The debate over teacher evaluations has been raging for some time, with discussion over how to rate teachers in very different communities with very different student demographics by the same basic criteria. One solution that has been effectively used across the country is value-added analysis, which pits teacher performance against specific student expectations. While many agree that value-added analysis is the best system to gauge teacher performance today accurately, another conflict has been brewing – whether to make these evaluations accessible to the general public.
What is Value-Added Analysis?
According to an article at National Public Radio, value-added analysis is "a method for calculating teacher effectiveness based on how the teacher's students perform on standardized tests." Instead of strictly looking at the scores, however, these evaluations consider the expectations for the students based on 30 factors, including the students' ethnicity and whether they are poor enough to qualify for a free lunch. This methodology more accurately compares the performance of teachers who teach to different populations of students.
In addition to value-added analysis, most teachers are evaluated by a "soft" criterion, which tends to be more subjective. This might include classroom observations by the principal, student papers, and project evaluations. The data compiled on teachers through these evaluations has been historically kept private by the school district and used strictly by administrators for developing classroom strategies and managing a teacher's personal career track. However, that changed when the Los Angeles Times published teacher
