Over the course of the 2007-2008 school year, John Merrow, the NewsHour's special correspondent for education, reported on the challenges faced by two new superintendents in struggling school districts: Michelle Rhee in Washington, D.C., and Paul Vallas in New Orleans.
I am a college and high-school teacher. I would like to know what yardsticks Ms. Rhee is looking to use in evaluating the performance of her teachers. I am certain that they are central to her negotiations with the teachers' union in D.C.
John Merrow responds:
Rhee, and administrators in most school districts today, can "drill down" in the data and see which kids are learning and which are not. They can then infer (incorrectly, in my view) which teachers are effective and which are not.
But Ms. Rhee and Mr. Vallas have endorsed what is called the "growth model" of evaluation, meaning that they look at where student A was on day one and where he ends up and draw conclusions from that.
The "growth model" is the latest magic bullet in education, but I think it's seriously flawed because of the way kids move around, particularly in urban areas. Paul Vallas also believes in looking at how committed teachers are - do they arrive early and stay late, do they tutor?