Wendy Lecker has advice for parents: if you want to know how your child is doing, ask the teacher. Don’t rely on standardized tests. The teachers sees his or her work daily, the teacher knows more than the test reveals
She writes:
“Even standardized college placement tests, tests ostensibly designed to measure “college readiness,” fail miserably at that task — with real and damaging consequences for students.
“College remediation is often used as a weapon by education reformers. Overstating college remediation rates was one of the tactics used by Arne Duncan to foment hysteria about the supposedly sorry state of America’s public schools and justify imposing the Common Core and its accompanying tests nationwide. As retired award-winning New York principal Carol Burris has written, while Duncan and his allies claimed that the college remediation rate is 40 percent, data from the National Center on Education Statistics show that the actual percentage is 20 percent.
“Exaggeration is not the only problem with college remediation. Many of the students placed in remedial classes in college do not even belong there.
Researchers have found that one-quarter to one-third of students in college remedial courses were wrongly assigned.
“Once again, non-standardized, human assessments of a student’s learning are more helpful than standardized tests.”
Lecker concludes:
“The key to ensuring and determining college readiness is clearly not high-stakes error-prone standardized tests. If politicians really want to understand how to prepare our children for college, maybe they should try a new — for them- approach and consult experts with a great track record of knowing what makes kids college-ready. Maybe they should ask some teachers.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
This is an important point and a battle worth waging. Parents and communities should never outsource their critique of their teachers or their schools. This is in conflict with a relentless, profit driven campaign to monetize every element of education. Teachers, generally, are way too reluctant to engage parents in conversations about the political/economic forces behind testing and ratings. We should be encouraging parents to trust their own eyes and ears.
Diane, so let’s just trust the teachers? True story. Parent walks into classroom two months after school begins at parent night. Parent asks teacher if parent can supplement school assignments because student is bored out of her mind. Teacher says no need to worry because the student is just “middle of the pack” and finishes assignments with everyone else. Parent asks teacher if she reviewed the student’s aptitude scores. Teacher says no because she doesn’t want to be “biased”.
Turns out student had scored in the 99%+ on two aptitude tests. Student skipped kindergarten yet achieved the highest grade on the DRA given at the beginning of first grade (she previously attended just a 3-day/wk preschool for 3 hrs each time). Student would later achieve the highest scores on the statewide tests in the third grade (SOLs). Even the “gifted resource teacher” could not identify the student. Principal and teacher relented once objective evidence was shown shortly after that first conversation but still would not allow parent to supplement.
Bottom line is many teachers have no clue! How could they when so many score so poorly on their own aptitude tests. If not for these tests, students would be stuck in “teacher’s pet” contests. That is even more devastating for boys.
First, the plural of anecdote is not data. Second, there is no such thing as an “aptitude” test. You have yet to explain to me, if these tests do measure “aptitude”, how it is that students of color consistently score lower on them. If your argument is that students of color have less aptitude than white students, please go ahead and make that argument – own it. If that’s not your argument, then explain.
virginiasgp, I have two children and two grandchildren. If I want to know how they are doing in school, I trust(ed) their teachers, not a standardized test.
virginiasgp, if a loved one had surgery, would you check on him or her by talking to the doctor or by reading the statistics for the hospital?
Virg, your story is very fishy. First, why would a parent “ask permission” to “supplement” the child’s learning, whatever that means, and how could it be denied ? So, that for starters sounds like a “this didn’t happen” thing. Second, as others have said, there is no such thing as an “aptitude” test (period).
Third, and this I think is most important: I teach “honors” and “gifted” kids (upper level math and science, meaning AP / Dual credit classes). This is a very misleading label. What it often means is “high processing speed”. This is not a good thing when kids get older. I mean, it is never bad to be smart, but kids who have bought into this giftedness or “high aptitude” game do not do well in higher classes. Once the “pattern spotting” piece wears off in usefulness, they’ve got nothing. I suppose you won’t agree, just out of stubbornness (I’ve seen a few other posts of yours in other places), but if your kids are still small, I am just trying to let you know — you’re not that special. Teachers have seen all of this before. Many times.
I have four “at-home” children. My husband and I are both teachers. We’ve let our kids make their own way through school — no second-guessing teachers, no judgments about how smart our kids are. Our plan has worked very, very well.
Of course, we live and work in a time and place where “education reform” has yet to rear its ugly head….
You say “many teachers have no clue”. Maybe where you live, education reform has taken over, and the good teachers have flown the coop (I would) — where I live, teachers are super-smart, super-well-informed and great role scholar-leaders for kids…
One of my children is highly gifted in mathematics and found the math courses in his high school stifling precisely because they were always all about pattern recognition and computation, not mathematics. It was not until we sent him to our local university to take his mathematics classes that he flourished as a mathematician.
This is a reply to TE. So, your child’s mathematics courses in high school were all about “pattern recognition” and “computation” and that was stifling, and your child flourished as a mathematician in college. I get that. Bear in mind that your high school teacher can do NOTHING about the curriculum / standards / assessments — those are dictated to him/her — by the fed/state/assessment writers triumvirate. The only exception is for example, teachers doing dual credit classes in a high school (like me). And the university that grants our college credit has been “reform” in its mathematics curriculum for a long time now (“reform” in this context means something entirely different than “reform” in K-12) — the point is, that the university professors/teachers have absolute freedom in their curricular decisions, while most high school teachers have zero freedom.
I haven’t followed you much lately, TE, and if others know who you are, what your politics are or where you work, I don’t. But if you want high school math instruction to improve, you’ve got to work on getting more freedom to local districts and teachers, get rid of the common core straightjacket entirely, free teachers from the pressures related to ACT and other mindless tests (bear in mind the vast majority of the ACT math is middle school level or lower and if kids don’t remember it, that’s because they don’t use it and that’s partly a function of high school curriculum that teachers don’t control), give them time to collaborate with other teachers to create meaningful assignments that use mathematics in meaningful ways….
Mom,
The main problem with reforming mathematics education is that there will never be a large enough majority of parents in a school district to allow reform to happen. This is one reason that school choice seems like a good idea in areas with a high enough density of students. If parents can choose a building, the faculty in that building will end up with more freedom to teach the way some in the community desire.
A small correction though. My son flourished when taking classes at the local university while still enrolled in high school. We do not have any dual credit program, but he was able to enroll as a special student and easily had enough credits to graduate from the high school without those high school classes.
MomintheMidwest, are you serious? The PISA tests measure applied skills and we do not do well on those. My “highly rated” district claimed to score well but when compared with similar districts underperformed.
Remember that math SAT? The one you probably claim is just a bunch of memorization? The formulas are all in the front! I’ve never used a calculator on a math test in my life. I would be shocked if you could score above a 20 on any college math test I took. Hint: they were graded on a curve and the mean was about 70. Our students are woefully prepared for life. They cannot understand marginal anything. Teachers can’t even distinguish between achievement and growth scores.
You may like humanities classes because A’s are easy but STEM class bring lasting income.
Another reply to TE: You say “reform” in math won’t happen because parents won’t allow it to (and that choice would allow it to happen, at least in areas populous enough to support choice) — but in my experience, “reform” in math can happen just as soon as you allow the teachers professional autonomy. It would happen organically in that way. I don’t want to judge my brothers and sisters in the elementary trenches unfairly — or at all, that isn’t my profession — but if we all showed a little more patience and respect for teachers, I do think we would get results that are even better than with choice — and it wouldn’t depend on having a “large enough” population either…
I think I understood your story about your son — I’ve had kids who went to local colleges to take Calc 3 their senior year (we don’t offer Calc 3 at our high school). And I help former students who are in Calc 3 and Adv Calc in college — college instruction isn’t always better, and is often worse — but they do have more autonomy than we do, and I still think that is a good thing.
Mom,
I am not nearly as optimistic as you are. This is not a recent problem: after all, Lockhart’s lament was written in 2002, so it hardly reflects recent changes in public school. I don’t see enough parents allowing real mathematics to be taught in a school district to get the local school board to teach mathematics the way that mathematicians understand the subject. I should add that I think the problem also exists in the calculus sequence at most universities, where calculus is taught for engineering students rather than mathematics students.
For my son it was not so much the quality of the instruction but the depth of mathematical understanding of the instructor that was important. My son’s first instructor at the university was a senior Ph.D. graduate student. The instructor of his final mathematics course (a Ph.D. course in abstract algebra) when he was in high school student was a full professor. These were the people who could finally answer his questions about what was being taught in the class, and how they related to the more abstract concepts that he was learning on his own.
Virginia SGP,
For the record, many students in Japan and South Korea don’t have as much self-esteem as students in North America, despite the fact both nations are well ahead of US in PISA scores. They can belong to the right side of bell curve if they are lucky enough to born to middle & upper middle income family. If they were born to working class family, parents of migrants, immigrants, out of wedlock, or whatever, they typically fall into the latter half or the bottom of bell curve.
I have never heard any story that high PISA scores have enriched student social well-being whatsoever.
For everyone of your teacher-bashing “true stories”, there are 1000 unheard, meaningful encounters of teachers and parents. Bottom line is you have no clue. But you do make an argument for smaller class sizes.
Diane, a dear friend contracted leukemia (CML). The initial doctors merely suggested some standard treatments which had countless negative side effects (unable to bear children, only lasted 5-10 years, lots of pain, etc.). After conducting her own research, she learned about genomics in which treatments are patterned after one’s own DNA. A Johns Hopkins doctor assisted but it took a ton of persuasion to get the local doctor to go along with the process because he/she were clueless on genomics. Long story short is after a couple of sequences, the genomics worked so well that is suppressed all of the abnormal bone marrow cells and the leukemia was undetectable. In addition, during the course of the treatment, at least once the patient was prescribed conflicting drugs which would have definitely caused cardiac arrest. She had some medical training in college and was aware of the potential interactions and thus protested to the doctors/nurses. Lesson learned is trust but verify. Anybody who takes anyone’s “word” without conducting some basic research on their own is either incapable of verification (many of our disadvantaged families are in this boat and need assistance) or completely naive.
Diane, you may have great teachers for your kids and grandkids. My son’s K teacher was perhaps the best teacher I have ever seen. My other child’s teachers have been very spotty. The tests are a secondary measure (and sometimes primary one) to determine how accurate the teacher’s (admittedly self-interested) assessment is. For example, I love my dentist but am amused at how she always gushes over how “great” her work is upon completion. I can’t imagine a teacher ever saying, “you know what, I just didn’t teach very well this year”. When one does, call me and we’ll discuss unwavering trust in teachers.
MathVale, so let’s pull that string. The parent asked the principal if she would provide enrichment material to other students who scored high on such aptitude tests. She said no. No other parent in the classes were contacted about enrichment material. In fact, can anyone relay any district that uses aptitude tests (e.g. CogAT or NNAT) to adjust for student growth? This is a much fairer way to evaluate students and teachers.
Ok, so let’s look at Harvard’s own analysis of their incoming class. Do we really believe that the students with a 4.0 gpa and a 1700 SAT are on equal footing with the 4.0 gpa and 2300+ SATs? Of course not. The teachers of the 1700 SAT students were inflating grades and cannot be trusted.
And no, smaller class sizes are not what is needed. The classes in question were about 24 students per teacher. Two years before, the teacher failed to provide any math enrichment material either (“Sunshine math”, etc.). In fact, there was virtually no homework assigned at all. And this is in supposedly one of the “best” districts in Virginia. But that’s only if you measure using achievement scores. Once you consider growth a la VAM, Loudoun underperforms similar districts all across the US.
MomintheMidwest, yes, aptitude and IQ are proven traits of humans. It measures how quickly someone learns, not whether they understand “tricks”. The reason the parent wanted supplemental material provided was so that their kids did not become lazy and wouldn’t think that everything in school is “easy”. If my kids were placed in the same sports classes as LeBron James’ kids and James’ children were not allowed to master more challenging exercises, his kids would grow lazy and bored as well. For gifted kids, it’s important to be challenged and fail. It’s important to equate effort with achievement as opposed to just showing up and acing the tests. Without that additional material, these kids won’t learn that lesson till college. That is unfair. I use my own experience in K-12 to inform my views. My teachers were very cooperative, especially after the 7th grade Duke TIP tests. Let’s just say that many of your students are much more intelligent than you are. Given new material, those high-aptitude students will learn the material at a much faster rate than you can. If you can’t accept this fact, then I think you are merely proving my point.
Education reform hasn’t taken hold yet in my district or state. I am working on that.
Tim, thank you so much for that information. I would not have been able to prove that. It highlights the deceptiveness of those on here who claim that private schools NEVER administer the same tests even though they clearly do.
Ok, now off to golf with the kiddos.
virginiasgp, you do not trust teachers. While it is true that there are many less-than-stellar teachers out there, that doesn’t mean we should hand over control of all education to the companies who create standardized tests or fancy new management schemes. You are misguided in thinking the tests and businesspeople will do a better job for our kids.
The real solution to your teacher trust issue would be to improve the profession of teaching itself, through better teacher training programs, more opportunity for collaboration in the field, more respect, and more resource support. In other words, help teachers become better teachers, rather than strip away all their power and judgment (only to hand it to someone else who is further away from the students).
I do not completely trust teachers to do the right thing all the time just because they are a teacher, and I’m a teacher myself. I’ve had plenty of bad teachers in my life, and few great ones. It’s really hard to be a great teacher, and we need help. But attaching everything to standardized tests — if you are in a position to pay attention to what is happening — does not, and will not improve education. You may have good intentions, and you do have a good point in there somewhere with your worries, but you are wrong about the solution. If you really care about improving schools, you would be more open to considering different points of view than a complete trust of the cold standardized testing regime.
Finally, I’m baffled when you say class size isn’t an issue, since your gripe seems to be that students do not get enough individual attention and proper guidance. A contradiction in your stance, to say the least. You realize that the less students a teacher has, the more able the teacher will be to do the right thing for each student?
You cannot disregard everyone’s evidence, experience, and points of view, then expect us to take you seriously as someone who truly wants “quality education for all.” If you care about your kids, and the kids of others, you would do well to not be stuck to this idea that standardized tests and for-profit companies and crazy formulas can “measure” everything that is important in education. Are your ideas serving the students, or your own stuck agenda?
Ed Detective, fair points. I agree the administrators need to do so much more to help teachers. That means allowing teachers to see how other teachers instruct kids rather than being isolated in their classrooms all year. It means providing teachers with best-of-breed lesson plans (multiple per subject) to choose from. It means offering lessons learned about alternative ways to relay a concept to a child. In the Navy, we constantly had to study lessons learned so that we would not repeat them. And when we had an incident (even if relatively minor), we generated a lesson learned so that others might not repeat it. It means enforcing discipline and not allowing troublemakers free reign in teachers’ classrooms. It means grouping kids by ability level in some classes (math and reading) so that we don’t ask the impossible of teachers (instruct kids at all ability levels in the same class). Tracking would eliminate much of the need for individualized instruction since the kids in a given class would learn at about the same rate.
Just as Chetty/Friedman/Rockoff theorized that future measures would be invented that are more accurate than VAMs, I wish educators would simply apply accurate observations to teachers. I’m not saying 25% of teachers are ineffective. My guess is 10-15% but the VAMs are shooting for 3-5%. And yet schools and administrators consistently rate 1% as ineffective. In my district, not a single principal was rated ineffective! Are you kidding me?
The whole point of VAMs is that innovation comes from the teachers. The teachers are the single greatest influence on the kids. Far from wanting to replace teachers with computers, I want to recruit and retain more great teachers by telling candidates how much they will really earn and allowing great teachers to see rewards in 5-10 years as opposed to 25-30 years like today.
All I hear on this blog is how VAMs have no beneficial information whatsoever and all teachers should be trusted to be great. My district took $$$ from the feds to use growth measures and not only did they not use it in any way to evaluate teachers, they didn’t even provide the growth data for teachers to use themselves. They didn’t even download the data! That’s called defrauding the US government when you sign the dotted line assuring the feds you complied. Then, my district claims we are great because our affluent kids score well. But when you strip out SES, we are below average. Would you sit idly by and say we should raise teacher salaries (the same ones who are getting below average results) when our salaries are among the highest in the nation? Is there any accountability for the administrators whatsoever.
Given our salaries, we could literally increase class size, recruit all the best teachers away from other districts with even higher salaries, and have the highest performing district in the country. But my “pretender” district lives in ignorance. And the unions prevent any discussion of objective data whatsoever. And I am not disregarding everyone’s point of view. I have the exact same view as President Obama, Secretary Duncan, Bill Gates, Chetty/Friedman/Rockoff (Friedman testified on our behalf in Richmond), and countless others. I acknowledge that many don’t agree both on here and some in academia (Amrein-Beardsley, Rothstein, etc.). But it’s disingenuous to say that 1) there are not problems and 2) I am on an island of my own.
Contrary to the chairman of my school board who works for Dennis Bakke of Imagine, I want public schools to work. I don’t want my kids to go to private school or charters. But I want quality teachers. They don’t have to walk on water. But they have to be open to ideas and at least be marginally effective. I’m afraid many of our teachers are not. If you lose parents like me who actually want public schools to work, who will be left to support you beside teachers who have a ve$ted interest? Can’t you at least acknowledge that the “trust the teachers/administrators” policy is failing? If some other alternative were proposed other than simply throwing money at it, then maybe we could find common ground.
MomintheMidwest, what exactly is “college algebra”? I’m only familiar with algebra taught in the 8th grade and I’m pretty sure I’ve taken more math than you. Please elaborate. The kids I know breeze through math because it’s relatively straightforward. An essay, on the other hand, can literally expand to take up as much time as one is willing to devote. Just because so many of our kids don’t understand math, likely because they are taught by teachers who don’t truly understand the math they are teaching, doesn’t mean we should just drop math as a requirement. I do agree that humanities majors are essentially offering “math for dummies” so they can give high grades in those courses as well.
formercheesehead, they claimed they could provide enrichment. Then, the student went back to being bored out of their mind. And no other high-aptitude kids were told of the material because that would be “unfair” to the low-aptitude kids. Seriously. And while I have a general idea of how my children will test, I do not know their exact potential until I see the test results. A single test is not definitive, but multiple consistent scores are accurate.
“Tracking would eliminate much of the need for individualized instruction since the kids in a given class would learn at about the same rate.”
There is a lot of research showing that tracking is usually more harmful than beneficial. And if the classroom revolves around the teacher, then yes, tracking may be beneficial… But in a project-based, student-centered classroom — which is what we should move toward — students can collaborate on different items and are able to pursue a variety of topics and challenges. This diversity means they learn from each other during the process, as well as afterward when results are shared. A homogenized classroom, in this case, would actually mean lower quality learning. I would be fine if we disagree on this point, just know that your current view of tracking is not the only valid one.
“Just as Chetty/Friedman/Rockoff theorized that future measures would be invented that are more accurate than VAMs, I wish educators would simply apply accurate observations to teachers.”
This is still placing faith in a numeric formula built on faulty premises such as (1) teaching and learning can be quantified, and (2) the teacher is completely responsible for everything the students learn and do (which breaks down into further sub-components such as the effect of poverty on scores). I think pretty much all of us here on this blog would agree that we need “accurate observations” of teachers. But VAM, and similar types of formulas that may arise in the future based on the same faulty premises, are not that accurate observation we are seeking. An accurate observation would be more like a council of people with educational experience, supplemented by student and parent voices. We could call this “peer review.” Some kind of mathematical formula just misses the point of teaching and learning, and the more complex this formula gets, the further it will be removed from reality.
“The whole point of VAMs is that innovation comes from the teachers.”
That may be the intent, but it is not what happens in reality. A teacher can be extremely innovative with VAMs, and still receive a negative or mediocre evaluation. A teacher can lack any bit of innovative bone in their body, and still receive a great VAM evaluation. Why? Because VAMs innaccurately measure a change in test scores, not the ability to innovate or even teach effectively. Any formula tied to testing is tied to the fallacy of testing as a true measure of teaching and learning. Tests mostly just “measure” temporary recall of basic facts and skills, which is only one reason (cue Duane Swacker) any evaluation based on them is heavily flawed.
“The teachers are the single greatest influence on the kids.”
This statement is begging the question. You do know this point is hotly contended by many educational researchers, right? It is in no way a consensus.
“All I hear on this blog is how VAMs have no beneficial information whatsoever and all teachers should be trusted to be great.”
Researchers, including high-profile statistical organizations as well as people who created and worked on the formulas, have themselves stated that VAMs have no beneficial information and were not meant to be used for their current purpose. “Complete, unwavering trust” is not the answer, but teachers do need some level of trust if they are going to do a good job. And the better we restructure our teacher education programs and evaluation systems (away from things like VAM), the more we will be able to trust our teachers.
“And the unions prevent any discussion of objective data whatsoever.”
It depends on which union (and which people within the union) you are referring to, and what you mean by “objective data.” If you are talking about VAM, then I have explained why many of us oppose it, and it’s not for reasons of simple job security. It’s because it is not really “objective,” and by masquerading as “objective” it unfairly destroys teaching and learning. If you are talking about data such as the correlation of poverty and test scores, then I have seen many unions openly embrace data and its partial role in reform.
“And I am not disregarding everyone’s point of view. I have the exact same view as President Obama, Secretary Duncan, Bill Gates, Chetty/Friedman/Rockoff (Friedman testified on our behalf in Richmond), and countless others. I acknowledge that many don’t agree both on here and some in academia (Amrein-Beardsley, Rothstein, etc.). But it’s disingenuous to say that 1) there are not problems and 2) I am on an island of my own.”
We will agree that there are problems, but the people you claim to share views with are not educators or researchers (I don’t know a few of those names, but I see mostly politicians, economists, and philanthropists). Is that not a problem when you are forming educational views based on people who are not actually in the field? Is it really likely that educators and researchers don’t care about doing the right thing, or know how — but these other foreign bodies with less experience are more in the right? It would be greatly cynical to believe that those in the field of education are more in it for themselves than these other economists, politicians, and businesspeople are.
“I want public schools to work. I don’t want my kids to go to private school or charters. But I want quality teachers. They don’t have to walk on water. But they have to be open to ideas and at least be marginally effective. I’m afraid many of our teachers are not. If you lose parents like me who actually want public schools to work, who will be left to support you beside teachers who have a ve$ted interest? Can’t you at least acknowledge that the “trust the teachers/administrators” policy is failing? If some other alternative were proposed other than simply throwing money at it, then maybe we could find common ground.”
I agree with everything you said here, except the overstated $$ motive of teachers and that there are no other alternatives. The people who have ve$ted interests are typically not teachers, it is the people implementing VAM and standardized test reforms who are more likely to have the wrong priorities. “Letting teachers teach” — that is, leaving them alone in the classroom and letting them all do whatever they want — is not the answer. But it’s not either/or. There is some kind of middle ground where we can support educators, collaborate, give them a relative degree of autonomy and respect, and treat them fairly in the process. There have been a lot of alternatives proposed. The alternatives have to do with opening up a discussion for those who work in the field, not shutting it down. It has to do with giving teachers a voice in what they do, and letting them throw around new ideas — not putting tape over their mouths and tying them down to the absolute commands of “ve$ted interests” coming from outside the field.
I don’t find virginiasgp’s story to be so easy to dismiss as anecdote because that was me when my family moved. Back then we took Iowa Basic Skills tests every two years and I was always at the top of the school, 99th percentile across the board. New school, new teacher puts me in the lowest/slowest reading group. I had been reading since before I went to kindergarten; I read the same books as my sister, four years older. My mother came in to complain. Teacher took umbrage, but deigned to move me up one level. I got an early lesson in how people really are.
Virg –
I also question whether the story about the parent is complete – I can’t imagine a teacher who would say “No” to any kind of supplementation. I can, however, easily see a teacher saying, “That’s not necessary!” But if it were me, I’d add the most important phrase of all – “I think I know your child’s ability, but you know best of all!”
Virg, you said to me: “I would be shocked if you could score above a 20 on any college math test I took. Hint: they were graded on a curve and the mean was about 70.”
Maybe I wrote one of the tests you took ? I have a master’s degree in mathematics from a prestigious university (never did finish my doctorate but I did do some of the coursework) — I’m pretty good at math and have been teaching college level math courses since the 1980s. [Fun fact: I took the college admissions tests before calculators were invented.]
So, um, you’re just wrong. I followed your other thing — you’re trying to get teacher’s students’ test scores published in Virginia, huh ? — you just stay put, but if you do come here, I think you will find us worthy opponents….it is an interesting legal question: does the public have the right to know this ? If they do, do the teachers have the right to force the knowledge to include the ways in which kids are assigned to classes (hint: it ain’t random) ? If they do, and particularly in the lower grades as to this point, how in the world are we going to protect students’ privacy ? The law of large numbers comes into play here too, again, especially for the lower grades….This is quite the Pandora’s box you are proposing to open — from a legal standpoint. All so you can brag publicly about your own supposed test-taking prowess ? [spoiler alert: you would be surprised at how few people are impressed by it].
You don’t seem to understand the notion of memorizing procedures vs. formulas — if you had a higher understanding of math, you would be able to follow this — it’s OK. If you can’t understand that the PISA results don’t mean _____, or maybe they just mean that our percentage of poverty is too high….what they don’t mean is “what you said”.
Just re-read your comment to me: you must be feeling a little vicious today — but as to your comment that I must like humanities because it’s easy A’s …. my degrees are all in math and “hard” sciences (think physics and chemistry). For me, those things are a little easier than humanities….or maybe I just find them more interesting ? but I don’t think it’s fair or accurate for you to make this characterization. And the STEM shortage ? It’s more propaganda — not real. People learn about those things in humanities classes — kind of a must-do these days.
Addendum to Virg — College Algebra is the name of the college course that is the single most prevalent college-credit bearing course that college students in the midwest are likely to have been required to take in order to get their bachelor’s degree. What it is beyond that depends on the institution — most of the elite private schools have tried to come up with something more useful, and some others have just modified their own curriculum without changing the name — but in general, it is “all of the alg 2 and ‘fourth course’ math found in common core plus a little more detail in things like conic sections and rational functions / partial fractions, that sort of thing”.
I doubt if you have taken more math than I have. Since you’re in Virginia, you don’t have “common core” but it isn’t that different from what it replaced anyway. Every high school in America has algebra, not just in the 8th grade. One good way to do it is offering a second algebra course for 9th or 10th graders, some geometry sometime, whether embedded or separate, then “math analysis” or “precalculus” then calculus (that’s how we do it), so kids can have one or two years of calculus in high school (if they want it, it isn’t required). Sometimes a College Algebra course is offered for dual credit also (we do).
And I don’t know what humanities majors are doing, but I do know some engineering schools that teach their majors all the math themselves (engineering faculty) because they do not like what the math departments do. I can understand this — many college math departments teach math as a series of desultory procedures completely devoid of context.
If math is “breezed through”, it might be because it is presented that way, which does make it easier, but a lot of kids / people (including me) don’t find it interesting that way and just don’t want to do it. So I understand that.
I’ve got over 40 credit hours of graduate-level mathematics courses beyond my bachelor’s degree. I had to study real mathematics at a high level — even write papers ! to get my advanced degree….that’s the right way to do it.
Ok, MomintheMidwest, I re-read my comments as well. And while I’m not sure I would retract anything I said as untrue, it was unnecessarily vicious and I apologize. As a math teacher, you are one that we want to engage in our schools. Let me explain a little bit more.
Look, it doesn’t really matter what one’s background is. I like to say that if a kindergartener has a great idea, I’m buying. But yes, I do know what I’m talking about with the PISA. Look at this report showing that among the affluent, we still rank 28th out of 34 countries in math: “Overall, the U.S. proficiency rate in math (35 percent) places the country at the 27th rank among the 34 OECD countries that participated in the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA). That ranking is somewhat lower for students from advantaged backgrounds (28th) than for those from disadvantaged ones (20th).”. I was surprised when I first learned this from…. Michelle Rhee. I heard her on the radio saying that our affluent parents would be shocked to learn we are not the best. I looked it up and she was right. In my school district (claims to be the third richest county in the nation based on household income), our results compared to similar students are abysmal. Look through the full reports here or the paired down one I prepared for trial with the key charts. Bottom line is we are unbelievably overconfident in our abilities largely because a lot of foreign students have come to our shores and started companies. Without those foreign born entrepreneurs, our economy would be much weaker.
I love to hear teachers on here say that it’s crazy to ask a math teacher to teach history. Or to ask a science teacher to teach English. Yet, our elementary teachers teach every single subject through the fifth grade. Most education majors took that route partly because they did not enjoy math (or perform well in it). They simply don’t understand why CC asks them to teach topics in a certain way (often visually/conceptually). They ask why can’t they teach it like they’ve always taught it even though our students’ knowledge is both poor and shallow. How can you explain why most STEM majors teach math the exact same way as CC without ever seeing the curriculum? Maybe if we hired STEM teachers to teach elementary school, but given we are asking these folks to teach math, we must have some oversight into how math is taught.
I seriously don’t know what “college algebra” is even after you tried to explain it. The entry level course at engineering schools is calculus. As far as I can tell, our high schools are not teaching trig/pre-calc well enough so there must be some remedial math before students can take real college courses. And even then, most of these students don’t continue into calculus. I would prefer that we teach more practical math (exponential growth/decay for financial literacy, marginal rates of change for business acumen, etc.), but that’s for another day. I am not saying that math should be taught without any context. STEM majors understand the systems to which math is applied (velocity/accel/mechanics, acoustics, electrical circuits, etc.) and can teach math in context. I just don’t understand how an education major who never had to apply math can relay those analogies.
I simply want my district to use the VAMs to evaluate teachers and recognize the best. You can’t take federal money via an ESEA waiver, promise to distribute and use SGPs, never even download them, and then keep parents from seeing the information. That is what is happening in Virginia. I’m surprised more states aren’t miffed that Virginia completely defrauded the feds when other states had to comply. If my district had used the SGPs for even 1% of the evals, then the SGPs would likely have been confidential at the teacher level. None of the districts (as far as I can tell) even downloaded the data from the state!
Lastly, Diane’s readers can confirm that I never give any specifics about my background. I gather some have looked me up on Facebook. Given that I have to sign my name on the lawsuits, my anonymity doesn’t exist. I use a handle because kids love the little birdie and it focuses on the issues, not the person. I can relay that countless students scored a 40 on our professors’ tests. These were not commoditzed tests but written by each prof. They typically had 3 questions on each. If you didn’t understand how to apply the principle we learned in class, you basically received 0 points for that question. Even if you understood the principle, you might still make an error in the process. Note that more than half of the students were either valedictorian or salutatorian in their high school classes (I’m sure many of you can figure out the school by now). When we did not take math/engineering classes, but took joint econ/business classes in our minors (such as prob or statistics), it was disappointing if we scored less than 95. This is one reason I don’t put much stock in GPAs predicting college success. There is incredible self-selection going on in college.
Ed-Detective, you are incorrect on tracking. See this section at Duke’s TIP program on why tracking is useful (or here for another article). For the CogAT test, see this explanation for how the most advanced students should be taught by choosing 9-A-None-None:
“When Grouping, Aim for Diversity. Very able students can benefit from group interactions when they are able to explain difficult concepts to other students, but they learn more when they are also able to participate as learners. This is unlikely to happen with any regularity when such students work only with their age mates in typical classrooms. Students become learners when other members of the group have equal or greater competence. Competence is primarily defined by the student’s level of achievement in a domain. As one acquires higher levels of competence in any field, diversity in the range of perspectives represented in the group becomes more important for the acquisition of critical reasoning abilities than does diversity in ability. Thus, when grouping very able students with other students, try to devise groups in which the very able students will be learners–not just explainers–and in which there will be a diversity of perspectives among participants.”
I know teachers want the smart students to help them out by teaching the slower students, but that’s to the detriment of the most gifted.
The MET study showed that observations among even trained 3rd-party evaluators are inconsistent. If an evaluation method cannot be trusted to internally consistent, how can we expect it’s even remotely accurate? I realize that Duane says no evaluation is valid and they should all be thrown out. I find it interesting that Duane is not deemed a “troll” for telling all the teachers on here that their in-class tests are a bunch of garbage.
VAMs measure the ability to influence test scores on state tests. Higher-VAM teachers have been shown to 1) positively affect scores on higher-level thinking tests, 2) increase long-term income/college attendance, 3) improve students’ own effort/enjoyment in class and 4) lower teenage pregnancy and incarceration rates. A teacher shouldn’t set out to increase her VAM. A higher VAM is what results from great teaching.
You state that VAMs “have no beneficial information and were not meant to be used for their current purpose”. Even the ASA recommended that VAMs be used for larger scale assessments such as teacher prep schools. I have no idea where you got your information.
Finally, I agree that nobody should be shut out from the table. And I would venture to bet that nearly all of the innovative ideas will come from teachers themselves. My biggest frustration is that those innovative teachers, just like some cops following the “blue code”, refuse to allow ineffective teachers to be identified and/or removed from core classes. We can’t even know who are the best teachers without the VAMs. When I get the SGP data, I will identify and recognize the best teachers and especially the ones who are underpaid (high-VAMs with little experience). You can’t possibly tell me the teachers on this list who had a median SGP of 80 aren’t miraculous teachers.
Virginia, perhaps we can agree: VAM should not be used for individual teachers. As the American Statistical Association said, use it for large-scale assessments, not for individuals.
Virginiasgp, I have seen many on this blog offer counter-studies to all of the ones you have posted, and they are certainly numerous. You have tended to ignore these counterpoints in favor of your own preferred studies. One particular research publication isn’t the be-all-end-all of what’s “better,” especially when much research is designed and backed by those with “ve$ted interests.” There are a multitude of reasons why studies come to one or another conclusion, and often it has to do with having a limited set of data, erroneous methods, flawed assumptions, or a narrow goal in mind. Know that there ARE “studies” showing that tracked classrooms are no better, and often worse. There IS “research” out there showing that VAMs are not valuable. What I wonder is why you ignore these studies when they are more numerous and consistent than the ones you tend to bring forward.
You said: “We can’t even know who are the best teachers without the VAMs.”
Again, you are begging the question by assuming this is true, when it is actually what needs to be proven (and has not been). Once again, know that not many experienced people in the field actually believe this. VAMs are a very recent invention and application in the field of education. I think without VAMs we knew who the good teachers were in the previous thousands of years of human history, and moving forward, we will know who good teachers are without VAMs.
Think about it: VAMs are for people who need something like VAMs to know what is real teaching and learning. In other words, if you need a VAM to know if a teacher is good or not, or if the students are learning something — then you are precisely the one who shouldn’t be judging them or controlling what they do. Howbout that for a new policy? If you need a VAM to know, then you shouldn’t be in charge.
You give far too much faith to these contrived systems of number manipulation. I wonder how you know who will be the best president to vote for in the 2016 election? Do we need to invent some crazy formula and look at their VAM score? Or should you decide for yourself, instead of some arbitrary number deciding for you?
Insanity is being controlled by inhumane ideas. VAMs are insanity. If they become the arbiter of who is a good teacher or not, then we are insane.
I guess the highest achiever on the SOL was SOL
We have to stop buying into the rephormers’ rhetoric. There isn’t one thing that constitutes “college ready” (much less “college and career ready”). Whether you’re going to college for general liberal arts, or for business, or pre-law or pre-med or a specific career or whatever determines what “college ready” means. Some fields, for instance, you’d better be able to write like no one’s business. Other fields, writing isn’t so important. I read some pretty atrocious writing in college from some people who are now very successful doctors and scientists. If you think you’re headed for a career in science, you’d better know your science. But if you’re going to be a lawyer, you might not need much science at all (unless you’re going to be an IP lawyer or a litigator in highly technical fields). And there there are the fields that require most of all interpersonal skills. I shudder to think of the day we develop a standardized test to “measure” that.
YES, indeed. Ask the teachers. They know more than ANY test. Are people dense? Misfinformed? Snookered?
Yeah, that’s pretty much true. Thanks for agreeing.
The only part of your comment that rings false is the line about teachers knowing more than any test. Teachers cannot know more than ANY test, but they DO know more than relying on just one test.
When my students take the Regents exam at the end of the year, I’m pretty much able to predict their grade on the exam months before they take it, months before we’ve even finished the course. How can that be? I know more about how well that child is doing because of the labs, HW assignments, quizzes, tests, worksheets, class participation, answers to questions asked privately – one on one, etc. long before the big test I absolutely know more than the test will tell the parent.
So yeah, ask the teacher. Nearly every teacher will be a better source of info than the result from a single BS test.
Here is the head of school at Sidwell Friends’ reasoning for why Sidwell, like nearly all elite private schools, with rich course offerings and low class sizes, administers a multi-part, multi-day, computerized bubble test to its students (in Sidwell’s case, in grades 5-8):
“It is important to remember that standardized test scores are only one measure of a student’s academic profile, a snapshot if you will. A more complete and accurate picture emerges when the scores are combined with classwork, daily performance, regular assignments, projects, and tests. Still, the ERB/CTP’s can help parents and teachers understand more clearly and completely a child’s balance of strengths and needs. Teachers may review the scores in detail, looking for patterns that emerge from one year to the next, and then use that information to be more effective in the classroom.”
That seems reasonable to me, and it’s what many “best and wisest” parents seem to want. Standardized tests are an important reality check–“Campbell’s Law” and other distortions are most certainly in play when humans are evaluating other humans, and when everyone’s salary and job status depends on it.
I have posted this piece by noted reform skeptic Michael Winerip many times before: this is what was happening when the tests were easy and when everyone up and down the line was swearing that everyone else was doing an amazing job: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/education/24winerip.html. What happened when these kids’ parents asked their teachers how they were doing?
So some kids who supposedly did OK on the regents exams need remediation. I don’t live in New York and don’t know anything about the regents exams. I do know that one problem with standardized tests is that many kids who do well on them are terrible students and will not be able to succeed anywhere unless they change their work ethic / habits. And conversely, many kids who don’t do well on them are very successful in college and in life, because they have good content knowledge, are deep thinkers (deep thinkers are tripped up by the mindless “which answer is least wrong in the eyes of the test writers” trickery of standardized test writing, where the “right” answer is not necessarily even “right”), have good soft-skills.
The reality is remediation courses are money-makers for colleges, and allow them to expand the pool of kids they will accept to include those who simply refused to work hard in high school and therefore are not ready to move on…
And many of the remedial classes kids need are in math. The reality is many colleges still think it is justified to require kids to [temporarily] memorize an enormous quantity of procedures (that will be of no use whatsoever to these kids in their lives, and will be forgotten within two weeks of the ending of the semester in which the course is taken) just to satisfy the gen ed math requirement.
But so many kids do NOT need remediation — most kids don’t — and all the kids I’ve known who did need remediation, had someone come to me and asked if they were ready for college, I would have said “certainly not, and why would you even admit them based on their grades?”
There are a lot of problems in higher education and high schools are being held hostage to many of them. Putting pressure on high schools to graduate more kids just means putting pressure on high schools to reduce standards for graduation — many kids will do the minimum you ask — and they know that under the “reformer” requirement of “graduate more kids” without looking at the underlying causes of low graduation rates (which are based on the poverty and economics of communities) you need for them to graduate more than they need the diploma.
“It is important to remember that standardized test scores are only one measure of a student’s academic profile, a snapshot if you will.”
Well, he has that wrong!
Those STANDARDIZED TEST SCORES are COMPLETELY INVALID and they “measure” absolutely nothing at all as they are not measuring devices as there are no agreed upon (and never will be) “standards” by which to measure. Ay ay ay, eso no es ciencia de cohetes.
To understand why the above paragraph holds true read and comprehend Noel Wilson’s never refuted nor rebutted critique of educational standards and standardized testing at: “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” found at: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/577/700
Brief outline of Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” and some comments of mine.
1. A description of a quality can only be partially quantified. Quantity is almost always a very small aspect of quality. It is illogical to judge/assess a whole category only by a part of the whole. The assessment is, by definition, lacking in the sense that “assessments are always of multidimensional qualities. To quantify them as unidimensional quantities (numbers or grades) is to perpetuate a fundamental logical error” (per Wilson). The teaching and learning process falls in the logical realm of aesthetics/qualities of human interactions. In attempting to quantify educational standards and standardized testing the descriptive information about said interactions is inadequate, insufficient and inferior to the point of invalidity and unacceptability.
2. A major epistemological mistake is that we attach, with great importance, the “score” of the student, not only onto the student but also, by extension, the teacher, school and district. Any description of a testing event is only a description of an interaction, that of the student and the testing device at a given time and place. The only correct logical thing that we can attempt to do is to describe that interaction (how accurately or not is a whole other story). That description cannot, by logical thought, be “assigned/attached” to the student as it cannot be a description of the student but the interaction. And this error is probably one of the most egregious “errors” that occur with standardized testing (and even the “grading” of students by a teacher).
3. Wilson identifies four “frames of reference” each with distinct assumptions (epistemological basis) about the assessment process from which the “assessor” views the interactions of the teaching and learning process: the Judge (think college professor who “knows” the students capabilities and grades them accordingly), the General Frame-think standardized testing that claims to have a “scientific” basis, the Specific Frame-think of learning by objective like computer based learning, getting a correct answer before moving on to the next screen, and the Responsive Frame-think of an apprenticeship in a trade or a medical residency program where the learner interacts with the “teacher” with constant feedback. Each category has its own sources of error and more error in the process is caused when the assessor confuses and conflates the categories.
4. Wilson elucidates the notion of “error”: “Error is predicated on a notion of perfection; to allocate error is to imply what is without error; to know error it is necessary to determine what is true. And what is true is determined by what we define as true, theoretically by the assumptions of our epistemology, practically by the events and non-events, the discourses and silences, the world of surfaces and their interactions and interpretations; in short, the practices that permeate the field. . . Error is the uncertainty dimension of the statement; error is the band within which chaos reigns, in which anything can happen. Error comprises all of those eventful circumstances which make the assessment statement less than perfectly precise, the measure less than perfectly accurate, the rank order less than perfectly stable, the standard and its measurement less than absolute, and the communication of its truth less than impeccable.”
In other word all the logical errors involved in the process render any conclusions invalid.
5. The test makers/psychometricians, through all sorts of mathematical machinations attempt to “prove” that these tests (based on standards) are valid-errorless or supposedly at least with minimal error [they aren’t]. Wilson turns the concept of validity on its head and focuses on just how invalid the machinations and the test and results are. He is an advocate for the test taker not the test maker. In doing so he identifies thirteen sources of “error”, any one of which renders the test making/giving/disseminating of results invalid. And a basic logical premise is that once something is shown to be invalid it is just that, invalid, and no amount of “fudging” by the psychometricians/test makers can alleviate that invalidity.
6. Having shown the invalidity, and therefore the unreliability, of the whole process Wilson concludes, rightly so, that any result/information gleaned from the process is “vain and illusory”. In other words start with an invalidity, end with an invalidity (except by sheer chance every once in a while, like a blind and anosmic squirrel who finds the occasional acorn, a result may be “true”) or to put in more mundane terms crap in-crap out.
7. And so what does this all mean? I’ll let Wilson have the second to last word: “So what does a test measure in our world? It measures what the person with the power to pay for the test says it measures. And the person who sets the test will name the test what the person who pays for the test wants the test to be named.”
In other words it attempts to measure “’something’ and we can specify some of the ‘errors’ in that ‘something’ but still don’t know [precisely] what the ‘something’ is.” The whole process harms many students as the social rewards for some are not available to others who “don’t make the grade (sic)” Should American public education have the function of sorting and separating students so that some may receive greater benefits than others, especially considering that the sorting and separating devices, educational standards and standardized testing, are so flawed not only in concept but in execution?
My answer is NO!!!!!
One final note with Wilson channeling Foucault and his concept of subjectivization:
“So the mark [grade/test score] becomes part of the story about yourself and with sufficient repetitions becomes true: true because those who know, those in authority, say it is true; true because the society in which you live legitimates this authority; true because your cultural habitus makes it difficult for you to perceive, conceive and integrate those aspects of your experience that contradict the story; true because in acting out your story, which now includes the mark and its meaning, the social truth that created it is confirmed; true because if your mark is high you are consistently rewarded, so that your voice becomes a voice of authority in the power-knowledge discourses that reproduce the structure that helped to produce you; true because if your mark is low your voice becomes muted and confirms your lower position in the social hierarchy; true finally because that success or failure confirms that mark that implicitly predicted the now self-evident consequences. And so the circle is complete.”
In other words students “internalize” what those “marks” (grades/test scores) mean, and since the vast majority of the students have not developed the mental skills to counteract what the “authorities” say, they accept as “natural and normal” that “story/description” of them. Although paradoxical in a sense, the “I’m an “A” student” is almost as harmful as “I’m an ‘F’ student” in hindering students becoming independent, critical and free thinkers. And having independent, critical and free thinkers is a threat to the current socio-economic structure of society.
Tim.
I am really troubled by the aggranziement of scores on standardized tests, especially discussions that do not include some indication of the subjects and grade levels and/or nature of the tasks being measured and who is making inferences from the scores. Scores are presented as judged “valuable.” Valuable to whom/, and why/, and when?
In my experience, the Accuplacer test should be re-named the Inaccuplacer.
Two of my former students from a high school Precalculus class were placed in Precalculus at our local Community College instead of Calculus. These were excellent, top-notch students. They report that they easily already knew every topic that was covered and scored 100s on everything. They even corrected the teacher at times. I know this is anecdotal, but for those 2 students their time and $ were wasted. However the College Board and the College made some money off of them. Their transcript from high school was a much more accurate picture of their achievement and potential.
Colleges love to have remedial courses, because they make a ton of money for schools. Particularly if it’s a class that has a high level of “failure.” At my local university, nearly all students have to take two beginning college math classes, which are now only available online. The failure rate on these classes is astounding, and many students have to take the class two or three times. It’s an enormous money maker for the university, particularly because it’s all online.
Threatened,
That is certainly not true at my institution. Students with an Math ACT score below 22 (or Math SAT score below 530) or who take the Math Department placement exam and get a sufficiently low score on it are required to take remedial math. About thirty percent of incoming freshman have to take remedial math.
The institution urges students to take this course at much lower cost at a community college before they enroll at my institution and transfer the credit in. A good number of students will take the course at a community college after they enroll in my institution and transfer it in.
Because students who take remedial mathematics are far more likely to leave the institution after their first year, the loss in future tuition from those students leaving is far greater than any gain in tuition from students that choose to take remedial math at my institution (tuition is about $900 for this class per in state student and $2,400 for the class per out of state student. I should note that out of state students are less likely to be required to take remedial math, and if they do take it, are more likely to return for the second year).
Your school should look at “why” kids are having these issues with math. Probably it is because your math department is basically requiring kids to memorize an enormous quantity of procedures that are and will remain completely irrelevant to the kids’ lives. It is your curriculum that needs reforming — not the students. Many liberal arts schools have done this — years ago now — and it is beyond time for the public schools and whatever private schools are still holding out to join them.
Kids SHOULD be required to take a mathematics course to graduate. But that course should involve REAL mathematical thinking — not memorizing “college algebra” procedures (which the students will never use again and won’t remember anyway within 14 days of the final exam). The reality is these courses are far more difficult (more time-consuming) for students than are the gen ed courses in any other discipline. A student could take a full load of other college classes and do the same amount of work for a single math class, and still maybe get a lower result. This is not OK, and this is the reason for the problem. It is the college math people that are causing it, and will have to somehow be forced to fix it. At many schools, the math department is being cut out of the majors — majors are offering their own math courses for kids. This happens because math professors and departments are simply being unreasonable.
Mom,
If you are talking about assignment to remediation classes, that happens before students take any classes from my institution. If you are talking about success rates in remedial classes, this is of great concern to the institution, and we have a separate program staffed by math education professionals not professors in the Mathematics Department. They spend all their time worrying about how to teach the classes more effectively.
We’ve gone around this before, TE. I’m glad your college is so inclusive. I’ve gathered you’re in Kansas, though, and so the funding cuts are coming for you. Your school may not be able to afford to be inclusive anymore. See, Utah’s NEVER funded well for any level of education, so schools make money any way they can, even if it means saddling kids with ridiculous debt or having a lot of itinerant adjuncts, or making money off of students taking classes over and over.
YES, Utah tuition is lower than most places. However, because Utahns have large families (we have the largest average family size in the country), and wages tend to be low, the costs for college are unsustainable for many families.
Plus more people are attending college. And many college students take remedial courses as a refresher or to boost GPA for grants and aid.
In K-12, the goals are to keep students enrolled and graduate as many as possible. Colleges in contrast, are more like survivalist game shows that see their role as weeding students out, though that is slowly changing for some. We’ve all been there trying to get through those “gatekeeper” courses, whether Calculus or Composition. A community college might have a graduation rate of 7% (not unheard of). Imagine the Reformer response if a high school posted that result.
When I was in graduate school in the 1970s, I learned that research tells us that the teacher knows more about the achievement of the child than any test. So this information has been around for a long time.
One of the very sad aspects of education is that much accumulated knowledge is neither acknowledged nor applied in the field. Instead, it is often ignored and then rediscovered every decade or so.
One of the best things we can do to improve education in our country is to respond to what we know.
You can almost see the next move by the pro-test zealots. Soon we will see gag order laws and policies (if not already in place) restricting teachers as to what they can and cannot say to parents regarding student performance. PT conferences will sound like a legal deposition. Sounds far fetched, but who in their right mind would have thought someday teachers would be judged on a year’s worth of instruction by a flawed, 2-hour VAM test? Reformers already see teachers as second class citizens, unworthy of Constitutional rights like free speech and freedom to assemble. To Reformers, just punch those teachers in the face and all problems are solved, right?
Agree: and invent an anecdote that supports bashing public education for each and every situation, and trot it out to “prove” your point.
So bored with the anecdotes! Did not everyone have a bad teacher and a good one? But you never see these people trotting out the anecdote of the good one to “prove” that all teachers are fantastic lol.
MathVale & Titleonetexasteacher: thank you for your comments.
And for helping me get back to Planet Reality. Some of commenters on this thread tried to take me, well, to riff off of Rod Serling’s intro to his long ago tv show: “You’re in another dimension. A dimension bereft not only of sight and sound but devoid of mind. Next stop: Rheeality Zone!”
😏
“As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.”
What a downer!*!^! Do either of you know if that Albert Einstein fella ever did anything as mathematically innovative and important as the Chetty/Friedman/Rockoff troika?
😎
P.S. A one-stop answer to why VAM and its kin are a scam. Audrey Amrein-Beardsley, RETHINKING VALUE-ADDED MODELS IN EDUCATION: CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON TESTS AND ASSESSMENT-BASED ACCOUNTABILITY (2014).
Haven’t heard of this “Einstein” guy, but he seems to know what he’s talking about.
The only two places where we should have looked for vital, rich, and valuable information (i.e., as data, metrics, KPIs or benchmarks) for students and about their situations, status or progress, are, ironically, the only two places where nobody apparently ever did bother to look:
1) In teachers’ notes,
2) In teachers’ heads.
Want “big data”? There’s plenty of “data” in those notes and those heads, too, so knock yourselves out. If only you had taken the trouble to organize all that data (staying out of the teacher’s way as you do that), since by now we’d all then be truly well informed about real status and progress of our children.