The can of worms opened a couple of weeks ago by the Los Angeles Times will be with us for some time. On August 14th, the Los Angeles Times ran a story called Who is Teaching Our Kids? What they did was this--

* The Times obtained math and English scores for the California Standards Test for the years 2003-2009 under the CaliforniaPublic Records Act.

* They hired Richard Buddin, a senior economist and education researcher at the Rand Corporation, to conduct an analysis of the data.

* The scores were then converted into percentile ratings, dividing them into five equal categories from least effective to most effective.

* The first report, including 6,000 third, fourth and fifth grade teachers, was posted Sunday by the Times on its website.

* The Times has given teachers an opportunity to comment on their ratings.

It is important to note that teacher performance is being measured using the value added technique, which rates teachers “based on their students’ progress on standardized tests year after year. The difference between a student’s expected growth and actual performance is the ‘value’ a teacher adds or subtracts during the year.”

Since publishing the first of many articles, there has been a massive amount of confusion, obfuscation, arguing, complaining, and threatening, with no signs of abating. I will attempt here to clarify the picture.

There are three different questions that need to be addressed.

First is “value added” (VA) a reliable measure? In other words, does it measure what it purports to measure – teacher effectiveness, based on student standardized test scores? There has been much input from statisticians and it would seem that over a period of years that yes, VA is a reliable measure.

Second, if VA is reliable, is it fair to judge teacher effectiveness on the basis of a single standardized test? Most experts say yes, but not as the only measure – other assessments such as principal evaluation during unannounced classroom visits, for example, should be given some weight.

Third, should the LA Times be publishing VA scores so that parents and the general public can see them?

While teachers seem to have mixed feelings about all this, the teachers’ unions do not. The more militant and intransigent National Education Association has been very unyielding and said “no” to all of the above.

The American Federation of Teachers led by Randi Weingarten has been more conciliatory. High visibility Washington D.C., with its tough-as-nails Chancellor Michelle Rhee, has a new contract with an AFT local –the Washington Teachers Union, whereby VA counts for part of a teacher’s evaluation. In fact, Ms. Weingarten claims that she has “negotiated 54 contracts in districts where it counted for 10% to 30% of a teacher's overall review.” However, the AFT President stops short of giving her blessings to the LA Times for publishing teachers’ names. She feels it is cruel, but does agree that parents have a right to see the scores.

A.J. Duffy, president of the local LA teachers union, UTLA, has said very contradictory things about VA. According to the Times, “… Duffy criticized value-added analysis because it depends on standardized test scores that he considers flawed. He said that he wasn't opposed to principals using it confidentially to give teachers feedback, but that it had no place in a formal evaluation.”

First he says that the scores flawed, but then says principals should use them as feedback for teachers. One has to wonder, if the scores are flawed, why should they be used it at all? He then went to call on teachers to boycott the Times for publishing the names. And according to their website, UTLA is planning a protest at the LA Times building on September 14th after the school day ends.

The bottom line is this. If VA is a reliable measure and that a student score on standardized tests is a fair way to at least partially assess a teacher’s value, why not publish the scores with a caveat that the VA score should be but one part of a teacher’s evaluation? Why shouldn’t parents, whose children’s education is at stake, know something about the effectiveness of someone as important as a teacher? And why shouldn’t taxpayers who pay teachers’ salaries be aware of what bang they are getting for their buck.

At this time, anyone can go online and find out what credentials a teacher in California holds. As such, it seems to make sense that the next step that parents and taxpayers should have access to information that shows how well these credentialed teachers are doing their job.

(I have created a Facebook page that deals with this issue. If you have a Facebook account and would like to get involved, please go here.)