Wendy Lecker, a civil rights attorney, explains here that states make a consequential mistake when they adopt a standardized test to measure teacher quality. The test measures something but not teacher quality.
Imagine trying to devise a way to measure restaurant quality with an objective measure. Would it be the number of customers? Surely that shows something important. But then MacDonald’s would get a higher rating than a three-star restaurant. How did the latter gets its three stars? That rating is based on discerning, expert judgement, not a standardized test.
She writes:
“One of the most damaging practices in education policy, in Connecticut and nationwide, is the misuse of standardized tests for purposes for which they were never designed. Standardized tests are being used to measure things they cannot measure, like school quality and teacher effectiveness, with deleterious results; such as massive school closures, which destabilize children and communities, and the current troubling shortage of students willing to enter the teaching profession.
“Connecticut policy makers engage in this irresponsible practice constantly. They jumped on the bandwagon to adopt the SBAC as the statewide accountability test, despite the complete lack of evidence that it the SBAC can support reliable or valid inferences about student performance, let alone school quality or teacher effectiveness. After abandoning the SBAC for 11th graders, our leaders hastily approved the mandated use of the SAT for accountability purposes, despite, again, the absence of evidence that the SAT is either aligned with Connecticut graduation requirements or valid or reliable for use a test to measure student performance, school quality or teacher effectiveness.
“Connecticut’s political leaders also blindly adopted the use of standardized tests in teacher evaluations in 2012, despite the evidence, even then, that standardized tests are inappropriate for this use. Since that time, every reputable statistical and educational research organization has repudiated this invalid practice; because a mountain of evidence proves that standardized tests cannot be validly or reliably used to rate teachers.
“If only our leaders would examine evidence before adopting a policy, our state would not only save millions of dollars, but it would guide education policy in a direction that is good for students and teachers. Engaging in thoughtful educational policymaking requires a more nuanced understanding of what happens and should happen in schools. It demands an acceptance that in this very human endeavor, objective measures are not always possible and even when they can be applied, they can only measure a fraction what we want schools to accomplish.”

This only encourages teachers to teach the test. Who wants to loose their job?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Off topic- Ohioans can contact the elected board member, of the search committee for the about-to-be selected, Ohio Schools Superintendent, at e-mail address Roslyn.Painter-Goffi@education.ohio.gov
The front runner for the position is,Tom Lasley, who calls himself an education entrepreneur and charter school fan.
The Fordham Institute’s co-written paper, with Prof. Wohlstetter, states, “Outside of Ohio government (state politicians) …support for expanded school choice is absent from local organizations (Cols. Mayor, City Council, Superintendent, School Board and parent groups.)
Ohioans don’t need even greater disenfranchisement from their state politicians, who hold office, as the result of egregious gerrymandering. The selection of a proponent of charter schools, instead of a neutral person, guarantees sustained rancor, in Ohio.
Local anger and action, is what prevents Murdoch Rupert, and his cronies, from turning education into a $500 billion dollar business sector, that impoverishes Ohio, for the benefit of concentrated wealth on the east and west coasts.
LikeLike
“The test measures something but not teacher quality.”
What, specifically, do these tests measure [sic]?
Even if we expand the word “measure” to “assess”, really all we’re assessing is students’ ability to figure out what test manufacturers want and their willingness to do it.
LikeLike
This is particularly true when tests are written above grade level, and have a rigged cut score designed to “fail” two thirds of the students and, by association, teachers and schools. It is a tool to destabilize schools and make them vulnerable to takeover. These tests yield little to no useful or diagnostic information. They are a waste of time and money, and they distract students from getting an authentic education.
LikeLike
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: psychometric is not a science. It is akin to astrology, reading entrails, and phrenology. Yet its practitioners have been extremely successful in convincing lots of people that it is an exact science and it does something important. Lies and conjectures and legerdemain. Nothing more.
LikeLike
RE “reading entrails”
Would that be “close reading”?
or “gross reading”?
or both?
LikeLike
Chris– I was thinking as I read the article that the only potential usefulness of such a test would be have kids take it for ten or more years, then crunch numbers to see if results correlated in any significant way with grades & grad stats… But then we’d be most likely be right back in the circle which always shows that kids from better SES get better grades, grad stats [jobs, opportunities, etc etc]
Your comment is more to the point. Astrologists, numerologists, palm- & Tarot- readers– & phrenologists– have always found correlations that appear to support their interpretation of results.
LikeLike
The problem is that the correlations” involved with these cases are very weak — so weak, in fact as to be essentially meaningless.
And most critically of all, they do not demonstrate causality.
The people who push VAM, SGP’s and the rest are not real scientists but cranks, at best, and fraudsters at worst.
They do indeed have much in common with psychics, astrologers, etc, primarily in that they cherry pick the cases that seem to support their claims and ignore/downplay all the rest.
With enough psychics making enough predictions, one of them is bound (virtually assured) of getting a prediction right by pure chance now and again. But it means nothing if they can’t do it with even a modest degree of regularity (ie, if their predictions are not reliable)
LikeLike
“If only our leaders would examine evidence before adopting a policy, our state would not only save millions of dollars,”
Most politicians only look at and quote the “evidence” that supports their case, eg Raj Chetty’s chetty-picked results on VAM.
They either disregard or attempt to dismiss/undermine “inconvenient” facts that do not support their case.
Not that this is surprising, or anything: Most of them are lawyers, not scientists.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Our leaders do examine evidence before adopting policies. The projection of policy results is calculated by vendors in estimated sales, & evidence proven to pols when toting up campaign contributions.
LikeLike
When their main goals are monetizing a public service for profit-taking and destroying the largest, strongest union in the country, evidence and what’s good for kids and society have no meaning or worth.
LikeLike
“Imagine classrooms outfitted with cameras that run constantly, capturing each child’s every facial expression, fidget, and social interaction, every day, all year long.
Then imagine on the ceilings of those rooms infrared cameras, documenting the objects that every student touches throughout the day, and microphones, recording every word that each person utters.
Picture now the children themselves wearing Fitbit-like devices that track everything from their heart rates to their time between meals. ”
Imagine yourself, then, grabbing your child and running as fast as you can away from these lunatics….. 🙂
I swear to God if someone from Google told them it was a good idea ed reformers would all jump off a bridge, together.
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2016/01/13/the-future-of-big-data-and-analytics.html
LikeLike
There is technology out there that is reading peoples’ facial expressions now. Look up the dumbstruck app. It’s not that far in the future!
LikeLike
We don’t have VAM in California, but the school districts have still become test obsessed and students are feeling it. One of the students who started the Union of Venice Students said, “We can’t be measured with numbers. We’re more than numbers. We’re human beings.”
I also learned that LAUSD requires principals to send home a letter explicitly informing parents of their right to opt their children out. But most principals don’t do it because the district also warns them not to let their school’s opt outs reach beyond 5%.
Here’s my interview with the wise students http://bit.ly/1WBhLU9.
LikeLike
Thank you Chris in Florida, SDP and B35 for pointing out and reiterating what to me appears to be quite obvious: STANDARDIZED TESTS MEASURE NOTHING!
The appalling misusage of language that insists that there can be a “fair test” or that those tests “measure” anything is beyond my comprehension. Such misuse of language is just sheer negligence or is intentional. And if intentional then let’s call a spade a spade and say that the folks who do so are lying deceiving con artists. If not intentional then they are naive oblivious ignorants who, if willing (which I doubt) need to take it upon themselves to learn the falsehoods of their thinking and correct it.
And yes, one day psychometrics, especially the standardized testing wing will be viewed as the pseudo-science, the false thinking and practices that it actually is.
LikeLike
Why is this even an issue any longer? Back on April 8, 2014, the Washington Post reported that the American Statistical Association (ASA) had just “slammed” the use of standardized tests to evaluate teachers in the “ASA Statement on Using Value-Added Models for Educational Assessment.” This authoritative statement should have been used since then and now each time in any teachers’ defense when the teacher was given a negative evaluation or especially if the teachers was dismissed because of student scores on standardized tests.
Among many other faults of using standardized tests for teacher evaluation, the ASA report noted that:
> “…standardized test scores…do not directly measure potential teacher contributions toward other student outcomes.”
> That standardized tests “…typically measure correlation, not causation: Effects – positive or negative – attributed to a teacher may actually be caused by other factors that are not captured in the model.”
> That “teachers account for about 1% to 14% of the variability in test scores, and that the majority of opportunities for quality improvement are found in the system-level conditions.”
Even the not-teacher-or-union-friendly Washington Post pointed out: “You can be certain that members of the American Statistical Association, the largest organization in the United States representing statisticians and related professionals, know a thing or two about data and measurement.”
The full ASA report is crammed with reasons from this authoritative body as to why the use of standardized test scores is invalid as a tool for evaluating teacher competency. The report’s contents should be vigorously cited in every instance where teachers are held accountable for low student test scores.
Isn’t that being done?
Moreover, a copy of the ASA report and a succinct summary of what it says, such as the quotes cited above, should be posted on the union bulletin board in every school throughout the nation and its contents should be reviewed at site-level union meetings.
This is the ammo to slam VAM.
LikeLike
The reformists just create their own Think Tank studies and ‘research’ and ignore such stuff. They don’t care at all what the ASA report says, unfortunately. That’s how low we have sunk as a nation.
LikeLike
Unfortunately, though the ASA report is indeed crammed full of reasons why individual teachers should not be evaluated and ranked based on VAM (particularly for high stakes decisions) and though any reasonable person can see that that was certainly the gist of their report, the ASA did not come right out and say “Do not use VAM to evaluate and rank individual teachers for firing and other high stakes decisions”.
I can understand why ASA did not say that. They are a scientific organization and don’t feel that it is their place to make policy.
But, in my opinion, it was actually a big mistake because by not using the above words (or something similar), they left the door open for some to claim that the ASA report actually legitimized VAM for individual teacher evaluation when any honest reading of the report leads to just the opposite conclusion.
The key word is “honest” and as Chris points out, the VAMbots don’t care about what the ASA actually meant. Their goal is to use VAM to evaluate and fire individual teachers and if that requires twisting the words of the ASA so that they mean something that they were never intended to mean, they will certainly do so.
LikeLike
I have just started reading “Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing”, considered THE bible of the standardized testing regime, put out by the American Educational Research Association, the American Psychological Association and the National Council on Measurement in Education (all three groups enthralled with or should I say seduced by the misbegotten belief that the teaching and learning process and what students have learned can be “measured”). Even in this, the standardized test lover’s tome, we are cautioned about using a standardized test for purposes other than the original intent:
Chapter 1, Validity (or as Wilson notes should be “Invalidity”, Pg. 14 “The position developed above [that different interpretations of test scores have and/or need separate validity considerations and/or evaluations] also underscores the fact that if a given test is interpreted in multiple ways for multiple uses, the propositions underlying [but not the epistemological and ontological underpinnings, those are shunted to the side] these interpretations for different uses are also likely to differ. Support is needed for the propositions underlying each interpretation for a specific use. Evidence supporting the interpretation of scores on a mathematics achievement [sic] test for placing students in subsequent courses(i.e., evidence that the test interpretation is valid for its intended purpose) DOES NOT PERMIT INFERRING VALIDITY FOR OTHER PURPOSES [my emphasis] (e.g., promotion or teacher evaluation).
There you have it from the testing god’s maw: “Thou shall not use test results for any other purpose than for which the test was designed!” Just playing the game with their “coin of the realm”, nothing more is needed, eh!?!
LikeLike
Using a test to measure “teacher quality” is as ridiculous a ruse as trying to measure the quality of a Caribbean vacation with an inaccurately calibrated thermometer.
Can you imagine telling your friends that it was one of the best vacations ever, and that you could prove it because the average daily high temperature was 81 F (+ or – 3 degrees).
Accountability breaking bad.
LikeLike
Now, I just realize that those techies are afraid of divergent thought from people with liberal art major = creativity.
Standard Testing Scheme is to measure the ASSET of testing material makers.
If children learn to master the art of music, painting, stage acting, then we, as parents and teachers will enjoy the true human divergent thought from YOUNG learners in dealing with machine/apps that try to read teachers and learners’facial expression.
Machine will be programmed in 1 = yes, 0 = no. Then, no 1, no 0, it is “maybe” for the machine, hahaha.
How intelligent and divergent artificial intelligence can be? It comes from programmer. Yes, programmer come from teaching and learning.
Therefore, we need to teach the foundation in human being – honesty, humanity, compassion, and being considerate for the unfortunate. These traits are the best tools to conquer all “AI technological apps” in the future.
We have nothing to fear or run away from crooks. Malice will be ultimately surrendered in the end without any doubt. Back2basic
LikeLike
“Machine will be programmed in 1 = yes, 0 = no. Then, no 1, no 0, it is “maybe” for the machine, hahaha.”
That’s a good one. Imagine what would happen if 1 or 0 hardly ever showed up!!
LikeLike
Rupert Murdoch described education as a potential “$500 billion dollar business sector”.
Since the business sector’s education products, are worthless and harmful, justifying them to the voters (promoting a worse mousetrap, instead of a better mousetrap), requires absent consciences.
LikeLike
Rupert Murdoch bet $1 billion on Joel Klein’s Amplify, expecting it to revolutionize education. After losing $500 million, Murdoch pulled the plug. Klein now works for Oscar, an online health business.
LikeLike
Thanks. It’s great to be reminded of the fails of “backpacks of cash”.
LikeLike