Backup is here
Sagan: "I come to this thinking...we have to evidence of student learning, the job that's being done in the classroom..."
voting will be to send it out to public comment
Chester: teachers have demonstrated time and again "their ability to impact student learning"
"I've just seen so many of the Massachusetts educators be strong in terms of influencing student achievement, student academic learning...I feel very strongly that if we're not smart about building into our rating cycle...we've missed the boat"
building into the rating the impact of teachers and schools
"if we don't build that into the rating cycle...we're doing our teachers a disservice"
"I feel quite strongly about that"
heard from unions in the spring; "I appreciate that conversation"
separate and discrete impact on student learning; distraction of that far outweighed the benefit of that
have folded impact of student learning into overall rating
concern that it would drive more testing; change would support 'on the fly' assessment "that schools are doing anyway"
"provides greater flexibility, perhaps, than the system that exists now"
clear signal from superintendents and principals that support
teachers' unions do not
PowerPoint now looking on how teacher evaluation currently is set up versus proposed change: "how best to modify the summative performance rating"
much of the informaiton is here
adds "student learning" indicator under standard II "Teaching all students"
adds under "instructional leadership" standard I for administrators
thus gets folded into that section of rating
optional for educators who are not responsible for direct instruction
public comment through mid-January to be considered at February meeting
Fryer: "have heard time and time again that we ought to be careful about including student test scores in things as poverty is the most impactful part of student learning"
"our educators have tremendous impact" on student learning
"Those things that raise test scores also have high and medium effects on their students"
(it's kind of interesting that he's ignoring his own results on test scores and long term earning in this past year)
there are things we know that do move the needle for students
"frankly, it's just damn insulting to think the real issue the parents you were born to and not the teachers are in front of you"
"have to get beyond that we have no sense of agency"
Q: is weight the same before and after?
There are no weights in MA system
districts "don't develop a formula themselves" but leave it to professional judgment
Stewart: what data do you have to support adding this indicator?
A: we don't have data
"it's my understanding that this is more of a hypothesis that we have"
piece on the student impact rating was never implemented "it isn't actually lost"
"it's a challenge, still"
fifth month of meetings with this as a topic on our agenda
"surprised that there is no problem-solving on the implementation"
"and it's been dismissed"
"a number of times that the proposals were brought without consultation"
Chester: been a lot of problem-solving
MTA/AFT proposal: Stewart "was very professional; they laid it out"
Stewart: why not included? Chester "you'd have to ask them"
Chester: wide body of evidence that being in front of an effective teacher makes a difference
Stewart: "has a tortured history"
"that was all part of the Race to the Top competition; people were putting in all kids of crazy things"
teachers have "valid reasons" for their concerns
Fryer:(not clear why Sagan is giving floor back to him)
offers to send around evidence
Gates Foundation found effective teacher this year with those impacted last year and how effect students rated teachers
Doherty: don't think we can deny that poverty is an impact on student achievement
two biggest correlation of education are education level of mother and poverty level
"it's not a coincidence that the lowest test scores in the state are in" poor sections of state
"I'm not talking about using poverty as an excuse" "have to invest" in needed resources
can't get a proficient rating without a proficienct rating in standard II
oppose inclusion, though will vote in favor of sending out to comment
McKenna: this has been a tortured process: "and somewhat unnecessarily so"
"I think everyone could have done is do a better job of listening to each other"
people firmed up their positions
"I hope there's an openness in continuing to find a solution"
"I agree that there needs to be accountability"
"the problem is...that teacher turnover is like this" (waves hand) in places like Mattahunt
"and the least experienced teachers, that's where they send them"
"parents care as much and have as much aspiration for them as the parents in Wellesley"
"that we don't provide the same quality of teachers for them: that's on us" (to applause)
"we see that turnover and it's not fair to those kids and it's not fair to those families who have those aspirations"
Morton: "this is a really difficult conversation"
how can we not take into account how student performance ?
"I don't know how we can do this job without it"
Moriarty will vote against as he likes system as it is
Noyce: cites what Fryer said (again)
endorses that Doherty might have had students who came in with more (and perhaps that's why they did better)
Peyser: proposal, grounded in regulation we already have
teachers matter, can measure student learning, teachers get better when they get feedback when that is grounded in student learning
(to Chester) "if there's torture here, he may not have caused it, he may have been suffering from it"
sad to see separate section go; but "retains what is core"
making it easier and more likely to be implemented in the field
Chester: only mandated piece is that student test scores have to used if available
"beyond that, those are local decisions"
Sagan: complements discussion
leans towards Moriarty on opinion
but have to find middle ground
motion to go out to public comment carries