Schools

Judge Rules Teacher Performance Ratings Should Be Public

The UFT vows to appeal the decision

A State Supreme Court judge ruled yesterday that New York City can make teacher performance ratings public. The United Federation of Teachers has vowed to appeal the decision.

The suit, which was launched by the UFT against the Department of Education, argued that the move by the city to release the ratings was “arbitrary and capricious.”

The data reflected in the Teacher Data Reports (TDRs) should not be released, because the TDRs are so flawed and unreliable as to be subjective and without merit, argued a union representative.

Find out what's happening in Bed-Stuywith free, real-time updates from Patch.

State Senator Velmanette Montgomery, a longtime champion of children’s education, expressed some concern around the test methodology which, she says, should be independently verified by a recognized authority. If it is flawed, the actions taken could ruin the careers of valuable educators and hurt the school system and our children, said Montgomery.

But in a nine-page decision, Justice Cynthia Kern wrote that the city’s decision to release the data was reasonable, because the TDRs are statistical, not subjective.

Find out what's happening in Bed-Stuywith free, real-time updates from Patch.

She wrote, “The Court of Appeals has clearly held that there is no requirement that data be reliable for it to be disclosed.”

As a State Supreme Court decision, the ruling sets the precedent for other school districts across New York State that may choose to take similar action toward full disclosure of their own performance ratings.

Kern also tossed out the union’s privacy argument, saying that, unlike email addresses or social security numbers, effectiveness ratings are tied directly to job performance, which the public has a right to see.

“Courts have repeatedly held that release of job-performance related information, even negative information such as that involving misconduct, does not constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy,” said Kern.

Public information should be shared without doing personal harm, but the information should be meaningful and accurate, as certified by a respected, recognized and independent organization, said Montgomery. “It is not enough for the Board of Ed to say "It's true because we say so,"” she said.

“We intend to appeal as soon as possible, and will be asking the appellate division, first department to halt any release pending their review of Justice Kern’s decision,” said Michael Mulgrew, UFT president.

 

What do you think? Do you think data needs to be reliable before it should be disclosed?

Do you feel that negative information such as that involving misconduct constitutes an unwarranted invasion of privacy?


Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here