I analyze data. I used to get paid for it. My job title was “analyst.” Some people have that skill set. You clearly do. Most teachers do not. And to divert, distract, frustrate, or infuriate them by saying learning to “talk data” matters more than working on real professional growth, that stinks.

I analyze data to look for things going right, or going wrong. If I am simultaneously being judged on that data, I have incentive to cheat, to analyze “differently,” to choose numbers that make me look good. These people have the power and the will to corrupt everything good, including numbers.

These sorts of demeaning tasks (making non-data people sift through numbers, making teachers waste class time “documenting” instead of teaching, etc) are what Bloomberg uses as a management tool. It helps foster a sense of insecurity, and keeps the young suits clawing for their jobs. It is not something we, as teachers, should expect. MBA’s and JDs sell their souls for their jobs – we do not.

Jonathan

We too are prepping for our dreaded Quality Review, and teachers are being told that they are expected to be able to speak thoroughly not only about every single child in their class but about class trends in data grouped by categories like gender (i.e., are the boys improving at a faster rate than the girls?). But everyone feels like they’re so busy COLLECTING the data that they have no time to ANALYZE the data…plus every other week we’re asked to organize our collected data in a different way for the purpose of consistency. So it’s not really about what helps the teacher figure out how to help the students; it’s about whose data collection binder looks the most like everyone else’s so an outside interpreter like Mr. Quality Review Man can be satisfied that everyone is the same.

The CEP is also complete and utter BS. It’s classic educational doublespeak and needless overexplanations. The things in there don’t really happen, or if they do, don’t actually DO any good. (At least in my experience. I told this to my friendly AP, and she completely agreed with me. [She's one of two sane and competent members of our admin]).

It’s scary how much in this system is a fairy tale, but what’s worse is that the futures of a million children are at stake. *They* are the ones paying for this sham.

I, unlike many teachers, agree with the documenting process. The problem I have is that we are not given the time or the professional development necessary to really know how to use the data. This is what makes the whole thing look like a show. If we are expected to collect all of these numbers and analyze them, then we should be given at least one more prep. in the day as well as receive training in how to deal with all the numbers. We also need access to computers that can run these numbers. There is no reason we should be (by hand) running any of these numbers. Also, there we should be looking at observational data. This is a whole separate skill set that teachers should be explicitly taught.

The CEP feels like another thing that’s just for show. Things get written that are not even looked at again let alone followed. Lone teachers write sections that should come of the result of problem solving and reflection by a group. And you’re right, who is checking these things to see that they are followed through on?