Dr. Grasmick needs to review a lesson in civics. The people spoke via the legislature and a decision was rendered to allow local school systems some control in the evaluation process. The legislature approved a 35% student growth formula in teacher evaluations. Though not perfect by any means this is what the elected officials of our democratic process voted on and approved. Dr. Grasmick should not have the power to over ride the process of our elected officials and the will of the people.

The MSDE is putting the cart before the horse in this entire process. Over half of the teachers in our state do not teach subjects that are tested on standardized tests. Teachers of both elementary and secondary electives, physical education, music, art, guidance counselors, media specialist(Librarians) and others that I'm sure I missed do not have any means of accurately measuring student growth. A system may be developed but not in a half hazardly way with no research to back up something that is so important to the students in our state.

Why is it only the teachers and principals that are subject to this process ? What about all the various supervisors and administrators at the local as well as the state level? Everyone involved in the education process should be subject to the same standards This process should also include the 1,300 employees at the MSDE.
Once again the higher ups in our system are immune to any real accountability on their part.

Student growth cannot be tracked to one individual teacher, and growth as a whole is much more of an abstract concept than the mucky mucks of the Education upper deck want to admit.

Growth in a student can be emotional, intellectual, skill based, and so on. For some students coming to school every day on time and not being a jerk on purpose, but instead taking notes and trying to learn is tremendous growth. That student might not test well because he/she came into a 10th grade class with 4th grade skills, but they are trying to improve and have made tremendous leaps and bounds in maturity. This is not trackable "data" (another abstract term admins love to push around), but it is growth.

A teacher's impact on a student as he/she grows is as immeasurable and vast and may be instantaneous or take years to develop. This will boil down to test scores from a socially biased exam and this system will once again reward the wealthy school districts and hurt those that struggle with less privileged students.

@ Brandon -
It's awesome that the kid in your example learned not to be a jerk. I love it when a student who is ridiculous in October says something thoughtful and poignant in March. But I'm not employed to make the kids more mature. That's responsibility primarily falls on parents, many of whom neglect that particular job. I completely understand the whole child theory, and the idea that you must nurture the social and emotional development in order to create lasting learning (believe me - I did my master's teaching portfolio on it). But at the end of the day, I want my kids to know the material. I'm more satisfied with a jerk that can't sit still but knows the Constitution, than a mature, kind, generous idiot. Also - consider that the other 50% of the teacher's evaluation will probably be based on classroom environment, motivation, professionalism, and other factors that point to those non-tangibles you mention. Finally, if the kid who comes to you with a 4th grade reading level leaves with a 5th grade reading level, you're good (provided you teach reading). The evaluation system expects a teacher to move students 1 to 1.5 years, not to put them on grade level.

I agree with you that a really tricky part of the evaluation is going to be isolating what teacher contributed what to the student. My students just yesterday pointed out that reading the Constitution now in May was easier than when we first did it in September because in between that time, they had read Othello in their English classes and they learned how to get through the tricky language. So I in Social Studies benefit from our awesome English teachers. No one's quite been able to answer how we deal with that issue.

If I want a really great annual evaluation, I might as well bring home all future students and raise them from birth. At least that would give me SOME control over the variables that are currently out of my hands.

Does this smell Orwellian? Think about it.

The idea that judging teachers based on student progress will improve student performance is not based on sound statistical evidence. It presumes teachers are currently not doing their jobs. It does not address giving teachers the supplies they need or the power to exclude chronically disruptive and even violent students. It presumes an equality of background of the students. It denies scientific research on brain development. It will not "cure" the problems of American education.

Our politicians make points and the general public get to feel better that they are doing something instead of actually addressing the real issues. Yes, we need education reform and not scapegoats!

It would not be fair to use the ALT-MSA (the maryland state assessment for students with severe or profound disability) in any amount in a special eduation teacher's evaluation. The ALT-MSA is meaningless to the students, a waste of time for the teachers, and supremely frustrating for parents, who would prefer that their children be learning functional life skills instead of having the teacher artificially show that she "taught" the student about cell division, or Shakespeare, or acute/obtuse angles. In the name of "access to the general curriculum" at the insistance of ideologues, we've ended up with rediculous "standardized" tests for kids who are anything but standard! Don't compound the madness by using the ALT-MSA scores in a teacher's evaluation!!!!!!!

The teaching profession is rife with inequities - how can these standards be applied when most teachers do not teach in a tested area? Furthermore, socioeconomic factors do more to determine overall test scores in a school - not individual teachers. In addition, quality teachers will not volunteer to work in low performing schools as it will harm their careers. Cheating may also become more common as teachers and schools are pressured to show results that the MSDE demands. Just like our natural environment which continues to be degraded despite all of the environmental rhetoric so will the environment in our schools continue to decline as ineffective standardized tests are relied on rather than the expertise of educators.