From FA 2006 - SP 2009, The Fifth Grade Level Departmentalized. I was the Science Teacher. Two other colleagues taught Math and Language Arts during those three years to the entire Fifth Grade. During the Departmentalization, Science Scores rose from 18% Prof/Adv in 2006 to 23% in 2007. In 2008, Science scores rose again with 34% of all 5th grade students Prof/Adv, and again in 2009 when Science rose to 45% of 5th Grade students being Prof/Adv. In 2009-10, I taught Most of 2nd and all of 3rd-5th Grade Science. Unfortunately, I could not focus on the Fifth Grade as I had done in prior years, yielding a 22% increase in over three years (2007-09). We still managed to raise the amount of Fifth Graders Prof/Adv to 49% in Spring of 2010, with consistent support and instruction. I also take my Fifth Grade Students on an average of 12 Field Trips Per year as Exposure and Experience is crucial to academic understanding. I also am one of the few Elementary Instructors that still teach the Full Science Curriculum (Including a comprehensive review of 4th Grade Standards) to prepare for the rigorous CST. I also teach the ENTIRE American History Curriculum and students have Projects, Hot Seats and other experiences while learning their history. I also teach my students how to play the Recorder for Musicianship. I also train my students for the Physical Fitness test in which over 80% of them have passed over every year (Compared to the statewide avg of 17-20% of students passing) We also have organized sports with PE where the students learn fundamentals of Volleyball, Basketball and Softball, as well as Football skills. They usually play for the culminating activity or other school wide activities. Most of your" Highly Effective" Teachers, I would venture to say, only teach language Arts and Math, LEAVING "THE REST OF THE CURRICULUM BEHIND"! So I guess, if I also ignored teaching the 6 other subjects, and purely focused on "teaching to the test" for Language Arts and Math, my "Effectiveness" would yield a different rating. I challenge one of the "Number Heads", who so aptly and carefully entered data, in a pre-formulated computerized system, to teach 9 subjects to a level of Mastery to Inner City children, with Limited Parental involvement and Instructional/Staff Resources, and Yield a "Superior" Rating. I'm sure no one would take me up on this challenge as these "Cubicle Kings" wouldn't have half the personality/expertise to engage or encourage these brilliant children of color!

I am currently retired from L.A.U.S.D. and do not want my value-added score publicized.
While I believe it is important for teachers to be accountable and for parents to have
this kind of information available to them, I do not believe this is the correct forum.
I'm disappointed in the L.A.Times.

I am happy to report that my school has met and surpassed LAUSD scoring mandates on the CST for the last past two consecutive years, and with 90% security this will be the 3rd consecutive year of improvement! However I am sad to report that this article on teacher effectiveness gets a "least effective" grade due its "black and white" content and lack of gray. It's naive to think that the teacher’s criteria explanations included in this article tell the whole tale! There are countless factors that contribute to the learning of all students and how well they perform on the California Standardized Test such as: lack of per students funds, social economic background, highly impacted classes, working single parents, and of course language barriers, to name a few. This article is nothing more than an attempt to mislead parents and put sole blame on the teacher in order to deviate from the previously mentioned. This article is nothing more than an attempt to cause turmoil and finger pointing within UTLA and LAUSD. It is a transparent article that can't conceal the black eye that L.A Times has bestowed upon itself. I am in favor of exposes, however it is highly recommended to report complete and accurate information not just the ones pertinent to a hidden agenda. "I am Carlos Rodriguez, and I approve this message."

After 30 years of teaching, it is my opinion that standardized test scores reflect how a student performs on a test, not necessarily what they have learned and will retain. It is very distressing to me that after putting in all the daily effort, teaching the standards that I am expected to teach, following the pacing plan to make sure all the curriculum is covered....I am rated by a standardized test score. Since this will be my last year of teaching as I am planning to retire, I do intend to give forth my best effort as I always have to make sure my students have a positive and meaningful instructional experience. Unfortunately, I will have to leave with a heavy heart as the LA Times has found it necessary to publish information which won't be fully grasped by the public and will only serve to make me and others look bad. They should be ashamed.

I unfortunately missed the entire school year Sept 2009 thru June 2010 and subsequently retired due to a neurological ailment. In my 25 1/2 years of service I was diligent in after hours preparation teaching the syllabus in a disciplined class environment mainly to ELD and low scoring students. I am very surprised at this rating.

While I agree that there must be accountability for teachers, and a way to weed out ineffective teachers, I deplore the way in which the LA times has chosen to present this information. This index shows only 1 component of teaching, rather than looking at the overall activities and instruction that go on daily in classrooms. This only reflects how children do on a test, not how well they learn to become life-long learners, or how they learn to handle themselves socially, which for me and many others, are a truer test of our "effectiveness" as teachers. Because of this, I don't believe that it's fair to publish names with rating scores in a newspaper, and I don't know of any other profession that would stand for this kind of public scrutiny. I am greatly disappointed that a newspaper of your stature would stoop to this kind of reporting, which further attacks the morale of the vast majority of teachers who give it all they've got, daily, for their students. Shame on the LA Times!

I wish the district would have let us know about these comparisons all along so I could have been teaching to " the test"! I see test scores dip in third grade, but I didn't realize I was behind the third grade curve. If test taking skills is what 'they' want - I'll improve their skills!

This is based on two years (2008, 2009) teaching 5th grade, not the 5 year range this database suggests in the title.

It is important to remember that not all students are the same, and that as teachers we all want the best for our students. I'm not making any excuses, but our students deal with so many issues like gangs, deportation of their loved ones, and abandonment and we are extremely happy to see our children survive that environment.

Just wondering, how did you pick the years to evaluate? I was in the classroom during 2002 to 2006 and an out of classroom Coordinator 2006 to present. The above years shown do not reflex my total in classroom time and includes a year I was out of the classroom.