What if Newspaper Editors Were Assessed on Their Job Performance the Way Teachers Are?

Over the past two days, I have read two editorials by newspaper folks who are vastly off-base when it comes to student testing and the Common Core. In the first, Glens Falls, NY's Post-Star newspaper editor, Ken Tingley, minimizes the opt-out movement to whiny parents and thug teachers in his weekly column Opting out of Common Core reaches hysterical proportions. A day later, we're treated to Gannett's USA Today education blogger, Jim Ryan Jr.'s, diatribe, When our children are the losers, which reads like a more nuanced version of Tingley's column.

Ryan's reductionist view can be summed up in this statement:

The new accountability standards being pushed by Governor Cuomo is a tough pill to swallow for teachers that have grown accustomed to a myriad of union protections insulating them from performance-based measurement, whether the virtual guarantee of lifetime employment or the compensation system based on seniority and not student achievement. Given that change is painful, the union led teachers are fighting back and have no doubt encouraged parents to fight as well. But in this fight it is the students who will suffer the most collateral damage.

In both cases, reducing the argument to a selfish and self-serving claim is used to minimize the importance and strength of the opt-out movement and the role of teachers in education policy in general.

There is a very powerful and highly organized movement in our society to condemn public education as being the source of many of our economic and social ills. The forces include testing and other media related corporations, anti-union "Right to Work" groups, hedge-fund investors and other charter school advocates, and an array of school choice proponents. These groups regularly engage in unwarranted assumption fallacies that rely on false information to make broad and inaccurate conclusions. 

But what if these editors, reporters, columnists and bloggers had to live by the same legislated APPR effectiveness standards as teachers? What would that look like and how equitable would they find their working conditions? After all, the print media has been experiencing an unprecedented and massive decline in subscriptions, revenue and readership. THIS AMOUNTS TO A NATIONAL CRISIS! Surely our democracy, our capitalist economy, and our entire way of life are threatened.

Here's the evidence:

Newspaper revenues and public knowledge of newsworthy facts continue to decline. In Pew's bi-weekly "national survey of 1,052 randomly selected adults, Americans answered an average of 6.3 out of 13 questions correctly, including 1% who got them all correct. By contrast, those who have taken the quiz online so far have averaged 9.7 correct answers, with 9% getting perfect scores."

Check that again- The general public scored 48% correct in a two week sampling of current events. However, those who took the poll online, presumably those who are wealthier and more educated, scored 69% correct. Still pretty unimpressive. Even American student assessment scores don't look that bad!

With those declining numbers, let's commit to holding newspaper editors accountable for the information their readers retain and understand. 

First, let's take a look at the proposed APPR laws for New York State teachers passed in the most recent budget. Here's how the system works for teachers. For the sake of argument, let's take a liberal approach to the Governor's proposed APPR scale. Either way, as Politics on the Hudson put it "the law makes clear that teachers whose students perform poorly on state exams won’t be able to get an overall evaluation score better than “developing” — the second-lowest score" (the actual percentages will be determined by NYSED and the Board of Regents at a later date):

• 40 points: Student growth on state assessments or a comparable measure of student growth using a Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) process for teachers in non-tested subjects. 
• 30 points: Observation by a school administrator.This is done using any number of concocted variations of Charlotte Danielson's Framework for Teaching.
• 30 points: Observation by an independent observer/or other regional administrator from a neighboring school district presumably using the same framework.

 So here's what an APPR model for newspaper editors might look:

• 40 points: Consumer growth on state assessments or a comparable measure of consumer growth using a Consumer Learning Objectives (CLOs) process for editors in non-traditional subject matter sections- entertainment, lifestyles, the arts, Hometown, book review, etc. To do this, we will need to develop a testing model for assessing newspaper consumers. Once a year, we'll have behemoth and  profiteering corporate entity perform a series of three simultaneous 90-minute mandatory tests of the year's newsworthy events for all newspaper consumers in their circulation area. Newspaper editors will be assessed based on how well their customers can answer these "current events" quizzes. 

Based on the "Man on the Street" style Q & A's on display at the YouTube sites for several of the late night talk shows, I think the editor's may have some concerns. But honestly, don't newspaper editors bare some responsibility for their customers knowledgeable level and understanding in a democratic society?

• 30 points: Observation of the Editor's job performance by the newspaper's publisher or other corporate manager. In this case, we can use aspects of the Society of Professional Journalists' (SPJ) Code of Ethics and the Pew Research Center's Principles of Journalism. Editors will be scored on the same scale as teachers- Ineffective/Developing/Effective/Highly Effective using a rubric style matrix to assure uniformity. :
• SPJ's Ethics Preamble: Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. Ethical journalism strives to ensure the free exchange of information that is accurate, fair and thorough. An ethical journalist acts with integrity. 
• The Pew Research Center's Principles of Journalism are as follows: 
1. Journalism’s first obligation is to the truth 
2. Its first loyalty is to citizens 
3. Its essence is a discipline of verification 
4. Its practitioners must maintain an independence from those they cover 
5. It must serve as an independent monitor of power 
6. It must provide a forum for public criticism and compromise 
7. It must strive to make the significant interesting and relevant 
8. It must keep the news comprehensive and proportional 
9. Its practitioners must be allowed to exercise their personal conscience

From an anecdotal perspective, take a look at the information above and decide for yourself how well your local newspaper would fair. I can assure you that many editors will face low ratings- particularly in the areas of integrity, verification, and independence.

• 30 points: Observation by an independent observer or other local newspaper professional using the same standards and codes. 

Can you picture this one? A neighboring and perhaps rival editor taking a day to observe and review the target editor's professional practices. How many editors would be willing to have their performance assessed by a peer? Especially one they either don't know or know well enough to fear their conclusions. And if they don't want to go that route, they'll have to shell out some big bucks to pay for annual independent observers. I'm sure that would go over well with investors.

Let's face it, this is an absurd way to assess any profession be it newspaper editor, dentist, contractor or restaurateur. The Governor claims the changes are necessary to counter the high rate of "Effectiveness" ratings (up to 95%) for New York's teachers. But ask any one of the professionals mentioned above if they believe their workforce to be effective and they will most assuredly answer "YES". Doesn't the editor at the local newspaper believe that his staff is highly effective across the board; even as his revenues, sales and subscriptions fall? Of course he does. Why? Because he knows there is no causal relationship between the hard work he and his employees do to report the days events and the outcomes that are realized on the current events assessments.

Overall, newspapers, and the media in general, serve a pretty lofty purpose and should maintain high standards. They play an important and valuable role in educating a democratic populace. In order for the public to be knowledgeable, it is imperative that media outlets report on the news in a way that reflects the true essence of the debate while adhering to industry standards. Unfortunately, neither of the pieces referenced here rise up that standard. They're short-sighted and intent on masking the real problems and solutions by scapegoating parents and teachers. Our communities deserve better.

The Absurdity of "Common Sense" Editorializing and Commentary

Throughout my life, I have managed to play nice through many political, economic and social conflicts. However, nowadays I feel myself being pushed further toward the "gloves off" mode when it comes to education policy and reform. A major aspect of this clearly has to do with the prominence of the topic in our state and national discussions. Education has become a lightning rod issue that does not parse along clear ideological lines. Regardless of political party affiliation, you can, and will, find a wide array of viewpoints from just about everyone on the subject of schools, assessments, Common Core, teacher effectiveness and so much more. As the national discussion ramps up, I find myself increasingly agitated with the absurdity of opinions based on the writer's belief in common sense approaches and a lack of evidence-based inquiry to support opinions or solve problems.

I get it. Our media has shifted from fact-based reporting to opinion-based ranting. A place where "thinking" something  has relevance means it actually does. Where scientific evidence or facts are antithetical to opinion. But having an opinion without adhering to fact, or even worse- ignoring facts, just corrodes your argument. And when it comes to education policy and reform, these United States are filled with corroded individuals whose opinions are factless and detrimental to the common good. In fact, it seems the only necessary requirement for having an opinion or being an expert on public education is having sat in a classroom.

As the rhetoric becomes increasingly hostile and divisive, I get the sense that the multitude of teacher "haters" prominent in society today were the students who were designated as, "Does not play well with others", when they were in elementary school. You remember them. The kid who refused to share with his kind classmates. The kid who argued with the teacher over seemingly inane issues. The kid who quit playing when things didn't go their way . . . and took their ball with them. The kid who fought for a position on a topic and wouldn't back down even when presented with evidence by his or her teacher. Governor Cuomo was most assuredly a "Does not play well with others" kid. Even if his teachers feared having to write it on any report, you know that everyone else in class knew it.

Newspaper editors and editorial boards seem to have a knack for jumping into the "Does not play well with others" fray with alarming frequency. The most recent ridiculous and adversarial screed by our local daily newspaper editor, Ken Tingly of the Glens Falls Post-Star, is just that kind of glib, "common sense" reaction to the rise of the opt-out movement. Ken used this weeks editorial opportunity to shamelessly exert his version of common sense on the good people of our fine state who chose, I think admirable, to opt their children out of the state ELA and math assessments (for the record, my wife and I did not opt our 3rd and 5th graders out). In  Opting out of Common Core reaches hysterical proportions, Ken targets the "mass hysteria" of parents who go crazy at the mere thought of any evaluation of their children. His commentary flips from blaming pandering parents for not being tough enough on their kids; to extolling self-gratifying bravado for his brand of real world parenting. He further belittles parents and teachers in what has become the fall-back commentary intended to minimize people- self-interest without rationale:

Whether it is their playing time in Little League or the number of gold stars on an art project, parents are often the least qualified to judge how their children are measuring up in the real world.

So to ensure they had even less information about their child’s development, hundreds of parents across the region boycotted Common Core testing designed to give educators valuable information about the students they are teaching . . . . I don’t see the value of opting out of anything in life. If I did, I would have left my dentist years ago.

I’m of the “If it doesn’t kill you, it will make you stronger” mindset.

Your teacher doesn’t like you? Get over it. You are going to have a boss someday who doesn’t like you.

The test is unfair? That’s too bad. In college, they will give you an impossible amount of work to do in a short period of time.

Can’t do it? Somebody else will.

Now, I can agree that our society has become too heavy in the helicopter-parent realm- after all, I'm a soccer coach. But the fact that 8 year old's should somehow deal with 8-9 hours of testing today because they may go to college someday and they need to have the gumption to compete, is particularly absurd. We've seen this same "minimize the opposition's argument" propaganda tactic used by Governor Cuomo in several interviews leading up to the state budget fight:

The governor, at two separate events, reiterated his argument that teachers' unions have opposed his efforts to implement mandatory teacher evaluations in New York because “their opinion is they'd rather not be evaluated by anyone ever, period.

“I understand that position,” he said during an event in Plattsburgh. “I don't know that I like to be evaluated. I don't know that anyone likes to be evaluated. That having to run for office every four years and go before the voters and explain what you did—if I didn't have to do that, I'd be OK with it, frankly. Take my word for it that I'm doing a good job and let me stay until I want to leave. But that's not how professions work.”

The problem is, none of this has anything to do with the real issue of testing avoidance, the opt-out movement or teacher assessment. And to prove his point, Ken throws in a few urban legends to make his point:

1. "But the basis of Common Core — to make our children thinkers instead of memorizers — is sound."- By attaching tests to the curriculum, the state has nullified this aspect of the Common Core. Furthermore, there are sound pedagogical challenges to the effectiveness of the Core in achieving these goals.
2. "For some time, we've watched our education standards in this country slip compared to other countries. That’s a problem in today’s world economy."- Facts do not support this convenient and misguided assertion. When accounting for poverty rates and economic status, the United States ranks near the top in every measure. The United States has one of the highest child poverty rates in the world- which is a disgrace in and of itself- and we do a better job at teaching ALL children than most countries in the world.

The opt-out movement is far too diverse and far too serious to sum up in such meaningless commentary as being only driven by well-intentioned but fearful parents and the teacher's unions that support them. Across the spectrum of advocates there are parents and teachers who disagree with the use of these low-stakes tests in evaluating teacher effectiveness. There are parents and teachers who see the tests as being a tool for destroying public education. There are parents and teachers who are dismayed by the extreme amount of time devoted to test prep at the expense of other curriculum areas and the arts. And of course, there are parents and teachers who understand (and fear) the power of corporate profiteering, greed and the access to student data that threatens our democratic way of life.

However, the biggest mistake Ken makes is in not understanding the basic fundamentals of what is happening. He makes the same mistake that many do, and in doing so, he probably pisses off some of the most ardent Common Core supporters. The Common Core (CCSS) and the state tests ARE NOT THE SAME THING. The CCSS are a set of national standards, established in a flawed manner, but with the intent that, “The Common Core focuses on developing the critical-thinking, problem-solving, and analytical skills students will need to be successful.”. Education standards establish objectives in educational attainment. They may include curricular areas to be covered and benchmarks to assess student progress. What the standards DO NOT do is establish state assessments tied to teacher effectiveness. In a nutshell Ken, people cannot opt-out of the standards, but they can opt-out of the tests that put their children through a testing program more time intensive than passing the New York State bar exam.

In the end, Ken Tingley and his ilk of maliciously ill-informed apologists, do nothing more than further misinformation and perform the bidding of those groups who would prefer to profit from our children rather than actually have them learn something and become productive citizens. And for people like Ken- anti-union, anti-teacher, anti-logic, anti-everything- the fight between the doers and the takers helps support the goals of those who strive to establish a plutonomy at any cost.

Common sense as a concept has been co-opted by individuals and groups to be a means for coming up with solutions or actions that seem natural to most people. However, as is generally the case, this one-sided use of common sense often neglects facts and/or scientific explanation. Ken's brand of common sense- that tough-guy, real American, and predominantly grunty male version- builds on false premises and a multitude of fallacies. As a journalist, we should expect better from people like Ken Tingley who have the power to shape and shift pubic opinion.  Unfortunately, in this case, as with so many that deal with public goods and particularly public education, Ken's personal bias toward the pull yourself up by the bootstrap crowd is a dangerous shift toward a divided community.

If we're basing our societal guidance on common sense, here's what I believe makes sense to most people:

1. Intellectual sense and science tells us that many students will not try to do well on no-stakes tests. As the governor said himself this week, the "tests are meaningless for students".
2. Intellectual sense and science tells us that these assessments provide a snapshot, not a true gauge of student learning. 
3. Intellectual sense and science tells us that each student cohort varies in ability and therefore constant growth (year-to-year) is irrational.
4. Intellectual sense and science tells us that poverty is a real indicator of student achievement.
5. Intellectual sense and science tells us that, due to these concerns, basing teacher effectiveness on test results is unreliable.

So enough is enough from the "Does not play well with others" common sense crowd. It's high time professionals and experts establish themselves as the arbiters of the truth in education policy. Let's call out those who fight from their self-appointed position of authority as being what they truly are- self-serving, uninformed, know nothings- with an ax to grind or a buck to make. Ken Tingley doesn't give a rat's behind about student achievement. What's his real motivation? Knocking whiny parents and unionized teachers off their perch? Standing up for his mildly-libertarian version of common sense? We may never know, but you can be sure, it has nothing to do with what's truly best for all members of society- just the one's tough enough to gut it out in his.

An Open Letter to Senator Betty Little on the Education Bill

Senator Elizabeth Little

5 Warren Street, Suite 3

Glens Falls, NY 12801

Dear Betty,

I wanted to take a moment to respectfully express my disappointment in your YES vote to approve the Education Bill during yesterday's legislative session.

The 2015-16 budget and, in particular, the educational spending bill that it included, will have a lasting negative impact on students, families, teachers and our entire community. Although the final bill excluded many of the more draconian aspects of the governor's requests, it nonetheless furthers unsubstantiated ​and ​punitive measures against teachers while ignoring research on the value of standardized tests as a measure of student growth and teacher effectiveness.

Suffice it to say, good, creative and truly effective teachers will leave the profession. Some of these teachers will depart voluntarily because they choose not to work in a system that does not value them. Others will leave involuntarily due to the ineffective ratings they will receive when their students- many of whom are dealing with issues including homelessness, abuse, non-involved parents or other supports- under-perform on discredited assessment measures.

Even worse, many prospective teachers will now choose not to enter a system that they know does not value them. As Nancy Atwell, the recent recipient of the Global Teacher Prize has said, “Public school teachers are so constrained right now by the common core standards and the tests that are developed to monitor what teachers are doing with them," she said. "If you're a creative, smart young person, I don't think this is the time to go into teaching unless an independent school would suit you."

​As a final blow, the budget​ institutes a merit pay scheme that pits educators against one another and drives a wedge into our best efforts to effectively educate our most needy students. The benefits of merit pay as an incentive are widely panned by economists and social scientists alike as you can read HERE and HERE. I don't believe it is in any of our best interests to have teachers who are intensely competitive and motivated by the prospects of more money. You need look no further than the scandal in Atlanta, currently in the news, to see what happens when we place improper incentives and punishment models into teaching.

Please don't read this as a protection of the status quo. Although I disagree with the education "reformers" who claim that our schools and teachers are failing, I do acknowledge that there exists a need to continually improve our schools and the teaching profession.

Much of this can best be accomplished by involving educators in the discussion and moving toward an assessment system that provides for meaningful feedback, support and growth. By incorporating teacher voice, we gain knowledge, skills and insight into what happens in our schools every day. We gain access to what may work and what may not work. Lastly, we gain support through collaboration in building a better community with citizens who can do more than take a test- they contribute positively to society.

Thank you for your continuing support of your constituents and your future support of teachers.​ I look forward to moving the conversation in a positive direction.

Regards,

Michael Shaver

Social Studies Teacher

Glens Falls Teacher Association (GFTA)

Glens Falls High School