News, data and conversationEach teacher receives a percentile ranking, plus a margin of error that indicates the amount of uncertainty for that ranking. In the example shown at right, the score of 50 indicates that the teacher is average, but may range from the 20th percentile (below average) to the 80th percentile (above average).
| Teacher | Math 2010 | Math Career | English 2010 | English Career |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Althea Fuller |
71
|
54
|
||
| Number of students | 22 | 57 | ||
| Expected avg. test score* | -0.59 | -0.56 | ||
| Actual avg. test score* | -0.5 | -0.56 | ||
| Value-added | +0.09 | +0.01 | ||
| Ann Marie Hall Croll |
88
|
58
|
||
| Number of students | 14 | 34 | ||
| Expected avg. test score* | -0.78 | -0.31 | ||
| Actual avg. test score* | -0.5 | -0.27 | ||
| Value-added | +0.28 | +0.04 | ||
| Summer Lott |
74
|
74
|
||
| Number of students | 22 | 65 | ||
| Expected avg. test score* | -0.13 | -0.52 | ||
| Actual avg. test score* | 0.01 | -0.39 | ||
| Value-added | +0.14 | +0.13 | ||
| Devyn Cunningham |
78
|
90
|
||
| Number of students | 23 | 44 | ||
| Expected avg. test score* | -0.2 | -0.33 | ||
| Actual avg. test score* | 0.01 | -0.03 | ||
| Value-added | +0.21 | +0.31 | ||
| Doreen Edwards |
54
|
62
|
||
| Number of students | 10 | 20 | ||
| Expected avg. test score* | -1.74 | -1.36 | ||
| Actual avg. test score* | -1.73 | -1.3 | ||
| Value-added | +0.02 | +0.06 | ||
| Patrice Palmer Williams |
33
|
19
|
||
| Number of students | 23 | 42 | ||
| Expected avg. test score* | -0.16 | -0.3 | ||
| Actual avg. test score* | -0.24 | -0.43 | ||
| Value-added | -0.08 | -0.13 |
| Teacher | Math 2010 | Math Career | English 2010 | English Career |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Summer Lott |
79
|
91
|
||
| Number of students | 20 | 111 | ||
| Expected avg. test score* | -0.51 | -0.34 | ||
| Actual avg. test score* | -0.34 | -0.07 | ||
| Value-added | +0.16 | +0.27 | ||
| Devyn Cunningham |
87
|
94
|
||
| Number of students | 23 | 61 | ||
| Expected avg. test score* | -0.01 | -0.23 | ||
| Actual avg. test score* | 0.29 | 0.13 | ||
| Value-added | +0.3 | +0.36 | ||
| Marlene Missick |
20
|
59
|
||
| Number of students | 20 | 76 | ||
| Expected avg. test score* | -0.13 | -0.15 | ||
| Actual avg. test score* | -0.25 | -0.13 | ||
| Value-added | -0.11 | +0.02 | ||
| Udeen Edmonson |
76
|
85
|
||
| Number of students | 17 | 49 | ||
| Expected avg. test score* | -0.17 | -0.36 | ||
| Actual avg. test score* | -0.04 | -0.15 | ||
| Value-added | +0.14 | +0.21 | ||
| Patrice Palmer Williams |
19
|
41
|
||
| Number of students | 21 | 44 | ||
| Expected avg. test score* | -0.45 | -0.52 | ||
| Actual avg. test score* | -0.57 | -0.54 | ||
| Value-added | -0.12 | -0.02 |
| Teacher | Math 2010 | Math Career | English 2010 | English Career |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Althea Fuller |
29
|
60
|
||
| Number of students | 21 | 44 | ||
| Expected avg. test score* | -0.24 | -0.38 | ||
| Actual avg. test score* | -0.31 | -0.35 | ||
| Value-added | -0.08 | +0.03 | ||
| Summer Lott |
71
|
91
|
||
| Number of students | 25 | 55 | ||
| Expected avg. test score* | -0.07 | -0.14 | ||
| Actual avg. test score* | 0.06 | 0.14 | ||
| Value-added | +0.13 | +0.28 | ||
| Devyn Cunningham |
90
|
96
|
||
| Number of students | 23 | 60 | ||
| Expected avg. test score* | 0.12 | -0.14 | ||
| Actual avg. test score* | 0.42 | 0.24 | ||
| Value-added | +0.3 | +0.38 | ||
| Marlene Missick |
63
|
19
|
||
| Number of students | 24 | 69 | ||
| Expected avg. test score* | 0.12 | 0.06 | ||
| Actual avg. test score* | 0.16 | -0.03 | ||
| Value-added | +0.05 | -0.09 | ||
| Udeen Edmonson |
46
|
48
|
||
| Number of students | 16 | 146 | ||
| Expected avg. test score* | -0.07 | -0.4 | ||
| Actual avg. test score* | -0.08 | -0.4 | ||
| Value-added | -0.02 | 0.0 | ||
| Doreen Edwards |
42
|
42
|
||
| Number of students | 13 | 13 | ||
| Expected avg. test score* | -0.39 | -0.39 | ||
| Actual avg. test score* | -0.43 | -0.43 | ||
| Value-added | -0.04 | -0.04 |
* Test scores are reported as standard deviations above/below the citywide mean.
The ratings on this page reflect the city’s effort to isolate the effect of individual teachers on student performance. In this case, the measurement is based on math and English scores on New York State standardized tests. Each teacher was assigned an “expected” score based on the past performance and demographics of his or her students. This expected score is then compared to the students’ actual test results. The difference is considered the “value added” by the teacher.
Not necessarily. Critics of the rankings point to their many deficiencies and caveats. One of them is that the higher teachers rank one year, the harder it is for them to sustain their high ranking by showing significant progress in students the next year. Critics also say there are aspects of a child’s life — or distractions on test day — that the numbers cannot capture: supportive parents, a talented principal, the help of a tutor, allergies or a relentlessly barking dog outside the classroom.
The scores here are estimates based on a complex formula, and the estimates carry with them a margin of error. The more test scores that are incorporated in the formula, the smaller the error margin, which is why single-year ratings have a bigger margin than those calculated for a teacher’s career. Error margins, which are called the “confidence interval” in these reports, can range widely.
Enter all or part of a teacher name
Schoolbook is a site dedicated to news, data and conversation about schools in New York City.
Tell us what’s going on in your school. You can e-mail us with your tips or documents, or call 646-801-9698 and leave a voice message.
Join the Public Insight Network and help our journalists cover education in the city. Your stories and insights can help us create relevant and distinctive reporting. Join more than 100,000 people and become a trusted source.
