Students rating CMS teachers

Want to know who the best teachers are?  Just ask students.

It's a comment that comes up frequently when people talk about crunching numbers to calculate teacher value.  On Tuesday, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg school board will hear teachers talk about both approaches:  Using student survey data and revisiting the controversial "value-added measure" to gauge teacher effectiveness.

Some of the teacher study groups reported enthusiastically on their  "talent effectiveness project"  work at the Feb. 14 meeting (see the video here;  the report starts at about the 1:50 mark).  Tuesday's follow-up promises to be even more interesting, as the remaining groups report on using student surveys, trying to make value-added ratings useful and dealing with the subjects and schools that are hardest to find teachers for.

The meeting starts at 6 p.m.  Read the agenda here, and go to the video link above to watch it live online.

Update:  At a news conference after the last presentation,  a teacher involved in studying classroom management invited reporters and the public to sit in on upcoming focus groups for teachers.  However, when I asked for specifics, I was told CMS has decided to keep those sessions closed.  "There will be community engagement events later in the semester,  however,  that will be open to the public,"  says David Pollack,  the communications coordinator for the talent effectiveness project. 

Good classroom observations aren't easy

Classroom observations can be a vital part of a good teacher evaluation,  but only if the people doing the observing have been well trained and tested to prove they know what they're doing.

That conclusion, from the latest Measures of Effective Teaching report, won't come as a shock to teachers,  who have long complained that too many administrators do rushed or biased observations.  Nor does it surprised Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools leaders,  who are working with the researchers funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to figure out how good teaching can be measured.  Chief Academic Officer Ann Clark says principals have been watching videos of classroom lessons and scoring them to develop their skill as classroom observers.

Districts across the country are trying to figure out how to recognize, recruit and reward teachers who can make a difference with kids.  Efforts to gauge effectiveness with number-crunching  --  such as CMS'  rollout of value-added ratings last year  --  have hit resistance.  But as the latest report indicates,  it's not easy to watch teachers in action and rate them, either.

Judy Kidd,  president of the Charlotte-based Classroom Teachers Association,  raised that concern when CMS and the state of North Carolina rolled out new reports on ratings of teachers in all schools, based on a new state evaluation form.  She said she doesn't believe administrators are familiar enough with the new system to deliver solid ratings.

The CMS Talent Effectiveness Project and the state Department of Public Instruction are both moving toward evaluations that will incorporate good observations, value-added ratings based on test scores and other measures of effectiveness.  And the national researchers taking part in the MET study  (which includes CMS teachers who have volunteered to be interviewed and observed)  are trying to provide guidance.

Help for rookie teachers

The Charlotte-Mecklenburg school board will vote on a plan for supporting beginning teachers at its meeting tomorrow.

It's not clear to me how much is new and different in this plan  --  teachers, feel free to weigh in  --  and how much is just putting things in writing to meet state requirements.  The plan calls for volunteer mentors.  From what I've heard, such mentoring programs can range from wildly successful to perfunctory,  depending on the skill and enthusiasm of the mentor,  the chemistry between the mentor and beginner,  the support from school administration and the time available for mentors to observe and coach.  (Update 10/25:  Interim Superintendent Hugh Hattabaugh clarified that it's the latter.  There's nothing new here,  but the state now requires the school board to approve the plan for beginning teachers.)

There's a widespread sense that this is a time for CMS to rebuild confidence and morale among its teaching force,  which has been battered by layoffs,  pay freezes,  new testing requirements and a rocky start to district performance pay effort.  New teacher work groups started meeting last week to chart the next phase of the effort, which has been dubbed the Talent Effectiveness Project.

As always,  I'll be eager to hear the view from the front lines.

Providence tops magazine's "best" list

Providence High again took the No. 1 spot on Charlotte Magazine's "Top Public High Schools" list.

Providence is a neighborhood school in southeast Charlotte with a long history of strong academics.  Second on the list is Cato Middle College High,  also part of Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools.  It's made up of juniors and seniors who apply to get in and take classes at a campus of Central Piedmont Community College.

The magazine ranked 47 schools in Mecklenburg,  Union and Cabarrus counties,  giving each a rating in environment --  class sizes, students in AP classes and teacher qualifications,  for example  --  and performance (SAT scores and graduation rate).

Third on the list was Union County's Marvin Ridge High,  which edged out Providence  on performance but landed much lower on environment.  East Meck was No.  1 on environment,  but 28th on performance.

North Meck jumped from No. 8 overall last year to No. 4 this year  --  interesting in view of the questions raised about how that last year's opening of northern Hough High would affect academics at North.  The list doesn't answer those questions,  because it's based mostly on 2010 data.  Neither Hough nor Rocky River High,  which also opened in August 2010,  is listed.

**

On another issue,  I'm curious to know what CMS staff thought of last night's presentation on the "talent effectiveness project"  (if you missed it, it's on video here).

There was vigorous discussion among board members and top administrators about how different this is from last year's "pay for performance" push,  which most are now describing as a bad start to a worthy goal.  Some members said it sounded mostly like repackaging;  others say this is a far more constructive approach to using "assessment" (the t-word is taboo in the latest presentation) to benefit kids and teachers.

I'll be heading back to the Government Center soon to hear more about this from the top folks.  Let me know what you think.