Lilia A. Alzate

A 3rd grade teacher at Winnetka Avenue Elementary in 2010

These graphs show a teacher's "value-added" rating based on his or her students' progress on the California Standards Tests in math and English. The Times’ analysis used all valid student scores available for this teacher from the 2003-04 through 2009-10 academic years. The value-added scores reflect a teacher's effectiveness at raising standardized test scores and, as such, capture only one aspect of a teacher's work.

Math effectiveness

Least effective
Most effective

English effectiveness

Least effective
Most effective
See how this teacher would change under different statistical models »

About this rating

The red lines show The Times’ value-added estimates for this teacher. Alzate falls within the “least effective” category of district teachers in math and within the “least effective” category in English. These ratings were calculated based on test scores from 102 students.

Because this is a statistical measure, each score has a degree of uncertainty. The shading represents the range of values within which Alzate’s actual effectiveness score is most likely to fall. The score is most likely to be in the center of the shaded area, near the red line, and less likely in the lightly shaded area. Teachers with ratings based on a small number of student test scores will a have wider shaded range.

The beige area shows how the district's 11,500 elementary school teachers are distributed across the categories.

Alzate's LAUSD teaching history

Years used for value-added rating. See FAQ for details.

Lilia Alzate's Response:

First of all, L.A. Times, it is absurd that you think I may use profanity, personal attacks, or threats in my response to your rating me as a teacher. Even "least effective" teachers such as I would not respond in that manner. Also, it is unfortunate that you wish to scapegoat the variety of problems of our educational system mostly on "teacher effectiveness" based on their students' test scores.

As your publication knows, our socially diverse society has a plethora of language proficiency levels, varied parental involvement, and a tradition of tracking students by language and academic need to a specific teacher(s). This situation makes teacher effectiveness based on student test scores invalid. ALL STUDENTS ARE NOT THE SAME. We're not talking about widgets. It is true that you state test scores are not the only consideration in rating a teacher. You know better.

No matter what, many people are HIGHLY INFLUENCED by student test score publications. Your publishing these test scores have kept teachers awake at night, including myself. Could it also be that some who have suffered a degree of emotional instability may not have survived your ratings? Do you plan to contribute to the "improvement" of education that way? Are you aware of the fact that some of the "least effective" teachers are highly respected by colleagues and administrators, and well liked by students and their parents? In the future would you quantify that information? On second thought don't bother. That data is probably not dramatic enough and too positive to be newsworthy. Now those of us who once again have received the L.A. Times scarlet letters L.E. for "least effective" must join the ranks of those teachers who must consider teaching to the test, even for those students not proficient in English.


The Times gave LAUSD elementary school teachers rated in this database the opportunity to preview their value-added evaluations and publicly respond. Some issues raised by teachers may be addressed in the FAQ. Teachers who have not commented may do so by contacting The Times.

 Permalink  Delicious  Digg  Facebook  Twitter
Los Angeles Teacher Ratings, the Los Angeles Times' database of value-added scores for Los Angeles Unified elementary schools and teachers.

Find a teacher...

Or, find a school

About the Data Desk

This page was created by the Data Desk, a team of reporters and Web developers at The Times.