Sheri Lederman Puts Teacher Value-Added Modeling Scores on Trial in a Precedent-Setting Case

Sheri Lederman

 See my prior posts:
Teacher Sheri Lederman's Lawsuit Against NY State's Teacher Evaluation System Moves Forward

Betsy Combier

Controversial teacher evaluation method is on trial — literally — and the judge is not amused
by Valerie Strauss, Answer Sheet, August 15, 2015
LINK

Here is a report on what happened this week in a New York court where a judge is hearing the case brought by Sheri G. Lederman, a fourth-grade teacher in the Great Neck public school district, against state education officials over their controversial method of evaluating her — and, by extension, other N.Y. teachers.

The method is known as “value-added modeling,” or VAM, and it purports to be able to use student standardized test scores to determine the “value” of a teacher while factoring out every other influence on a student (including, for example, hunger, sickness, and stress). One way it works is by predicting, through a complicated computer model, how students with similar characteristics are supposed to perform on the exams, and teachers are then evaluated on how well their students measure up to the theoretical students. New York is just one of the many states where VAM is a key component of teacher assessment. Evaluation experts have warned  policymakers that this method is not reliable for evaluating teachers, but VAM became popular among school reformers as a “data-driven” evaluation solution.

 

Lederman’s suit against state education officials — including John King, the former state education commissioner who is now a top adviser to U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan — challenges the rationality of the VAM model, and it alleges that the New York State Growth Measures “actually punishes excellence in education through a statistical black box which no rational educator or fact finder could see as fair, accurate or reliable.”

Here’s what happened to Lederman: In 2012-13, 68.75 percent of her New York students met or exceeded state standards in both English and math. She was labeled “effective” that year. In 2013-2014, her students’ test results were very similar, but she was rated “ineffective.” Meanwhile, her district superintendent, Thomas Dolan, declared that Lederman — whose students received  standardized math and English Language Arts test scores consistently higher than the state average — has a “flawless record.”

Lederman and her attorney husband, Bruce Lederman, sued and obtained affidavits of support from a number of education experts. You can read about what they said here.

On Aug. 12, New York Supreme Court Justice Roger McDonough presided over a hearing in the case — and he was not amused with the state’s case. Following is a report on the hearing by Carol Burris, the executive director of the nonprofit Network for Public Education Fund. Burris retired in June as an award-winning principal at a New York high school, and she is the author of numerous articles, books and blog posts (including on The Answer Sheet) about the botched school reform efforts in her state.

[Why a master teacher is suing New York state over her evaluation]

By Carol Burris

The exasperated New York Supreme Court judge, Roger McDonough, tried to get Assistant Attorney General Galligan to answer his questions. He was looking for clarity and instead got circuitous responses about bell curves, “outliers” and adjustments. Fourth-grade teacher Sheri Lederman’s VAM score of “ineffective” was on trial.

The more Ms. Galligan tried to defend the bell curve of growth scores as science, the more the judge pushed back with common sense. It was clear that he did his homework. He understood that the New York State Education Department’s VAM system artificially set the percentage of “ineffective” teachers at 7 percent. That arbitrary decision clearly troubled him. “Doesn’t the bell curve make it subjective? There has to be failures,” he asked.

The defender of the curve said that she did not like the “failure” word.

The judge quipped, “Ineffectives, how about that?” Those in attendance laughed.

Ms. Galligan preferred the term “outlier.” Those who got ineffective growth scores were “the outliers who are not doing a good job,” the attorney said. She seemed oblivious to the fourth-grade teacher who was sitting not 10 feet away from where she stood.

“Did her students learn nothing?” Justice McDonough asked. “How could it be that she went from 14 out of 20 points to 1 out of 20 points in one year?” He noted that the students’ scores were quite good and not that different from the year before.

Back behind the bell curve Ms. Galligan ran. As she tried to explain once again, the judge said, “Therein lies the imprecise nature of this measure.”

I met Sheri Lederman a year before she became an “outlier.” In April of 2013, a group of principals organized a forum at Hofstra University, called More than a Score. Sheri’s principal, Sharon Fougner, recommended her as a panelist. “She is not only a remarkable teacher, she is a scholar in childhood education,” Fougner said.

At that forum, Sheri spoke eloquently about her students. She explained what good elementary education should be. Her thoughtful presentation full of authentic concern for the effects of Pearson testing on her fourth-graders was the most moving presentation of the evening.

The following year, in 2014, Sheri received her ineffective score from the state. Principal Fougner called her into her office to tell her, so she would not have to suffer the indignity of reading it on a computer screen.

The master teacher, known for her high expectations for students and her belief that every single student can succeed with her help, was in shock. Just the year before her score was rated “effective.”

After being told the bad news, Lederman recalls sitting at her desk thinking that there must be some mistake. She thought about quitting — and then she got angry.

What started out as a personal affront became a cause. As she recently told me:

“I spend a lot of time teaching my students about the injustices that have historically plagued populations across the world. It is often the case that one single person must step up and take a stand against an unjust law or governing body, becoming the tipping point for so many others. I could not stand by and accept what SED [State Education Department] and the Legislature were doing to me and every other educator out there. I have made the choice to take a public stand. Win or lose, I won’t stand by and be ineffective in this fight.”

She and her husband, attorney Bruce Lederman, filed for a review. She received a dismissive letter from the State Education Department saying there was no review and if she didn’t like it, the only recourse was an article 78 action.

And that is just what she and her husband began.

Lederman was not the only teacher in the school to get a poor score. In 2014, 21 percent of the staff at E.M. Baker School received a score of “ineffective,” 21 percent “developing” and 57 percent were “effective.”  Just the year before, not one teacher received an “ineffective” score.

[How is this fair? Art teacher evaluated by students’ math test scores]

The irrationality was not limited to the teachers of Sheri Lederman’s school, one of the highest performing elementary schools in the state. In 2014, 44 percent of the teachers of the Fox Meadow School in Scarsdale received growth scores that said they were not “effective” teachers with 22 percent rated “ineffective.”  Yet 61 percent of the school’s students were proficient in English Language Arts, and 75 percent were proficient in math—more that double the state’s proficiency rate.  Similar results were found at the high-achieving Harbour Hill School in Roslyn, where 36 percent of its teachers received growth scores that labeled them “ineffective.”

The Lincoln School in Rochester, is a school designated as a priority/failing school by the state. Its proficiency rate was less than 3 percent. In 2014, 100 percent of its teachers received “effective” state scores, with 7 percent being rated “highly effective.”  At another school facing receivership, The Martin Luther King Jr School in Utica, New York, 60 percent of the teachers received “effective” VAM scores and 40 percent were given VAM scores of “highly effective .”

I point out these dramatic differences not to disparage or embarrass the teachers of any school, but rather to shine a light on the irrational state-produced teacher scores based on the New York Common Core tests. For more information on the unreliable manner in which these scores functioned in 2013 and 2014, read here.

Bruce Lederman argued the irrationality of that rating system before the court. He laid out a careful, systematic argument. He was not opposed to evaluation. He was not even opposed to evaluation based on a measurement of student learning growth. He objected to a rating created in a black box that spit out predictions that compared his wife’s students to “avatar students.” He was disturbed that when questioned, that system responds with “because we say so.” He noted that “the magic of numbers brings a suspension of common sense.”

[How students with top test scores actually hurt their teacher’s evaluation]

“There is nothing in the law that requires a bell curve,” he argued. He explained that a bell curve with its forced failures violates that law that requires that every teacher must be able to get all scores. Not only did he want the court to set aside his wife’s score, he wanted the court to “declare the measure an abuse of discretion” because “the State Education Department does not get a pass on unreasonable and irrational actions.”

After 90 minutes of argument, the court adjourned.

At its core, this story is a love story. It is the story of a teacher who loves her students, her profession and justice so much that she is willing to stand up and let the world know that she was “an outlier” with an “ineffective” score.

It was love that compelled teachers, retired and active, driving from all corners of the state to be in that courtroom to listen on a hot summer’s day. It was love that compelled her principal to drive to Albany to be there. It was the deep and abiding love of a husband for his wife that compelled Bruce Lederman to spend countless hours preparing an extraordinary defense.  And it is love that nourishes and sustains the good school, not avatar score predictions for performance on Common Core tests.
 

Supreme Court Justice McDonough’s decision is expected in two to three months.

 

NY State Education Commissioner Praises NYC Chancellor Carmen Farina For Her Support of Professional Development on Common Core

John King touts Fariña’s focus on teacher training
Link
 

 

 

John King, visiting Brooklyn's Pathways in Technology Early College High School in 2012

A couple days after reprising his criticism of New York City’s enrollment policies, State Education Commissioner John King had nicer things to say about school system’s new boss, Chancellor Carmen Fariña.

Fariña’s efforts for boost professional development for teachers earned praise from King, who said the extra training was a missing piece from implementation of the Common Core learning standards.

“I’ve been pleased that Chancellor Fariña has expressed a strong commitment to, not only the Common Core, but the professional development for teachers that will help to ensure its success,” King said today on the Brian Lehrer Show.

In her first five months on the job, Fariña has revived the Department of Education’s office of professional development and launched a program that encourages principals to share best practices at their respective schools. And next year the city plans to give teachers more training time during the school day, which King had repeatedly advocated for in recent months.

The remarks were King’s latest in a spate of public appearances leading up to Saturday’s 60th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Brown vs. Board of Education decision. He mostly stayed on message about what he thought was needed to end persistent educational inequalities, including a need to raise learning standards through the Common Core.

Critics have argued King has moved too quickly by basing high-stakes tests on the standards. This week, King likened the criticism to rejecting values that were enshrined in the 1954 Supreme Court case, which ruled that educational segregation was unconstitutional and compelled public schools to integrate along race and other demographic lines.

Brian Lehrer pushed back against that comparison on Friday, saying that some of the same groups that have criticized the state’s Common Core policies have a long history of civil rights activism.

“Are you saying that opponents of the Common Core approach, which includes some real campaigners for social justice, are racist?” Lehrer asked.

“I’m saying that the notion that there are some kids who just can’t be prepared for success after high school is wrong and inconsistent with American values,” King responded, referring to low number of black and Latino students who graduate ill-prepared for college-level coursework.

Lehrer also asked King to clarify his criticism of New York City’s enrollment policies, which the commissioner singled out in a speech on Thursday. In the speech, King said district and neighborhood zoning lines had created stark racial and socioeconomic disparities between schools situated just a few blocks away.

Lehrer pointed out research that found a large part of the reason New York City’s school system is so segregated is because of charter schools, which predominantly serve low-income black and Hispanic students.

King, a former managing director of Uncommon Charter Schools, said it was “a legitimate concern,” but played down the sector’s role because it serves “a very small percentage of students.” He also said their commitment to serve students living in low-income neighborhoods should be shared by more schools.

One caller identified herself as a parent from P.S. 282 in Park Slope, a elementary school that serves a large share of low-income students and is often seen as an example of disparities caused the city’s enrollment policies.

Instead of integration policies, the parent wanted to talk about the Common Core. She said the real problem is the curriculum that many low-income schools in New York City were using to adopt the standards.

Common Core criticism, she said, is “really against the very poor Common Core curriculum that was pushed by the DOE on schools and primarily taken by poorer schools.”

King reiterated a need for schools to do more professional development for teachers so that they’re aligning their lessons to the standards, which require students to read more non-fiction text and refer to it often in their work.

And King said the state could also be doing more to support districts.

“We’ve got to highlight examples of great practice [and] try to help people replicate those,” he said.

A Mom Asks For Commissioner John King To Be Censured, Reprimanded, or Asked To Resign

Mother to John King: I Have a “Special Interest”: My Son by dianerav

LINK

This letter was distributed to every member of the New York State Board of Regents, along with many elected officials in New York State.

Dear Distinguished Elected Officials,

I am the parent of two children one presently enrolled in the Spackenkill school district, the other is a junior in college studying computer science, much to my chagrin. I have an advanced degree and have practiced in the legal field for many years. I am raising my second child who is now in Kindergarten in the Spackenkill School District, Poughkeepsie, NY.

Spackenkill teachers are professional, engaging and amazing people! They go the extra mile for our students. We feel blessed to live and learn in this small community. But, I digress. A little more about me. Both my parents are physicians. My brother has a PhD in neuroscience. In fact, to be honest everyone in my family has an advanced degree of some sort, mostly MDs, a few pharmacists and some dentists. I have a JD. Naturally, I am the black sheep in this family both figuratively and pregoratively. My point?  As you can see, I am not an ignorant fool.....no, in my family we strive for and understand the value of a stellar education. I want to instill those values and I expect the same opportunity for my children too.

Which brings me to why I am writing you today. I am writing to express my deep disatisfaction with Commissioner of Education John  B. King, Jr. I attended and spoke at the October 10, 2013 Town Hall event and would like to share my thoughts with you, if you dont mind.

The event, at capacity, was hosted by the NYSPTA. My friend Jennifer Kaufman (who also spoke) and I sat in my car prior to the event debating whether we should bail and go for coffee to catch up. That was the extent of our "plot" to organize some sort of concerted effort to "manipulate and control" the forum. I assure you, that was the farthest thing from our minds that evening. My intention that evening was to face Dr. King, make eye contact and to be heard with the hopes that he would address my concerns. End of story. No conspiracy there.

From the NYSPTA Town Hall flyer:

"NYS PTA is providing you with this opportunity to gather information,

ask questions, and share concerns with NYS Education Commissioner

John King and/or other SED Representatives at one of five town hall meetings around the state"

Those of us who were at the meeting saw firsthand that Dr King must have missed the memo. Instead of providing parents and teachers the opportunity to "ask questions, and share concerns" this meeting was dominated by Dr. King. The audience was not given much opportunity to speak, ask questions or raise concerns which issues we were hoping the Commissioner would address.

Concededly, there were some hecklers at the meeting. People who were rude and spoke out of turn. But, I understand why they were acting this way. You see, as parents and teachers I feel that we have not been afforded an opportunity to express our concerns directly to the man in charge - Commissioner King- about Core, privacy or testing and this was our golden moment. A shot. A chance. A rare opportunity for us as parents and teachers to face the man who is making important, significant educational policy decisions that have been affecting our lives every day and night at, breakfast, lunch and at the dinner table with our children. Look, this forum was supposed to be our turn to have a say, a voice, a chance to express concerns. This evening, for once, was about us,  not about him.

I understand that some people were rude and spoke out of turn. Some hecklers were annoying. But, so what? This is a very important subject one that we have been denied an opportunity to participate in at the outset. So, even though I dont condone such behavior, I understand where these people were coming from. In my opinion, whether rational or not, they were coming from a primal need and desire to protect their children. Guess what? I GET THAT AND CAN RESPECT THAT. Can you? Truthfully, if Commissioner King had handled these individuals questions and concerns with sensitivity, tact and grace then I would have had respect for him also.

But thats not what happened. I was there. I spoke at the mic. I consumed every last second of my precious 2 minutes at that mic. while Dr. King made attempts to further dominate and manipulate the forum. I had 2 minutes to speak up - I did the best that I could speaking as quickly but articulately as I could knowing full well that my concerns were not and have not been addressed and probably wont be. This  does not sit well with me. But, to add insult to injury,  the meeting ended abruptly after 5 speakers including myself presented  leaving at least 75 or more people who were simply denied the chance to speak. On subject matter of this magnitude, this is simply unacceptable.

Commissioner King has since canceled all further Town Hall appearances without affording parents, students, and teachers an opportunity to have a voice in the curriculum that is being bestowed on them. We deserve better. What a disappointment and disgrace to parents, teachers and students of Spackenkill and the State of NY. I am very disgusted with the support Commissioner King is recieving from Robert Bartlett, Regents Board Member and Chief.

I would like to express my incredible displeasure at Commissioner John B. King, Jr.’s decision and the support being promulgated by the Board of Regents about his decision to cancel the state sponsored PTA town hall meetings. As I stated earlier, we have legitimate concerns regarding NYS educational reform policies that are affecting our children and deserve an opportunity and forum in which to be heard, not patronized.....heard. Commissioner King is an appointed official who oversees the education of our children. He became defensive when mention was made of his own 2 children, so he should understand why we as parents feel defensive towards NYSED when it comes to the policies being implemented and the curriculum around those policies that affect our children and our lives.

Commissioner King should at least have had the decency to listen to concerns and address policy and curriculum related decisions publicly. He did not do this. This speaks volumes. Frankly, may I be so bold as to suggest that Comissioner King apologize for shutting down dialogue on a subject that is so significant to us as parents and teachers on a daily basis. We breathe it. We sleep it. We eat it. I am flabbergasted that Commissioner King does not have the sensitivity or capacity to understand where parents and teachers are coming from.

Many parents, like myself, chose to raise our children here in NY because of the quality schools that have existed for decades. The Commissioner’s policies seem fatally flawed and the curriculum has been poorly implemented. The canceling of these important meetings suggests to me that the Commissioner of Education, and his progeny, are more concerned with privatized education and corporate nepotism that children and teachers.

Commissioner King claims that the forum was hijacked by self interest groups intent on dominating and manipulating the forum. In one article that is presently circulating, Commissioner King was asked to identify the "self interest" groups he was referring to. He was quoted as saying: google it. I did. The video in which I speak comes up. Commissioner King further elaborates about these purported self interest groups alleging that "Email blasts encouraging their membership to dominate the microphone and take over the meeting," were sent.  http://jamestown.ynn.com/content/news/700678/education-commissioner-to-consider-rescheduling-meetings/#sthash.kk64eK2B.dpuf

Well, if I were an average citizen, which Im not, I would write a boiler plate letter and be done with it. But, Im not writing you a boiler plate letter for a reason. I am disgusted by King's representations. I am a one of the parents who spoke for 2 minutes at the mircophone on October 10, 2013 before Commissioner King and he has essentially reduced my concerns to anti education reform zealot rhetoric. I dont take kindly to that representation and I dont think my 6 year old and his teachers would appreciate it either.

In the short video aptly entitled "Commissioner gets Spanked" by Mert Melfa, I can be seen around the 7min 10 sec mark. I am "Anna Shak" (sic....its Shah). I am a parent. A taxpayer. A citizen. A mother. I am all of those things and I dont appreciate the fact that Commissioner King dismissed my concerns.

A copy of my speech is attached herewith. I cannot tell you how many hours I have devoted to researching these issues prior to this event in order to be fully informed before speaking to the Commissioner. I wrote my speech because I was thrilled beyond imagination about having the opportunity to voice my concerns to Dr King in an open forum. As you can see from the video and my speech, I was respectful, articulate and I advanced intelligent, well versed and legitimate concerns that I have about common core, testing and privacy that I wanted the Commissioner to hear. I did not even get to finish my statement within the 2 minute mark despite the fact that I had practiced it over 100 times and had clocked in at 1 minute 54 seconds - giving myself the cushion of a few seconds leeway in case I had to sneeze or cough during my statement before Dr. King.

I am disgusted beyond words that a man of the Commissioner's stature would choose to dismiss parents and lump speakers in with "special interest" groups just because he did not like what he was hearing. King's statements are inflammatory and abhorrent.  Rest assured, I am not a special interest group - I am a parent, a tax payer and a mother  of two children who simply wants to make sound decisions that are right for my children. I took the opportunity that exists in a democratic society to air my concerns to the official to whom those matters whould be addressed and he slammed the door in my face and the face of all of us. This is absolutely unacceptable and should not be tolerated by those of you who are in a position to do something about it.

Cancelling further Town Hall sessions and referring to speakers at the mircrophone that night as an organized effort by "special interests" to "dominate and manipulate" the forum was disgraceful. I am offended beyond words by this man.  The Commissioner's decision to cancel further appearances speaks volumes. While I went into this forum willing to have an open mind, circumstances have now changed as a result of King's behavior. I question his agenda more now then I did before the meeting. I have lost faith and respect in the Education Department. I have been unwilling to be swayed by zealots who argue against education reform in general, as King so put it, but King's lack of judgment has given legitimacy to these coalitions. As a result of King's own actions, I am worried that the Core initiative is less about children and more about competing interests (think $). Personally, I attended the meeting skeptical of this initiative, concerned about common core strategies and its implementation and yes I had nagging questions. But, to be honest, I was open to being persuaded if the evidence to back up this plan was there. It wasnt. I had hope that this meeting would quell my concerns so that I could have faith in Commissioner King's leadership. I went into it as a parent. But, when I realized how mismanaged the system is and how irresponsible Commissioner King has been with legitimate concerns, red flags were raised and circumstances changed considerably for me. King has thrown down the gauntlet- he has accused me of being a "special interest" and he questionsmy agenda. So be it. I have no problem being accused of being a "special interest". Indeed, my special interest is 6 years old and his name is Tyler and I would love the opportunity to face Commissioner King one more time.

There have been allegations made by Regent Board Member Bennett that Commissioner King was subject to racial slurs at this meeting. I was there at the meeting. I have watched the video several times. Given the fact that I am a person of color, a minority, I am acutely aware and sensitive to the challenges that minorities face on a daily basis. I can assure you that I heard no racial epithets and, in my opinion, the Comissioners race was not a factor at this event.

For all of the forgoing reasons, I am respectfully requesting that elected officials censure, reprimand and/or seek the resignation of Commissioner John B. King, Jr. immediately.

I am attaching a photo of myself and my youngest, "special interest". Rest assured, I will remain active, interested and involved in my child's education for despite Commissioner King attempt to shut me and other parents like me out of it. Thank you for your kind attention to this matter.

Respectfully submitted,

Anna Shah

Here is another post from Diane Ravitch:

Parent: I Was at the Poughkeepsie Meeting by dianerav This comment came from a mother who attended the infamous meeting where State Commissioner John King announced his intention to have a dialogue with parents, then lectured the audience for over an hour, and interrupted those who disagreed with him. Having announced five such meetings, he canceled the other four, claiming that "special interests" had manipulated the parents. This parent says she was there. She writes: "....I was at the Poughkeepsie Meeting. Sat in the front row, cause I wanted to look directly into the eyes of the man who has stolen the love of school from my 9 year old. I am a mom, I have two boys (9 and 14) and we reside in the small community of Millbrook NY. No matter if the persons who did speak were teachers, they were most likely parents too....and I trust them to be surrogate parents to my children when they are in their care 6-7 hours a day. We are a team. So, I suggest that every parent start attending every BOE meeting and PTA/O meeting (as I have for the last 4 years, and that's why I was at that meeting in Poughkeepsie) to show the local districts our support and encourage them to break free of the STATES hold on our children's love of learning and their own love for teaching. REVOLT.....great history lesson....lets stop talking about how teachers are scared for your Jobs...implementing the CC cause you have to...and lets NOT DO IT ANYMORE. The claim from King was that local districts have some control...and I agree, so now we should show him!!!! Some of the problem is that not enough parents understand how much power we hold in the accountability dept. But, we are educating ourselves and in turn becoming more involved whether our districts want us there or NOT. It's time for WE THE PEOPLE.....Teachers and Parents TOGETHER....No excuses, we are just as much to blame for this mess as anyone else. Let's listen to each other and lets take back the importance of educating our youth. I am writing for King's resignation. His disrespect for anyone to have a voice showed him to be the Dictator of his "Communistic Core" and I will not be silenced....this mama bear will fight for her cubs."