OK. Obama/Duncan/Gates School "Reform" Model: The results Are IN !!! Today's NYT: P. A1

[reACTIONary]

78. I think you make some very good points...

...and I can agree with much of what you say. However, it wouldn't be much of a "forum" if all we did was agree with one another, so I would like to offer you some differing perspectives.

Evaluation of individual teachers based on their students test scores

This is indeed difficult, but statistical techniques exist for "zeroing out" the factors affecting results outside the teacher's area of influence. This very definitely is possible, although it is not always possible, and is not easy. And it would not be a good idea to make it the only evaluation criteria.

Here is a short description from a report that is critical of this technique:

Recent statistical advances have made it possible to look at student achievement gains after adjusting for some student and school characteristics. These approaches that measure growth using “value-added modeling” (VAM) are fairer comparisons of teachers than judgments based on their students’ test scores at a single point in time or comparisons of student cohorts that involve different students at two points in time. VAM methods have also contributed to stronger analyses of school progress, program influences, and the validity of evaluation methods than were previously possible.

Problems with the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers

The single greatest predictor of a standardized test, then and now, is SES: economic and education levels.

Results on these test do indeed strongly correlate with the socioeconomic status and educational attainment of the student's family. That doesn't mean that they don't measure the educational attainment of the student or the effectiveness of the school system that the student is in. It means that those factors also correlate with socioeconomic status.

If we don't measure and monitor the attainment gap between students of lower and higher socioeconomic status, and look for other such factors such as ethnicity, we are not going to be in a position to understand how well our country serves all of its citizens, and we are going to give those who do not have that purpose a free pass. It would be a great day for the racists in Mississippi to be able to ignore the attainment gap between rich and poor.

What is the best way to provide quality education for every student? A culture of collaboration, where everyone supports each other, or a culture of competition, where someone else's "failure" makes you look better?

Human culture is both collaborative and competitive, and both aspects contribute to our individual and and our collective achievement. However, I don't think that standardized testing of individuals is biased toward one approach or the other. If a collaborative learning environment helps everyone learn more, that would show up on standardized tests, and testing would be able to differentiate that approach as being superior. Of course, it might be that a competitive approach does better, or does better for some but not others. It would be useful to understand these dynamics, but it would require testing, statistical analysis, and careful experimentation to do so.

It IS a good way to keep eroding the nation's confidence in teachers, and the ability educators have to affect education policy.

I agree that standardized testing and other characterizations of our nation's public schools have been used as a political tool to advance ideological agendas that are not in our nation's interest. However, when teachers and those who support public schools express hostility towards objective measurement of their work and statistical evaluation of their techniques they appear to be defensive and seem to have something to hide. Its as if they are saying "nothing to see here, move along, move along." This plays into the hands of their critics and those who are working against public schools.