplishing?
@12:29,
That's odd because I had absolutely no trouble at all getting myself into Dr. Gorman's office (with an appointment), and I am neither employed by CMS nor have children enrolled in CMS. I simply had some questions about CMS while weighing public vs. private and had a 30 minute allotment afforded to me with Gorman without having to do much explaining as to the purpose of my visit. His admin asked me why I required a meeting and I said I had questions about the CMS curriculum and the plans they had in place. I had my meeting that same week. Sack up and demand your say.
@12:50
Of course, what a shocking surprise. LOL and FYI I'm female, so I don't sack up.
You know what.... The stats have been thrown around way too often, but regardless of societal impacts and factors to success, CMS has a roughly 60% pass rate, and yet teahcers overwhelmingly respond and are rated as 90% doing an effective job. To me that makes no sense. The question Gorman is trying to ask is can we do better. Can the leadership do better, can the teachers do better, can the students do better, can the parents do better. if the teachers are unwilling to change, then they are doing a great disservice to the future of this country, and I call them out as hypocrites who say they care for the students, but in reality they only care for themselves. One day will come when the only people left in CMS are the below average teachers and the below average students. The best and brightest will have moved on to better places and ideas.
I have had the same experience as anonymous at 12:50--no problem getting a meeting with Dr. Gorman. I will have to say that the viciousness of the comments directed at Dr. Gorman and the board on this blog and at the board meetings are distressing--and this whole situation is obviously about much more than PfP.
Please note that the Meck Acts leader speaking at the board meeting last night mentioned the school closings as well as PfP, as did another leader two weeks ago. And don't forget what groups were leading the charge about the school closings--remember Kojo amd the behavior of his supporters? Meck Acts has a much larger agenda than PfP.
In response to 8:36 a.m.
I did indeed mention the school closings. What the school closings and the testing issue have in common is that both are cases in which parents and community members raised significant concerns about school policy that were essentially stonewalled by Dr. Gorman and the board majority. As a result, both are contributing to an erosion of support for CMS among many members of our community who are generally strong supporters of public schools.
Before you bring up the busing issue, let me do it for you. I do not support the resegregation of our schools, because I don't believe that concentrating poverty is good for schools or children (and there's plenty of research that backs that up). I do not support the expansion of standardized testing because I don't believe that standardized testing is good for schools or children (and there's research on that as well). Other than both being bad for schools and children, they are different issues. There is no "hidden agenda" in our standardized test fight.
There were many many people in this community who supported the closing of the schools. Perhaps the board and Dr. Gorman listened to both groups and decided that closing schools was the fiscally prudent thing to do.
There IS a hidden agenda because Mecklenburg ACTS has changed their tune! I was on the Equity Committee from the very start and the ACTS agenda was ALL about the teachers! Your fight was advocating to get better teachers at impoverished schools arguing that the quality of the teacher had the most impact on children. So...why the switch all of a sudden to supporting job security for teachers and not utilizing evaluation tools? Sounds like a great political foundation for the next round of School Board elections! What a great hook to amass quite a sizeable email list to help push your "agenda" forward!
We have not "changed our tune." That's silly. We believed then, and believe now, that children throughout the district should have access to the same quality of teachers. We have argued that the quality of the teacher was important, not that it had the most impact on children. We have also consistently advocated for many of the support services that children in poverty need to overcome the many challenges they face outside of school. We are opposed to high-stakes standardized tests because they do not promote excellence in education and because they are not reliable indicators of teacher quality. You may have been on the equity committee for many years, but it doesn't sound like you listened very carefully.
Perhaps you were not listening very carefully. As I recall one Meck ACT member in particular argued quite strongly and angrily that background of kids made no difference--that we were shortchanging poor children in almost every way possible--loved coming up with data to "prove" this.
Seems to me the tune has indeed changed.
Unfortunately for the Equity Committee, it had been a great listening and sharing opportunity for quite some time. We were gaining such understanding between people of such various histories. It wasn't later in the committee's existence, when I was already off the committee, that the Equity Committee became dysfunctional and had to be put to rest since the listening had stopped and the agenda raging had begun! It really was too bad since this committee was a great resource in promoting respect and consensus building before it was usurped by Mecklenburg ACTS and their specific agenda.
I guess this all puzzles me from a mangerial standpoint. Up to 2 or 3 years ago, CMS needed any warm body it could get to fill the classroom position. As California found out 10 years ago when they pushed for smaller classrooms, the effort was fruitless because there were only so many "effective" teachers.
This race for more "standardized tests" to evaluate teachers via the improvement in students' scores is simply showing the lack of managerial ability of public school administration. Principals know who are not "good" teachers but between needing the warm body or cowardiceness to follow the process to "excuse" the teacher, they have failed to dismiss those teachers who should not be teaching.
Now PfP is not quite totally it has been sold by. The bottom line of PfP is to give a lower bar for inner city teachers to earn pay raises than the rest. Thus, teachers must decide to accept the higher challenge of educating inner city kids than the others if they ever want a pay raise from the beginning year level.
Bottom line, this new approach simply lets public school administration off the hook of the difficult task of dismissing teachers and gives rise to the testing and consulting industries which now milks more taxpayers money from the school systems.
Also in the same vain, this is the same cowardiceness shown by public school administration to not enforce approved and published discipline standards to root out those who wish only to disrupt and create chaos in the learning environments.
Would you perhaps be talking about Carol Sawyer? There's no need to pussyfoot around, as neither Carol nor I are afraid to take public responsibility for what we say or think. Carol's data made it quite clear that kids at schools of concentrated poverty were shortchanged in many ways, from the high numbers of novice teachers at high-poverty schools to the lower numbers of extracurricular activities to the sparser offerings of advanced classes. She did not argue that background did not matter. What she refused to accept was the idea that kids at high poverty schools did not "need" the same range of extracurriculars and advanced classes available to students at wealthier schools.
Pamela Grundy... How do you determine which teachers are quality teachers?
Members of the equity committee looked particularly at numbers of first-year teachers, because most first-year teachers simply aren't that good. This isn't their fault -- the first year of teaching is a tough one. Studies show clearly that most teachers improve significantly in the years after their first year. The problem in the past has been that high-poverty schools had high turnover, and many had wave after wave of first year teachers. It doesn't take rocket science to determine that kids at those schools weren't getting the same overall level of instruction as kids in more stable schools with more experienced staffs.
Interesting point Pam. However, I would challenge that from personal experience. Years ago, my middle class neighborhood got reassigned to a high poverty middle school. My child had 3 first year teachers, 1 second year teacher and 1 five year teacher. The 5 year teacher quit mid way through year due to health reasons. My child had their highest jump in eoy scores of any other years. While they were classified AG, htere were no AG classes not AG certified teachers. My child never sat in front of a computer.
I believe this is due more to the programming the social engineers, the community organizers, the liberals, etc, have kept telling this populaiton that first year teachers are not good enough, that they do not know how to teach, etc. Whereas in reality, they are the best trained, with newer techniques, with more enthusiasm, etc. but they last no more than 5years or so becuase of all this negative reenforcement, constant cahllenges by this illiterate population like they would even know what a good teacher was.
Therein is the problem I have with kids' performances having anything to so with rating teachers.
I'm glad your kids had a good experience. One of the greatest pleasures of being at Shamrock has been watching our young teachers develop from nervous, uncertain novices into more confident, more capable teachers, adding skills and ideas every year. They've also developed lasting connections with each other that strengthen our school. That stability means a great deal. It's the kind of experience I would wish for all schools.
Very nice comments, Rest of the Story. Indeed, we all have heard how first teachers are "not that good" (that was not my experience either), along with the line thathigh poverty schools were not receiving as much funding as suburban schools (oops--that wasn't quite right either, was it), etc, etc. And yes indeed, advocates have been telling parents at high poverty schools how bad things are, how poorly their kids have been treated, how almost any move CMS makes is designed to harm their kids. Throw in a little demonizing of the suburbs and you've got discontent. But apparently that serves the advocates' purpose.
And what purpose would that be, dear Sharon?
Post a Comment