This morning, researchers at the University of Colorado released the results of a study that wasn’t nearly as enthusiastic about the LA Times‘ stories on “value-added” teacher scores as the Philip Meyer Award judges seemed to be. But don’t tell the LA Times that.
The new report, released by U of Colorado researchers, Derek Briggs and Ben Domingue, found that “the research on which the Los Angeles Times relied for its teacher effectiveness reporting was demonstrably inadequate to support the published rankings.”
After the LA Times folks got an early look at Briggs and Domingue’s study, they rushed out a story of their own regarding the study’s findings.
The headline on Monday’s LAT story read as follows:
Separate study confirms many Los Angeles Times findings on teacher effectiveness
In the sub hed, the Times admitted that the Colorado study raised “…some questions about the precision of ratings as reported in The Times,” but most of the story suggested that the new research was more validating than it was critical.
Okay, well,….now compare those characterizations with the title of the press release for the U of Colorado study:
Research Study Shows L. A. Times Teacher Ratings Are Neither Reliable Nor Valid
Previously on Fishbowl LA: LA Times Wins ‘Philip Meyer Award’ For Controversial Teacher Story
- Brooklyn Journo Revisits 2005 Heath Ledger Interview
- Winner of Second Place Behind Slate/Travoltified: The LA Times
- Novelist Andrea Cremer Chose Veronica Mars Over a Summer Vacation
- Columnist to Alec Baldwin: Silicon Valley Nerds 'Would Adore You'