A judge has ruled that a major court case challenging New York State's teacher evaluation system can move forward. The story is at the Diane Ravitch blog.
Here is my issue: Why is plaintiff Sheri Lederman's husband Bruce, an attorney, handling this case and not lawyers from New York State United Teachers? Ms. Lederman received an ineffective rating on one of the student growth portions on her rating but was fine in the other areas of the evaluation.
The New York State Education Department tried the "No harm, no foul" defense since the overall rating was not adverse. This did not succeed in court and now a great many details about the senseless evaluation system will be coming out.
Our NYSUT/UFT leaders, who are not at all personally impacted by any of the evaluation system, should at the very least be joining this case to challenge the nonsensical and incomprehensible way New York State rates teachers but they seem to be sitting on the sidelines. Maybe I am missing something here.
Couldn't we have hundreds, if not thousands, of similar cases challenging this inane law?