Your Sun editorial writers should have their pay based on how many people they persuade to change their views. Oh, wait, nobody pays attention to what Sun editorial writers say anyway since they never say anything interesting, informed, or thoughtful. Why does the paper even bother to keep them?

I want to know why the editorial writers feel they have the knowledge to determine how a teacher should be evaluated. If this was about how journalists should be evaluated, then maybe their say would matter.

If Sun writers were evaluated on data, you would all(instead of most) be unemployed. Your writing has caused subscriptions to drop, the paper to shrink, the reading level to be dumbed down to an elementary level, and advertising to consume the paper. The Sun ia almost another National Enquirer in content and layout What? There are other reasons for those factors? Same for teachers. We are taking the fall for a cultural shift that does not respect education and expects educators to fix all societal problems. I am one of a few people who still actually subscribe to three daily papers delivered to my home. Keep up your ignorant opinions and it will soon be two papers.

I'm grateful to the Sun and the Post for taking the right stand on teachers' evaluations. Governor O'Malley should ensure that we develop a new way to evaluate teachers in Maryland, and the 50% growth measure is a good place to start.

Don't get me wrong - the idea is far from perfect. But does anyone think the system we have now is a good one? I've taught in Baltimore City schools for years, and I don't know anyone who thinks our current evaluation is good for students, teachers, or administrators.

Show me someone who thinks the status quo is a good idea, and I'll show you an NEA staffer.

This isn't about RTT money, although that's not an insignificant issue. This is about having a way to find out what helps students achieve and what does not. We do ourselves and our students a great disservice collecting the invalid and pointless data we now generate about teachers' effectiveness.

Enough hair-spltting. Enough political grandstanding. Let's take a first step.

"Don't get me wrong - the idea is far from perfect. But does anyone think the system we have now is a good one?"

Campbell, just because the current system is broken doesn't mean we should jump into an entirely new untested idea. I would put money on that exact process being responsible for the system we have currently.

For once, Baltimore and Maryland should stop, take a breath, and instead of jumping on to whatever hot issue or buzzword is floating around in the education world... actually build something that works.

50% of my evaluation on "student achievement"? How will it be measured? Is it a test, or does it take into account where a student starts and ends via my instruction? Will it take into account that I get 9th graders who might as well have skipped middle school because they don't have any grade level skills? "Student achievement" is such a vague, unique, and individual thing that it cannot be mainlined into a measurement tool!

You want education to improve in the city, state, and country? Stop having uninformed people make policy decisions that lead to educator abuse.

How about we pay editorial writers and bloggers according to their positive tags, I mean performance. It would be easy to tabulate and transparent- unlike teacher evaluations.

@ Brandon:

Let me agree with half of what you said and disagree with the other half.

But first I need to clarify. The MSDE initiative is planned to be based on growth, not achievement. So it would supposedly measure your impact, not measure an absolute level of proficiency among your students. So if you get a class far below level, which many of us often do, and you move them at least a grade level you've done your job and the evaluation should reflect that, even if they're still not on level. MSDE has said this publicly enough that they can be held accountable for it.

I do, actually, think that trying something new and relatively untested is exactly what we should do. I really don't think we could do any worse than what we already have, and hardly anyone is doing this right anyway, so it's all uncharted waters.

You're right that we should build something purposefully that works for us. But delaying provides too much political cover for those who only aim to impede, like the 12 members of the education committee who voted against the growth measure.

But here's where you and I agree. We should definitely stop letting unqualified outsiders make decisions like this. The governor's committee, which is slated to meet unitl February to design the growth measure, is not well-publicized so we have no idea how qualified they are - or aren't. Are they asking the right questions? How are they holding each other accountable for the work? What's their process for consensus-building?

When the committee and anyone else involved in setting standards for evaluation based on assessments meets, they need to consider how everyone classified as a teacher will be evaluated and paid as a result. All I have heard from Grasmick is talk about the MSA test and teachers, such as elementary teachers who teach most of the content tested. What about social studies, science, specials which include art, music, gym, tech, foreign language, librarians, guidance ... and the list goes on. If supervisors did their job in hiring administrators who supervised their building and teachers correctly, then we would not have this problem. We are looking at all teachers rather than the few administrators in each school should be looking at, helping to be better teachers, or counseling them out to another career. In short, if principals did their job, we wouldn't have this problem. Who evaluates them? Oh my, that would be that the heavy administrative and curriculum offices in each county/city would have to do their job too.

When the committee and anyone else involved in setting standards for evaluation based on assessments meets, they need to consider how everyone classified as a teacher will be evaluated and paid as a result. All I have heard from Grasmick is talk about the MSA test and teachers, such as elementary teachers who teach most of the content tested. What about social studies, science, specials which include art, music, gym, tech, foreign language, librarians, guidance ... and the list goes on. If supervisors did their job in hiring administrators who supervised their building and teachers correctly, then we would not have this problem. We are looking at all teachers rather than the few administrators in each school should be looking at, helping to be better teachers, or counseling them out to another career. In short, if principals did their job, we wouldn't have this problem. Who evaluates them? Oh my, that would be that the heavy administrative and curriculum offices in each county/city would have to do their job too.