Value-added-measurement (VAM) produce ratings that are
inaccurate and unstable. In Florida, about half of teachers don’t
teach tested subjects, so they are assigned scores based on the
scores of their school, meaning they are rated in relation to the
scores of students they never taught and subjects they never
taught. This
Florida teacher explains why she was rated a 23.6583 out of 40,
even though she teaches a non-tested subject. This is
irrational. Yet Arne Duncan has compelled almost every state to
develop VAM ratings because he believes in them, even though there
is no evidence for their value. How can a teacher’s quality be
judged by the test scores of students she never taught? If that is
not Junk Science, what is? Bill Gates gave Hillsborough County,
Florida, $100 million to evaluate teachers using
value-added-measurement. Here is the formula: Here’s how
the state’s Department of Education explains it, from
a department paper: 
I admit I don’t understand it. Many
people don’t understand it. But whoever wrote it understands it.
Bill Gates said recently it would take at least ten years to see if
this stuff “works.” I don’t think we have to wait ten years. “This
stuff” doesn’t work. It doesn’t even make sense. Teachers of the
gifted may be rated ineffective because their students have already
hit the top, and their scores can’t go up any higher. Their ratings
are Junk Science. When the same teacher gets a bonus one year, but
then is rated ineffective the next year, it shows how unstable the
ratings are. That means they are not science, they are Junk
Science. There is so much more to the art and craft of teaching
than standardized tests reveal. What matters most is not
quantifiable although peers and supervisors can indeed judge which
teachers are best and worst. If the measure is not valid, if the
measure in inaccurate and unstable, then it is wrong to use it to
give people bonuses or to fire them. In this post on her
blog VAMboozled, Audrey Amrein-Beardsley reviewed a study
of VAM which again identified the weaknesses of VAM. She writes:
Finally, these researchers conclude that, “even in the
best scenarios and under the simplistic and idealized
conditions…the potential for misclassifying above average teachers
as below average or for misidentifying the ‘worst’ or ‘best’
teachers remains nontrivial.” Accordingly, misclassification rates
can range “from at least seven to more than 60 percent” depending
on the statistical controls and estimators used and the moderately
to highly non-random student sorting practices and scenarios across
schools. Now, think about it. If the VAM rating can be
wrong by as much as 60%, why would any school district use it to
fire teachers? No wonder teachers are suing for wrongful
termination! Call in the lawyers, VAM is Junk Science.
A site to discuss education and democracy
82 Comments
Leave a reply to Julie Cancel reply
-
Diane Ravitch's Blog by Diane Ravitch is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at dianeravitch.net.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Never forget that VAM was designed for AGRICULTURE and is wrongly applied to very human teachers rather than livestock. Only in America, where economists and billionaires are treated as if they had anything worthwhile to say about classroom teaching while we ignore actual teachers. . . .
LikeLike
Livestock – that’s exactly how these billionaires think of the masses they rile over. Say, aren’t these guys like the “quants” who screwed up Wall St. A decade ago? Get your head out of the numbers and look at the facts on the ground right in front of your eyes!
LikeLike
A more ample perspective may be of use.
In 1971, economist Eric Hanushek introduced the concept of a value-added metric to rate a teacher’s production of gains in students’ test scores, See Hanushek, E. (1971). Teacher characteristics and gains in student achievement: Estimation using micro data. The American Economic Review, 61(2), 280-288. Since then, he has published over 500 papers on the topic in the context of education, many containing long inferential leaps about the economic value of x increments in test scores and how to extract those increments from students and educators.
Even so, many value-added methods migrated into public education from work on “Seeds, Sows, and Cows,” specifically the work of Dr. William Sanders, a statistician specializing in agricultural genetics at the University of Tennessee. With the encouragement of then Governor Lamar Alexander, Saunders and his students developed and published value-added assessments of Tennessee teachers in a political and publicity context that gained traction. Saunders later become the senior statistician at SAS, a company whose software programs are designed for value-added (growth measures) based on comparisons of test scores.
The proprietary formulas of SAS are used in Ohio and many other states. I requested copies of the SAS contracts in Ohio. The formula was not available, only PR from the company and the contract for deliverables, several million for two years of VAM reports, complete with legalize that puts the burden on Ohio officials to provide reliable data.
I think it is useful to restate some rudimentary ideas about genetic engineering not only as the source of statistical methods for evaluating teacher productivity, but also as a metaphor operating below a threshold of much public and professional discussion in “re-engineering” education.
Genetic engineering is the study of ways to alter or select traits of plants and animal species. The studies are made in order to perfect ways to propagate superior traits, accelerate genetic improvement, and produce transformations that incorporate new features (e.g., capacity to resist disease), or functions (e.g., terminator seeds that grow sterile plants).
The technologies of genetic engineering also have unintended consequences. Among major risks are disturbing a thriving ecological system, doing harm to strengths in existing species, unexpected and toxic reactions to changes introduced into reproductive systems, and the development of resistance to engineered interventions. Other concerns bear on unhealthy concentrations of traits by inbreeding, and the irreversibility of these processes.
Although selected techniques of statistical estimation (e.g., mixed model analysis of variance, “percent cumulative norm gain”) have uses across many contexts in and beyond education, other lessons that might be learned from genetic engineering as a metaphor (and program) in education have not been as fully examined and publicized. Current policies seem to be intent on producing the educational equivilent of terminator seeds for public education.
LikeLike
Yes, Hanushek has his own level in hell awaiting him for his role in the abuse of children, teachers, and parents in public schools for over 40 years in the name of Friedman economics.
LikeLike
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx There is also the possibility that Hanushek’s work has been coopted by politicians rather than studied. For example, here’s an EPI summary showing that ‘size of class doesn’t matter’ is a political soundbite & not an accurate reading of Hanushek’s work: http://www.epi.org/publication/books_classsizedebate/
LikeLike
As a teacher of gifted students in Florida, I can attest to the fact that you are more likely to get slammed by VAM. I was rated the worst teacher at my school, the 14th worst teacher in my district, and the 146th worst teacher in the state of Florida (out of 120,000). Previously, I had a great reputation at my school among staff, parents, and students. Now that these scores have been published on the internet, I fear that future students, parents and administrators might be influenced by my extremely negative VAM ranking. Even if they aren’t, I have to worry about being slammed by VAM two years in a row, being rated “needs improvement”, losing my job and having my teaching license revoked by the state. Funny, just two years ago I was selected to be a mentor teacher by my district in the subject that I teach. Now I’m at risk of losing my career based on VAM results of a subject I don’t teach. Thanks a lot Arne. http://kafkateach.wordpress.com/2014/03/01/gosh-damn-thats-a-bad-vam/
LikeLike
We’re in this together here in Florida, kafkateach. I am National Board certified, have 2 masters degrees (only 1 is in education), 20+ years of experience, and was named a Teacher of the Year by three different programs in my district.
Now my Title I school is graded “F” after they hiked the cut scores yet again last year and I will be following you to the unemployment office in another year or two. Should be interesting to see how they plan to staff the school after they have fired the roughly 85% of us who work in “failing” schools around the state.
My VAM came from 4th and 5th graders’ scores — students I have never taught because I moved to this school a couple of years ago and I teach 1st grade.
LikeLike
As soon as the first teacher loses their job over this garbage, I hope the FEA files a lawsuit and VAM gets thrown out for good. There is no way this insanity is going to stand up in a court of law. Politicians and bureaucrats may think it’s fine and dandy to judge teachers on voodoo math and test scores of students they don’t teach, but the scales of justice will ultimately free us from the grasps of the data demons. I would love to see the Department of Ed sued by districts and states for all of the time, money, and resources wasted devising these bogus evaluation systems.
LikeLike
Kafkateach, the US DOE should reimburse every school district using VAM for the billions of dollars it has forced them to waste on meaningless and punitive teacher evaluations. There is no evidence to support VAM. Theory, yes. Speculation, yes. Paper predictions by economists, yes. Evidence. no. Evidence of error, yes. Evidence of harm to careers and reputations, yes. Sue them.
LikeLike
This is no less absurd than rating your dentist as ineffective because the cholesterol levels of your doctor’s patients are too high.
We are so deep inside the rabbit hole insanity is starting to become the norm.
LikeLike
Get out of gifted ed next year. Then, next year’s scores should be much better for you. This is the evidence teachers need to fight VAM in courts.
LikeLike
Tennessee has the longest running VAM database in the country. Since the early nineties Tennessee has been amassing VAM data. Of all the reform ideas, none has seemed to be more ludicrous than measuring teachers with data on students they do not teach. Yet it was accepted with very little conversation from leaders. I spoke out directly against it to Commissioner Huffman to no avail. Why this has not been universally condemned by anyone with common sense is completely beyond my understanding. We are ” through the looking glass ” on reform, and acceptance of this by ed. leaders is proof.
LikeLike
This Junk Science has not been universally condemned because the bottom line need is to: discriminate, harm, beat up on, shame, hurt, hate, rage, kill, joy of inflicting pain, watching them squirm, anger, greed, power…. Not one interest to improve education for children.
They are so wrong and unwilling to let go of teachers. White knuckles! Blood curdling choke hold! With financial rewards, spineless legislators bring up the masses.
McCarthyism, McCarthy Era, rings a loud bell! It had to run its course, destroy lives and lasted lifetimes and generations.
We are now in the Gates Era! Death and distruction in his tracks.
LikeLike
Negatively impacting teachers and students with junk science reforms just because you have big money and want to make even bigger money off of tax-payer dollars is criminal and should be deemed illegal.
LikeLike
Big money, central bureaucracy, and tetsing agent. VAM should be called Vacuous Assessment Measures. Bad science.
LikeLike
I know that there is currently a law suit claiming discrimination on behalf of Rochester teachers in NY. There are also law suits in Tennessee, Florida and New Jersey. NEA filed a federal law suit last April.
But the courts are slow and in the meantime excellent teachers are being maligned, schools are being shuttered, students are being bullied and abused by a testing industry that year by year gains more political power through wealth acquisition. Our elected officials are as corrupt now as they were during the height of the rule of 19th century robber barons.
When I feel discouraged, I remember a mere five years back when there were only a handful of people sounding the alarm about the privatization of public education and the corrupt nature of “corporate driven education reform”. There are so many more people becoming aware today. I believe that good people will prevail in this fight to save our schools. Unfortunately there will probably be unnecessary casualties along the way.
LikeLike
All this VAM stuff has me thinking about my life as a longtime math teacher. We talk up “what math can do”. Equally important is “what math cannot do”. Quality statisticians know this: overfitting a model is as bad or worse than underfitting it. You want to use math for what it can help with, and leave the quality control (because you simply don’t need math for that anyway). I am not particularly a statistician but a good book that addresses the idea of “when you can use math to predict and when it doesn’t work so well” is Nate Silver’s The Signal and the Noise Why So Many Predictions Fail (but some don’t). Mr. Silver has not addressed VAM specifically as far as I know. Having data is necessary but not sufficient (and the data must be good). You also have to understand the mechanism (Bill Gates says we don’t understand the mechanism of effective teaching — I do think he is wrong about that, e.g. communication and relationship-building skills, the ability to inspire others in a positive way, work to structuring a classroom that is conducive to academic endeavors…. but how are these things being accounted for in VAM ?
LikeLike
Julie, Ditto the recommendation on Nate Silver’s excellent book, “The Signal and the Noise.” In education, both sides are guilty of not being able to tell the difference, though their motivations for a failure to understand are completely different. How many state departments of education posted improvements on the 2013 NAEP scores, compared to 2011, when no “statistically significant” improvement was even reported by the federal government? But that excerpt from FDOE reminds me of the derivatives traded as collateralized debt obligations, which brought down the world economy in 2008. The more complex it is, the more likely it is to mislead, and the easier it is for people with lots of money to spin it whatever way suits them.
https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/cdos-are-back-will-they-lead-to-another-financial-crisis/
LikeLike
“. . . both sides are guilty of not being able to tell the difference. . . ”
And pray tell who are the “both sides”?
LikeLike
Duane Swacker: By “both” sides, I clearly meant: (1) those who want public schools to keep getting better, such as teachers, principals, school boards, superintendents; and (2) those who want to destroy public schools and use statistics to advance their purpose. The VAM situation would be an example of side (2). One example of side (1) can be found in the link below. State school officials failed to distinguish the signal from the noise in interpreting reading scores on the 2013 NAEP: what they were looking at was “noise” created by a high exclusion rate for special ed students in some states compared to others; they completely missed the “signal” that can be found in these same statistics, if you know what you’re looking at.
As Julia posted about Nate Silver’s book, I simply thought I could add some small side note about how that applies to VAM.
You can run in denial that teachers and other educators have spun completely insignificant “gains” from programs they have initiated in their own schools and classrooms in an effort to show that public schools are working well, but you would be revealing your blindness to evidence.
I’ll give you another example: A recent book, “The Public School Advantage: Why Public Schools Outperform Private Schools,” Christopher A and Sarah Theule Lubienski, made various statistical corrections to NAEP data and showed that public school students outperformed private school students. This is not an example of signal vs noise, but it is an example of a side citing test results, when they favor a position of support for the public schools.
I simply find it disingenuous to use test scores to make a point in favor of the public schools if your next post will be to say standardized test data should not be used to make decisions about the public schools.
In the end, VAM is incredibly flawed, but there are useful ways to look at data in making decisions about the schools, just not the way VAM is being done in Florida.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/education/blog/bs-md-naep-exclusion-rates-20131115,0,4258634.story
LikeLike
paulkatula
Your point relies on the use of false equivalencies.
LikeLike
Well, you might want to suggest there’s nothing wrong with the mathematical formula. Fine. If you have a number of credible mathmatician scholars nationwide getting a seal of approval, there should be some room for credibility. But that’s quite different from who is/are using that formula and how it is utilized in reality. If some people want to prove the reliability of formula; they need to 1) find alternative valueables other than student test scores and any factors related to standardized tests; and 2) set highly reliable lubrics to assess instructional skills and lesson delivery(which cannot be easily translated into quantitative measurements. And, who are standing in the front to talk about the issue? That’s the key.
LikeLike
Very good points, Julie. Quite apart from the simple greed aspect of all this is the question of why so many fall for the BS. Not every supporter of “reform” is getting rich off it. Why do the others fall for it?
I come at this from a different place than most here. I’m not an educator. Nor am I the parent or grandparent of school-age kids. I’m a computer guy, a java programmer, but I know what computers are not good for as well as what they do well. As such, I have developed in my mind the concept of what I call “computer piety” – i.e. The attitude of those who for whatever reason, will never question what a computer tells them.
I first realized this fully in 2000, when my wife had to have a biopsy for the brain tumor that eventually took her life. Blue Cross tried to stick me with a $10000 Bill saying we had gone out of network on the brain surgeon. It took me six months to hack my way through the Blue Cross bureaucracy before finding the person with the authority to use her brain and not just take as gospel what the computer said. The others were either by edict or by their own choice computer-pious.
To me it’s not surprising that Bill Gates is one of the leaders of the “reform” movement. He may even believe in what he is doing, I don’t know for sure. But we need to focus on getting people to trust their own two eyes instead of “experts”/snake oil salesmen like Gates and Duncan.
LikeLike
Thanks for this — nice turn of phrase, so “data piety”, then. Here’s a link to something Peter Greene posted — this guy (the guy in the video, not Peter Greene) is from Knewton, a corporation that supposedly works with Pearson to collect all the data in education and soon will be able to tell students exactly what to do (education, he says, is the most data-ready, more so than health care, at least until we have the right nano-bots deposited in our bloodstreams to monitor ?? some things about our blood I guess). I hope that Knewton’s scheme “just doesn’t work” (chaos theory, Greene posits) — but it is still scary. Computer expert’s take on this ?
http://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2014/03/who-puts-scary-in-pearson-meet-knewton.html
LikeLike
Julie: for some reason the system doesn’t offer me the option of replying to you, but it lets me reply to my own post that your reply was a reply to. Software bug? They happen all the time. Pity if one cost you your job.
Well, geez, that Knewton guy was a glib talker, wasn’t he? He’s got it all figured out. So did all those “quants” on Wall St. who had the whole damned thing figured out a decade ago and crashed the whole economy. Their bosses didn’t understand what they were talking about but they were just so damned smart that they let them have everything. I can just imagine those Dept. of Education honchos having a similar reaction.
Talk about data piety!
So this is what Bill Gates is talking about when he talks about seeing if “this stuff works”. And if it doesn’t? Gee, you’ve only flushed a whole generation of students and teachers down the toilet. Seems they want to flush the whole generation of traditional teachers and their unions so they can try this cool tech. What could possibly go wrong?
I found it funny that the guy mentioned match.com. I have some experience there. I used it to find someone after my wife died. It worked very well. It worked because it provided a platform where I could interact in a human way with many potential partners I’d never meet otherwise. It was a database of people looking for partners. Cool. But what I found to be real howlers were their computer algorithm estimates of compatibility estimates of these partners. They were way off and did not predict the compatibility with the woman I did find there. That stuff is a joke. And who would want it not to be? That is a particularly good example of what you do and don’t want out of computer systems.
LikeLike
Julie I’m really replying to your post below this one but the system won’t let me. Also see below for an earlier rely to that post.
In addition to what I said below about Knewton, I’ll also say this.
In the early days of a software product launch, it’s not uncommon for the developer/inventor to spend a LOT of time with end user to improve the product which has been a labor of love for the developer. My first software product was written for ME so I know the feeling. I also worked for a guy like that. This period features high attention to detail and great rapport between the developer and the end user who both feel a stake in the success of the product.
That doesn’t scale well, of course. Once the product is released there’s more of a business relationship, end users can’t talk to developers, bug reporting is farmed off to Tech Support, maybe overseas but in any case lacking the deep knowledge and passion of the developer.
This is what the situation between Knewton and that happy ASU instructor reminds me of. Somehow I doubt that relationship would translate to your average inner-city classroom or even your average American classroom.
The DOE is being wowed by the passion of the inventors but you can’t bottle that and so Bill Gates’ dream is only a pipe dream.
LikeLike
I’m sure I’ll be the lone voice here, but I think VAM has value. Like so many things in public education, a good idea is being absolutely ruined by two forces:
1. The lousy implementation in many states coupled with it being used for high stakes decisions before it is ready.
2. The blasting of it without nuance by teachers and the failure to provide useful structures for teacher evaluation.
It seems to me that there are three parts to VAM: determining what goals to measure for each student, determining effective measures and implementing coaching and other continuous professional development programs that can help teachers become more effective coupled with a method for removing ineffective teachers that don’t improve.
Do people find any merit in doing things like setting goals based on predicted MAP score growth (based on the past growth of similar students) for academic subjects?
It also seems to me that goals could be determined and measured against for many other functions. It would certainly take effort to develop goals that were mutually accepted by those being measured and those doing the measuring, but don’t you think it’s possible?
Keep in mind that in most places, VAM is being tried because the current evaluation models are not working (e.g. 98% of teachers being rated satisfactory is useless). Comparing VAM or any other measure to perfection is not useful. Comparing it to what is in place now and seeing if it can be made into something better than that is.
I think there is no question that evaluation systems have to exist that can differentiate effective from ineffective teachers. Why aren’t teachers trying to develop these systems? Every teacher I know acknowledges that there teacher effectiveness ranges from poor to great and that everyone in the building knows which teachers are at either end of that scale. Everyone who has been in a school knows this too, so politicians, representing the needs of the public, have been pushing for systems that measure that in some way that can then be used to get more effective teachers and fewer ineffective ones.
Why aren’t teachers trying to develop these models? Use peer reviews. Use VAM with thoughtful implementations. Use observations in a meaningful way. Come up with something else completely different that I’m not thinking of because I’m not a teacher.
Evaluation is inevitable. Evaluation based on student outcomes is also inevitable because student outcomes are the purpose of public education. If teachers don’t work with leadership to develop the right set of measured outcomes and the right tools for measuring them, they will continue to get crappy methods forced on them by people impatient for change.
I agree with teachers that politicians are ruining traditional public education and demoralizing the profession, and I, and many other ed reformers, think what’s happening is terrible. I think the distinction is that we agree with the goals of those pushing down, but agree that the implementations are horrendous. That’s the reason why you see charter schools with very data-driven, objective measures opting out of state evaluation systems. But, we only get to do that because we have other systems in place.
Is there any effort going on to develop this that I’m not aware of? What do the readers of this blog think? Is it just impossible to come up with any meaningful method that is acceptable to both parties and accomplishes the goal of getting more effective teachers and fewer ineffective ones? I think that is the holy grail for getting more money, respect, and autonomy for the profession and ending the horribly blunt and misshapen tools that are growing like weeds. Weeds thrive in bare soil, not where desirable plants are plentiful.
LikeLike
Why aren’t teachers developing these models? Because nobody asked them and nobody would listen to them if they did bother to develop these models.
You want to measure me as an educator on student growth? OK. Come to my classroom and look through student portfolios. Look at their essays at the beginning of the year and compare them to their essays at the end of the year. But don’t judge me on some algorithm’s random prediction of growth based on a single exam that I didn’t create, am not allowed to see, and is not even in the subject that I teach.
LikeLike
Schools aren’t businesses, and teachers CANNOT be evaluated on the basis of what SOMEBODY ELSE DOES. Do you get this at all? It’s up to the student’s desire or ability to learn–teachers CANNOT control this at all.
Furthermore, teachers don’t get to pick their students–administrators do it, and vicious ones will load up “undesirable” teachers with “low-performing” students to set them up to fail.
Define what an “effective” or “ineffective” teacher is. You don’t know, that’s why. What constitutes an “ineffective” teacher means nothing more than a teacher who “costs too much money.”
I suppose you are one of these people who believes it is “impossible” to “fire” teachers. What a laugh. It’s laughably easy to get rid of teachers.
LikeLike
I guess it’s the “waiting to be asked” part of your comment that gets me. Show me where teachers are trying to do this and being denied. I see teachers collective voice being used to avoid accountability, not embrace it and shape it.
Re looking at essays from start to end of year, that’s perfect. I find differences in student writing to be a very useful measure of what they have learned. Would you deny that that is a value added measure?
Again, my point is the implementation of these plans is terrible, but the underlying point of measuring student growth on an array of measures has value if the models are developed thoughtfully, backtested for predictability, etc.
LikeLike
JPR, I will say it again. If you were to read the research, you would have no confidence in the use of student test scores as measures of teacher quality. There is now a large body of research and evidence. You should read it.
LikeLike
Uh, VAM is being tried because the US DOE wants it that way — not because teachers or principals do….it’s just another way to attempt to lend legitimacy to standardized test scores and has nothing at all to do with quality teachers or learning . . . . and — you say the current system is not working. If you think this, you can’t possibly be working at my school. Our principals do their jobs, and our system (we don’t have VAM) does work — we have principals who have more than two years of classroom experience, and who come in our classrooms. They hire well, and we work hard. No one is dead weight. I can’t think of a single teacher in our building that is not doing his/her job well. Why ? Because we have experienced teachers for administrators, who do THEIR jobs. VAM is completely unnecessary, at the least.
LikeLike
“Evaluation based on student outcomes is also inevitable because student outcomes are the purpose of public education.”
Excrement of bovine/equine/porcine origin.
What is the stated purpose of public education? Where can you find that information?
When you figure those two answers out, get back to me.
LikeLike
I’ve told you what my opinion of the purpose of public education is. Why don’t you share yours?
Arguing about which outcomes matter is one thing, but it is hardly heresy to say that the purpose of public education is to have a positive effect on students.
LikeLike
So you don’t know what the constitutionally mandated purpose of public education is. I’m not looking for your opinion, I’m asking if you know what that purpose is and where that information is to be found. (I’ve given you a hint with my response.)
LikeLike
Duane, please share. To the best of my knowledge, the US Constitution says nothing about public education.
LikeLike
You are correct that the US Constitution says nothing about public education. It is a state function. So as to not belabor the point, I point you to your state constitution.
In Missouri the constitution states: Article IX, subsection 1a: “A general diffusion of knowledge and intelligence being essential to the preservation of the rights and liberties of the people, the general assembly shall establish and maintain free public schools for the gratuitous instruction of all persons in this state within ages not in excess of twenty-one years as prescribed by law.”
I’ll let you decide what “A general diffusion of knowledge and intelligence being essential to the preservation of the rights and liberties of the people. . .” means. But I do not see anything about the purpose being “student outcomes are the purpose of public education.”
LikeLike
Sorry, posted this in the wrong place…
Duane,
My (NY) constitution is not exactly helpful on the subject; I believe it says that the state will provide for the education of all students without saying what the means.
I guess if I lived in Missouri, I’d be trying to change the state constitution. A “general diffusion of knowledge and intelligence” and “gratuitous instruction” certainly say nothing about outcomes nor much about the purpose.
I see that the Missouri Constitution was written in 1820 in only 38 days. Does this date from that original?
Not to take away from all of the deep philosophical discussions that might have occurred during the 3 hours that I’m sure were spent on Article IX, subsection 1A, but I would hardly use that as the measure of the purpose of public education.
LikeLike
The passive-aggressive act by those who are trying to deceive around here is getting very tiresome.
LikeLike
jpr–
Do you think VAM would work for government officials? Why don’t you ask them to experiment with it on themselves before imposing it on others? BTW don’t patronize teachers.
“I think there is no question that evaluation systems have to exist that can differentiate effective from ineffective teachers. Why aren’t teachers trying to develop these systems?”
And what business allows their employees to come up with their own eval system?
We should be listening more to students and serving their needs. Not the teachers, not the principals, not the supr, not the school board, not the politicians, and certainly not men in penquin outfits. Do we listen to the voices that matter the most?
LikeLike
So tell me, are you subjected to VAM? Is your career, your college degrees, your years of experience, your countless hours spent on mandatory professional development, your teaching license, your standing in your community, your ability to pay your living expenses and support your family all dependent on a clunky, unreliable statistical model that has a 50 – 60% margin of error rate?
Are you willing to make yourself subject to such a system where something that dozens of children may or may not do during a few days determines your future life with no recourse?
Unless and until you can say an unequivocal “yes’ your liking of VAM and focusing on a pure, non-existent dream of its implementation is little more than an insulting rant.
LikeLike
How do you know teachers haven’t tried peer reviews? We’ve used them many times in my school along with video taping our lessons to be viewed by other teachers and administrators. So my question to you is are you a teacher? Doesn’t sound like it.
LikeLike
It may be junk science and no doubt it is but it accomplished its goal: The end of tenure.
LikeLike
You mean the end of due process. Not a single K-12 teacher has tenure in the USA.
LikeLike
That is right. K-12 teachers never had “lifetime employment.” All “due process” is, if a teacher uses it, which few do, is just an extra step in the process of getting rid of teachers administrators don’t want.
LikeLike
OK, but 2999 out of 3000 is pretty darn close, wouldn’t you say? It’s a distinction without a difference.
LikeLike
Proper word usage helps to eliminate those “distinctions without a difference”.
And in this case “due process” is completely different than “tenure”.
LikeLike
I’ve argued in the past that we should not use “tenure”. Forgot myself and should remember to ONLY use “due process” in every conversation.
LikeLike
My (NY) constitution is not exactly helpful on the subject; I believe it says that the state will provide for the education of all students without saying what the means.
I guess if I lived in Missouri, I’d be trying to change the state constitution. A “general diffusion of knowledge and intelligence” and “gratuitous instruction” certainly say nothing about outcomes nor much about the purpose.
I see that the Missouri Constitution was written in 1820 in only 38 days. Does this date from that original?
Not to take away from all of the deep philosophical discussions that might have occurred during the 3 hours that I’m sure were spent on Article IX, subsection 1A, but I would hardly use that as the measure of the purpose of public education.
LikeLike
Sorry, that last belonged on a different thread. Yes, “due process” is completely different from “tenure” in theory and meaning.
But, from the perspective of what’s good for students, a dismissal rate of .001 is the distinction without a difference.
Tell me in what meaningful way “due process” is different from tenure in how it affects students. The difference between 1 out of 3000 and 0 out of 3000 may be huge for teachers, but is negligible for students.
I don’t deny that the freedom from teachers being arbitrarily dismissed is a benefit to students to the degree that it attracts and retains great teachers. But, from that perspective, is the way we do “due process” in practice a net benefit to students? IMO, hardly.
LikeLike
jpr,
Not sure where you get the dismissal rates of .001 or 1/3000.
In my twenty years of being in two different public schools I’ve seen a number of teachers who weren’t up to snuff dismissed/counseled to leave. Teaching as a profession has a fairly large “dismissal/exiting rate” for beginning teachers as much as 50% in the first five years meaning that most teachers who have more experience than that have been through a fairly tedious vetting process by that time. I’ve yet to see a teacher who wasn’t doing his/her job be allowed to stay on no matter how many years experience.
I just don’t see the “problem” that you are saying exists.
LikeLike
I don’t believe jpr is a teacher. I do believe he has some connection to “reformers”. His facts seem to come out of thin air.
LikeLike
No, I’m not a teacher. I started a successful charter school and continue on the Board. In short, I’m one of the people who tries to create policy that represents the best interests of our students, the most important of which are those related to finding and retaining the best teachers.
Duane, would you share some of the demographics of your school? I’m glad your experience has been that teachers who aren’t getting the job done were not allowed to stay. My experience has been different. I think a lot has to do with the individual school and school district.
Michael, I’m not talking about instances of review types here and there. I think teachers need to come up with some kind of meaningful rubric that can be public. I don’t want to know about individual teachers, but I want to know that a system is in place to identify teachers that need assistance and get them coaching and development. I want to know that every teacher has goals for how to be more effective and is making progress on those goals.
My whole point here is that what politicians and much of the public want to see is accountability. Teachers can develop those accountability plans and measures *if* they take control of the situation and make it happen.
That hasn’t happened. IMO, that’s why crappy evaluation systems are being forced on the teaching profession. Digging in and saying that any evaluation is worthless, that there is no way to determine teacher effectiveness, getting kids to opt out of tests, etc. is going to make this much worse, not better. The notion of accountability won’t go away. Teachers can work to make measures as appropriate as possible and to make assessments broader and more meaningful. But if they don’t engage, it won’t make those things go away. It will make education departments create systems and assessments that they won’t like.
LikeLike
jpr: Two points about charters and VAM. First, most charter teachers don’t stay around long enough to get a VAM score. Two, many state laws exempt charters from teacher evaluation that is imposed on public schools. Accountability as presently defined is a hoax meant to demoralize teachers and to harm public schools. If it was such a great idea, why are we the only nation in the world measuring teacher effectiveness by test scores? At some point, jpr, you should read the research. It is devastating and it does not support VAM.
LikeLike
I disagree that accountability as implemented is “a hoax meant to demoralize teachers”. I acknowledge that many of the implementations have that effect, but I don’t see that being the purpose.
To what end would someone demoralize teachers on purpose? I imagine you’ll say to get teachers to perform poorly which will then generate more support of charter schools, or something like that. I just don’t see some kind of grand plan like that at work.
What I do see is teachers (and I mean the profession at large) saying that there is no way to differentiate between teachers that need a lot of improvement and those that don’t. The general public just does not believe that to be true.
I think there is a need to measure how schools and teachers are doing at giving students what they need. Isn’t that understandable at that level? Then, the question comes down to how to do it.
I think the current poor evaluation systems are a response to a vacuum. The profession has largely avoided tackling this issue and is now reaping the unfortunate results.
I honestly believe that fighting the notion of accountability and being against everything, but for nothing, will make this worse before it makes it better.
As for why we are the only nation in the world measuring teacher effectiveness by test scores? I think we also lead the word in the contentiousness of our management/labor relationships. I just don’t see leadership and teachers in district schools working together to determine what’s best of students. I see it all of the time in high performing charters.
When I see a teacher struggling to teach concepts to the point of understanding in the majority of their students, I know that teacher needs assistance. If they’re willing to work at improving, we give them lots of resources to do so. For the most part, those that we ask to leave (and it’s few; nobody wants to lose teachers that we’ve invested in) do so because they aren’t willing to put in the effort to improve.
Now that I’ve mentioned that, I think there are some parallels between this and the larger school and District level. I think the public sees school systems that aren’t putting in the effort to improve. The biggest District near me has a K-8 school with a zero percent passing rate in 8th grade, but when I ask what initiatives they are doing to improve this, I get blank stares. They are trying absolutely nothing that might move that needle.
At some point, some terrible outcome will befall that school. It will be closed and that will be detrimental to the community in many ways. But it can’t be allowed to continue for decades churning out students that are destined for failure in the real world. And there doesn’t seem to be any recognition of this being unacceptable nor any effort to change it. That’s what breeds top down forced accountability systems.
LikeLike
JPR: states are using accountability systems not to support teachers, not to inform teachers, not to improve teaching, but to punish teachers. There is a massive outflow of teachers from the profession. They are being replaced by young teachers who will not remain in what used to be a profession but is increasingly becoming a job. This drives down the cost of teachers by getting rid of veterans, and it drives now future pension costs. But it doesn’t improve education. Some think that churn is good, but I don’t know of any parent or teacher who agrees.
LikeLike
I agree that states are using these systems this way and I think it’s extremely unfortunate and detrimental to the profession.
But, I think accountability plans have to exist and are a reasonable expectation on the part of the public. My point is that the teaching profession isn’t creating it, nor even negotiating such systems in good faith. The result is terrible systems being forced on them.
Appropriate evaluation used to coach and improve teaching elevates the profession. A “job” is something that you show up to each day to take home a paycheck. A “profession” involves continuous improvement, seeking best practices, etc. Teacher contracts and management/labor relations are all about the “job” aspect; how many hours get worked doing what, etc.
Teachers, like charter schools, could trade flexibility to implement their own systems for accountability on whether those systems work. Accountability requires flexibility since you can’t hold someone accountable for something they have no control over. On the other hand, without this accountability/flexibility trade off, you get strict rules and inflexible top-down proscription of exactly what needs to be done, coupled with top-down assessment. Not a good place.
LikeLike
Let’s see how the latest EduCraze is inextricably linked to VAManiacal schemes.
[start quote]
In truth, the idea that the Common Core might be a “game-changer” has little to do with the Common Core standards themselves, and everything to do with stuff attached to them, especially the adoption of common tests that make it possible to readily compare schools, programs, districts, and states (of course, the announcement that one state after another is opting out of the two testing consortia is hollowing out this promise).
But the Common Core will only make a dramatic difference if those test results are used to evaluate schools or hire, pay, or fire teachers; or if the effort serves to alter teacher preparation, revamp instructional materials, or compel teachers to change what students read and do. And, of course, advocates have made clear that this is exactly what they have in mind. When they refer to the “Common Core,” they don’t just mean the words on paper–what they really have in mind is this whole complex of changes.
[end quote]
Link: http://deutsch29.wordpress.com/2013/12/28/the-american-enterprise-institute-common-core-and-good-cop/
From an articulate and genuine insider of the “education reform” movement: Dr. Frederick Hess of the American Enterprise Institute.
Game, set, match, to dianeravitch.
😎
LikeLike
jpr
In most cases, the presence of ineffective or incompetent teachers can be blamed on weak and ineffective administrators. They read the resumes, they conduct the interviews, they vet the applicants, they make the hires, AND they have three years of direct and indirect observation to determine if any particular teacher should earn strong (and necessary) due process rights. And they have within their authority many options, other than dismissal, to either help support weak teachers or ways to make their working conditions rather uncomfortable. Most principals are simply lacking in management skills. Besides, principals also know that, despite what many non-educators seem to think, there is not some large pool of superstar teachers in hiding, just waiting for their chance. Highly effective teachers just chomping at the bit, ready willing and able to swoop in and save the day once those ineffective teachers are finally given their pink slips. Effective teaching requires a very complex and nuanced skill set that can only be fully developed after years of trial and error in the trenches. Expecting most teachers to be above average is simply unrealistic. Another over-looked factor is that many experienced teachers were hired and earned their due process rights well before the profession was put under a public microscope. The scrutiny that we are witnessing now, just wasn’t there when many of the current force of veteran teachers were hired.
LikeLike
NY teacher,
“In most cases, the presence of ineffective or incompetent teachers can be blamed on weak and ineffective administrators.”
I agree 100%. Even good administrators don’t have time (or even perhaps the skill) to evaluate teacher. They get to the end of the probationary period and have to decide whether to keep a teacher or take their chances with a new one. And, as you point out, the pool of applicants isn’t good, and most schools of education are not exactly centers of excellence nor best practices.
I also acknowledge that many experienced teachers go their due process rights in a different world and deserve to keep them. As you said, the scrutiny wasn’t there then, but it is now, and I think the system needs to adapt.
I wish NYSUT would get out in front of this issue and develop a meaningful teacher development and evaluation rubric. One that shows whether a teacher is improving and yes, shows whether they are effective or on track to become effective, or if perhaps they are not. One that provides continuous coaching and goal setting to hone skills. And yes, one that takes student growth vs. projected or historical growth as one measure of whether the teacher is effectively getting students to understand the curriculum.
I think due process rights in general are important. I think that they have been taken overboard as implemented (e.g. union has final say on arbitrators, extremely long timelines). They need to be balanced against student’s rights to have competent teachers. It should not cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and a couple of years to dismiss a teacher who insults their students regularly or who reads magazine while the kids watch movies in class. Yes, these are *by far* the exception, but as has been pointed out by others, very few teachers use or need to use their due process rights. Many of the ones that do are an abuse of the system.
Protecting competent teachers from administrators who are making decisions based on inappropriate criteria is important. But, this system seems to do more to protect incompetent teachers, which brings the profession down. Arbitrariness and pettiness need to be protected against. Competence and inappropriate behavior should not be.
Sorry this ended up sounding a little preachy, and I didn’t intend it to be that way; especially since your post was quite thoughtful and respectful. IMO, almost all teachers need to be honored, respected, and paid more, but part of getting there is streamlining the methods by which developing teachers get effective coaching and those who won’t or can’t improve (preferably gracefully) leave the profession.
LikeLike
jpr
One aspect of the teacher evaluation issue that I find quite surprising is the reluctance of unions to support peer review. At the secondary level most teachers with specialized certification are routinely being observed by administrators with very little knowledge in our subject areas. This precludes being judged on one very important aspect of instructional effectiveness: knowledge and understanding of our disciplines and the ability to convey that knowledge accurately and in interesting or challenging ways. Independent peer review teams could be formed by NYSED using retired teachers that have no inherent bias that would normally exist between colleagues..
LikeLike
I agree 100% and I’m not sure what the politics of that are. As I’ve said elsewhere, I think accountability systems are inevitable (and IMO a reasonable expectation of the public). If the profession (as represented by unions) doesn’t get out front to define the systems, lousy systems will be imposed. It’s certainly already happened in NY.
I honestly don’t think that the public or politicians care about the details of an evaluation system, they just want to know that one is in place and that it works to improve teaching and learning for the benefit of students.
To the best of my knowledge, the official position of most unions is to double down on fighting accountability instead of fixing it.
LikeLike
“I admit I don’t understand it.”–You’re not supposed to, that’s the idea.
“Many people don’t understand it.”–They’re not supposed to, that’s the idea.
“But whoever wrote it understands it.”–He/she may understand “it” but certainly does not understand what the teaching and learning process entails.
LikeLike
HEADLINE NEWS:
For the Umpteenth Time the Winner of the Annual “BAFFLE EM WITH BULLSHIT” Award goes to the VAM formula!
The winner said “Thanks, it’s been my life goal, now please go out and use it to get rid of all those shitty public school teachers”.
LikeLike
“What matters most is not quantifiable although peers and supervisors can indeed judge which teachers are best and worst.”
NO! Peers and supervisors cannot accurately and consistently judge who are the “best and worst”. They may opine on who is better or worse, but they will never come to an agreement on the superlatives “best” and “worst”. Any attempts to do so is as rife with error as VAM is.
LikeLike
Especially given how absolutely filthy the office politics is in public education.
“Peers and supervisors” often work in cahoots to scapegoat the “undesirables” who don’t brown nose the principals.
LikeLike
Which is why the Gates experiment on human subjects will take 10 years to measure an effect. The effect? His enhanced pocketbook at the expense of administrators, teachers, students, and parents. Why is VAM not used to measure the teachers in schools which the children of Gates, Obama, Rhee, and Duncan attend? That’s a rhetorical question, of course.
LikeLike
Supporters of VAM have been sold snake oil. So has USDE.
In a belated recognition that NO evidence supports the teacher evaluation policies it has foisted on states, USDE had decided to commission a study for the purpose of getting “rigorous” evidence on whether the evaluation systems called for in federal policy have their intended effects on teacher and leader performance and student achievement.
This five-year, $16 million study of Teacher and Leader Evaluation Systems will be completed in 2017, long after teachers and principals in almost every state have endured the requirements of evaluation systems KNOWN to be unreliable and ineffective as means to improve educational outcomes. Some teachers have lost their jobs and more are being victimized by policies that Arne Duncan and President Obama publically endorse.
If the economy were stronger I think many more teachers would be leaving in droves.
It the legal system offered more protection for teacher speech and collective action, the levels of discontent would be far more visible than these rants in blog posts.
For information on USDE’s belated study, see: American Institutes of Research. (2012, February 23). AIR selected to conduct study measuring the impact of teacher and leader evaluation systems on student learning and performance. Press Release. Retrieved from http://www.air.org/news/index.cfm?fa=viewContent&content_id=1755
LikeLike
CT Attorney General George Jepsen has backed off on demanding all teacher evaluations due to bad press (and the fact it’s illegal), but Gov. Malloy now wants to back pedal on state funding of an already negotiated formula. That will save him $6 mill, but the poorest districts behind the eight ball.
I have known George Jepsen since high school, and over the years he’s sold himself as a liberal until he got the top job. Another Democratic turncoat.
LikeLike
Amazing. Though I’m concerned some commenters here are mis-using ‘privatization’ to mean anything they don’t like ( or the GOP/ extreme left claims is privatization). Don’t fall for it.
VAM is pseudo-science AND pseudo-privatization, and any private business or non-profit that began measuring its e.g. salespeople/fundraisers on what they didn’t produce would be out of business quick.
At a time when students are using things like Sudbury techniques to set their own goals and develop individualized programs, teachers need to be free focus on using their training and being facilitators and professionals more then ever IMHO, not distracted by this one-size-fits-all VAM pseudo-measurement.
LikeLike
Interesting. You say “any private business or non-profit that began measuring its e.g. salespeople/fundraisers on what they didn’t produce would be out of business quick.”
You’re 100% correct.
Often we hear the claim that the “reformers” are bringing to the education world techniques that the business world uses.
Bah Humbug!
I work in private industry, for a big nasty corporation everyone loves to hate. (What can I say? It’s a living.) And yeah, every year we have to fill out “goals” and we’re coached about making our goals quantifiable, so they can be measured. Supposedly this has a lot of relevance to our compensation and advancement.
But you know what? It’s all bullshit. Any manager who has to rely on these “metrics” is a lousy manager. Our managers are not that stupid. A decent manager knows who his productive employees are. If he doesn’t, metrics won’t help him. And so, our “goals” go in one ear, out the other, and after due lip service is paid, nobody thinks about them again.
In the private sector, the real measuring stick is the profitability of the corporation. Education is not a business, you don’t have that measuring stick. But that doesn’t mean we have to (or can) invent an unreal measuring stick to measure what is important. And that’s what the “reformers” are doing.
LikeLike
From a past post by Alan Jones:
This is the central problem (tragedy) with treating education as a production/manufacturing industry instead of a coping organization (what organizational theorists call education). The goal of a production industry is to reduce variation in processes in order to manufacture a product that customers are certain will perform according to expectations/specifications. In a coping organization you are confronted with uncertain inputs, uncertain processes, and uncertain outcomes. Added to the inability to control inputs, processes, and outcomes, what parents are looking for in schools are instructional programs that increase variation in outcomes—further develop the unique abilities, talents, and interests of their children. For this reason, as Deming attempted to point out, but which our school leadership and political class still don’t understand, is that managing a production industry and managing a school require entirely different set of intellectual and organizational tools. Not understanding the fundamental differences between manufacturing and educating is the reason that all the intellectual and organizational tools—merit base, standards, standardized testing, curriculum alignment—that the Duncan’s, Rhee’s, are implementing will fail, and in fact will result in the dysfunctional outcomes Deming describes in his books—cheating, drop outs, early exiting of teachers, etc. I would add, that the set of intellectual and organizational tools that school leaders require to lead a coping organization—schools—are not taught at all in administrative certification programs. I do provide a full description of these skills in my book: Becoming A Strong Instructional Leaders: Saying No to Business as Usual (Teachers College Press; Amazon and Kindle books).
LikeLike
Here is my formula for VAM…BS squared minus 2(common sense) cubed = |rsvp| (aka the absolute value of rick snyders vicious plan)
LikeLike
The notion that we as teachers are somehow loath to develop the metrics for our accountability…I guess there’s two battles. As a CTU member, I was proud to strike against VAM being anything but a minor part of my evaluation. However, I won’t join this slate for among other reasons their too soft approach on teachers who can’t or won’t improve. I’m looking for a slate who are more for accountability, but not to deformed or time-sucking and complicated metrics such as The Danielson Method. Some of those descriptors would require a regular parade of classroom observations, which we all know don’t happen in today’s edu management world.
I was at my cousin’s wake recently, he was a circuit court judge. I asked in line if one had to pass the bar or be a lawyer in order to be a judge or assoc. judge, to which I got incredulous “duh!” type answers from both behind and in front!
LikeLike
Yes, exactly. In the absence of effective systems, preferably created by teachers, ineffective and even detrimental systems have been created. The only solution I see is to develop alternatives that take into consideration the needs of students and schools.
Fighting accountability is not going to work. More teachers will become demoralized. More great teachers will leave teaching. Fewer potentially great teachers will enter the field.
IMO, teachers need to embrace and define accountability in meaningful ways. As I’ve mentioned before, a system of coaching and development for improving teachers, coupled with a way of exiting those who won’t or can’t improve, would help. It needs to be created by teachers but needs to be developed with the needs of students and schools as a factor.
Everyone knows what teachers are against. What are they for when it comes to methods to effectively develop teachers and remove those that aren’t excelling or improving?
LikeLike
Looks like a weighted measure. One would assume since it is the sum of four quantities they all count for 25%?
One- school / grade demographics, more points for student in bad demographics or harder grades.
Two- student test scores, improvement relative to all the tests they have taken previously.
Three – mumbo jumbo, student gets more points for what exactly? Having quantified bad teachers and bad schools?
Four – variable ei not defined.
In conclusion, it looks like for student scores yti, half the score is based on coming from a bad environment.
So where is the variable for the teacher score? An average of the student scores?
Looks like a bunch of integral signs and vector math based on simplistic and wrong assumptions.
LikeLike
Two other things come to mind looking at this, what’s your vector victor?, and I picked a bad day to stop sniffing glue.
LikeLike
PARENTS EVERYWHERE: If your local school district is planning for your children to be administered a Standardized test for the benefit of Bill Gates, Apple Computers,and all the other Ed Materials Publishers, Keep them home from school on the day of the test and have them read a good book. The 3-8 hours wasted on testing becomes their UNPAID JOB for wasting their time with mind-numbing tests on that day and the benefactors should be paying the kids for their effort. As an alternative, you might want to coach them to supply blank answers to every question that they are asked including the personal/family questions. There are ways to beat Arnie Duncan and his business “Cronies.” These tests DO NOT affect their school grades and performance. Please don’t let them affect your children or the teaching staff at their schools. ERASE Common Core from every school’s chalkboards.
LikeLike
Yes, and by all means, throw away their textbooks too because they also benefit those companies. Oh, and don’t put them on the bus. Oh, and don’t let them eat lunch at school.
Please explain to me how a standardized test benefits Bill Gates. Then explain to me how knowing how your student and your school are doing relative to peers in your state is useless.
The idea that opting out of tests hurts Bill Gates and helps your child just isn’t credible. It is completely transparent that teachers wanting to avoid being measured by student progress is 95% of the impetus behind opt out.
This is doing a disservice to children who are struggling with concepts at school. Instead of working with them on them, we can blame the standards and don’t have to worry about the children. By all means, give them a B and promote them to become next year’s teacher’s problem, all while complaining about how unprepared the students that you’re getting from earlier years are.
Lots of public schools are finding that their students are able to grasp these concepts. They’re reading material that even their teachers expected them to have trouble understanding. These schools and teachers are taking on Common Core as a challenge to making the curriculum more rigorous.
Sure, Common Core needs some adjustment, especially for SE students and ELL students, and I can even see opting out of the tests for those students until that is adjusted. But widespread opt out by General Ed students is a cop out.
Great for everyone involved except for the student.
LikeLike
JPR, inform yourself about data mining. Inform yourself about Gates’ passionate belief that every problem can be solved by measuring it. Bill Gates is not out to make a buck. He is interested in creating an entity to collect every piece of data possible about our (my and your) children so that he can solve “their” problem. I want him to butt out of my grandchildren’s lives.
LikeLike
I’m quite aware of data mining and agree that we need to be vigilant about privacy and adherence to FERPA. But, please don’t imply that data mining is a bad thing in itself.
As for solving things by measuring them, it is an important first step in almost every bit of scientific research. Why does it not apply here? There are certainly aspects of teaching that are art, but most of it, especially in early years, is science and practice, true?
Yes, it sounds absurd to count the number of times that a teacher checked for understanding during a lesson, and the difference between 4 and 6 is meaningless. But the difference between 0 and 6 *is* meaningful. And the identification of that as a useful metric predictive of outcomes is also useful.
Certainly there are skills and practices that most effective teachers have that most ineffective teachers do not have. Is it wrong to identify those and try to improve them? I’m as glad to have the Gates Foundation studying effective teaching in this country as I am to have them battling malaria, polio and HIV. Conspiracy theories don’t change that for me. It seems GF was embraced until they started talking about teacher quality and class sizes.
LikeLike
VAM: The Scarlet Letter. A talk given to the School Board of Palm Beach County.
LikeLike