One of the more controversial and interesting studies The Times has published this year has to do with some of the most important people in Los Angeles: public school teachers.
In a widely-shared article (it has been posted on over 4,000 Facebook profiles in just a few days), the findings that the best teachers are not necessarily in the most-affluent schools, and that within schools the quality of education can vary, has inspired debate on local radio and TV shows. It has even fueled the L.A. teachers union president to call for a boycott of The Times.
Naturally, the comments on the stories online have crackled with life. Predictably, some of the opinions have focused on The Times and its coverage of this extremely sensitive topic. Some have praised the reporters for their work. Some have suggested that the paper was way off base.
After the jump, a small selection of comments:
Kai Hoku wrote:
For the LA times to call out a teacher in "the poorest corner of the San Fernando Valley" is shameful. Why don't the writers of this piece evaluate teachers in San Marino or Santa Monica?
JohnYuEsq wrote:
I agree with most commentators that we must "weed out" ineffective teachers. But not so fast! Test scores are inaccurate and must be just one criterion used to quantify teachers' performances. This article makes it appear that the test scores are the end-all, be-all sole criterion to use to judge a teacher. The entire 'sensationalistic' feel of the article is what many, including myself, object to. This is article is an example of IRRESPONSIBLE, SENSATIONALISTIC journalism akin to what's found on the cover of a super market tabloid, not a well regarded newspare like the LA Times.
xpres383 said:
I will not read this article until I see a public list of all newspaper journalists in L.A. County that rates the effectiveness of their writing. That way I can choose the correct newspaper to subscribe to and when I see an article I can look at the list and see if it's worth reading by looking at that writer's quality rating. This specific article would take triple time for the research because it took three writers to write it. Come to think of it, I would love to see an article on where my subscription fee goes. Three journalist for one article!
My above statement is as absurd as publicly listing teachers names and their effectiveness rating. As you can read in the article, one teacher who is highly respected by peers, students, administrators and parents has a low score. There is no malice whatsoever, as far as work ethic and now she is being put on display for this!. These writers have no clue as to what goes on in a classroom and now they will singlehandedly shrink the pool of prospective teachers. Who will want to become teachers now.
SHAME on the L. A. Times. You have just reached a new low in responsible journalism.
Beef Jerky said:
The LA Times should do a story about bad teachers, bad administrators, bad policy-makers, and bad parents. If we are to start pointing fingers, maybe we should look ourselves in the mirror before starting a witchhunt.
Rachel Canchola said:
I applaud the teachers for allowing their names and photographs to be published. This courageous act in my view was to enhance quality education, not to demonize these teachers. They should be considered heros because they have allowed the Times to expose what many believe to be personal attacks. While many would not agree with this method of evaluation, I would ask, is there a better way?
drwily said:
Wake up, Pulitzer committee. This story is what outstanding journalism is all about and quite possibly the single most important story of relevance to America's future. Let us hope the LA Times has the courage to follow this story more deeply, calling spades spades as it goes. I consider the least effective (not "liked" or "revered") 20% of teachers to be the most dangerous and damaging demographic in the country because they destroy futures. Children are resilient and can usually overcome a year wasted with a bad teacher. But two bad teachers, especially in early grades and doubly so when experienced in a row, is a kiss of intellectual death, never to be overcome. Nothing will improve the quality of education in America more and more quickly than weeding the ineffective ones out.
SteveKeegan wrote:
An absolutely courageous piece of journalism that takes on the most powerful union in California for the betterment of society. As a fellow journalist, I can say this is supposed to be what print journalism is all about. Bravo, L.A. Times! Way to make newspapers relevant again!
lisaintheoc said:
The LA Times has finally found a spine. This is a great story, real journalism, too bad the teachers screaming "foul" are not qualified to see it. I'm sure all the great teachers in LA are quietly reading this story and saying "finally". Teachers who push their students, inspire them, and do it for THEM, and not to get brownie points from the adminstrators or parents, should be rewarded. I know several teachers, some are very good, but others to this day spend most of thier day flirting with other teachers, posting on facebook and texting each other during class time! Sorry Union leaders, but these teachers must be weeded out. Don't blame The Times for doing what the school administrators and Union have failed to do! Good Job LA Times, can't wait to read the rest of this series.
So what is your take? Does The Times deserve kudos and awards for this story? Or should it be boycotted? In what way could the first part of the series have been improved? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
-- Tony Pierce
Photo: Over seven years, John Smith's fifth-graders have started out slightly ahead of those just down the hall but by year's end have been far behind. Credit: Irfan Khan, Los Angeles Times