Patricia Camacho

A 4th grade teacher at Toland Way Elementary in 2007

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
Less
Avg
More
Most effective

English effectiveness

Least effective
Less
Avg
More
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. Camacho falls within the “least effective” category of district teachers in math and within the “less effective than average” category in English. These ratings were calculated based on test scores from 27 students.

Because this is a statistical measure, each score has a degree of uncertainty. The shading represents the range of values within which Camacho’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.

Camacho's LAUSD teaching history

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

Patricia Camacho's Response:

As a dedicated educator holding positions in and out of the classroom for fifteen years at LAUSD, I believe that these results do not reflect my accomplishments as a teaching professional.

Not only is this LA Times assessment based on just one class’ data (my first and only year teaching this grade level), but much relevant information, such as historical trend analysis seem to be missing.

Ultimately, most teachers welcome feedback that is constructive and can be used as a tool for improvement. However, it appears the LA Times’ methodologies fall short of this goal, and using just one year’s worth of testing results to summarize a 15 year career isn’t just an unfair generalization, but one undoubtedly full of compounding variables.

Nevertheless, I still agree that it is important to hold teachers accountable, but trying to over-simplify a complex issue causes more harm than good. Even the LA Times admits that “For teachers with relatively few students, the ratings have less certainty.” Yet, the LA Times feels justified to use one year of data - a tiny sampling of students and a sample full of “less certainty” according to the LA Times - to summarize a 15 year career? That’s simply poor statistics.

In summary, I am confident that current and former students, their parents, colleagues, and administrators would agree that this information is not representative of my teaching career.

 

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.
Advertisement

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.