Teacher Impact

[fuji]

And you keep on ignoring that the tests should NOT be created by the teachers,...and kept secret until test day,...problem solved.

FAST

That doesn't solve the problem. Teaching the test doesn't mean teaching the exact questions, but shifting the focus of teaching to memorization and test strategy, drilling students with sample tests similar to the final test, etc. These things lead to a superficial understanding, a sort of rote learning.

It would be better if teachers instead helped students develop their analytical thinking, discuss the issues target then memorize dates and talking points. A more comprehensive and in with depth learning experience.

I agree with finding objective ways to measure teacher performance and linking their pay to those metrics but I think we have to do better then just rely in standardized test scores.

One creative way to do that would be to use NEXT YEAR's standardized scores. In other words, evaluate a grade 9 teacher based on their students grade 10 test score a year later. That would incent the teachers to prioritize giving kids a solid foundation for their next year of school.

 

[onthebottom]

Certainly if 'teacher impact' on scores is as low as 14% that's an awfully weak correlation to assess their abilities or performance on under a state-wide law. Kinda like a law requiring CEOs to be assessed (and paid, demoted or sent for remedial training) annually by a formula that considers only growth in profits. Irrespective of recession, competition, rising material prices, administrative ability, cost efficiencies, R&D costs for the new product line or other any other factors.

If you had half a brain you'd know that's exactly what happens, they are paid largely in stock options that have no value if the value of the firm doesn't grow.

If you want to 'score' teachers, test teaching. If all you test is student achievement, then score that factor at 14%, just like anyone sensible scores a kid's pop quiz as only a fraction of her entire scholastic achievement over that year.

What else would you score?

You aren't manage anything by measuring other things instead. And I'm teachers would be grateful to finally have their 'clients' tell them just what they believe the good teaching they blather actually is.

Nice sentence, it's results, nothing else....

 

[basketcase]

Still trying to figure out why bot justifies firing people based on a 14% correlation.

(or for that mater why he doesn't comment on the actual issues in American education or why Canada does much better despite out lack of standardized testing)

 

[oldjones]

If you had half a brain you'd know that's exactly what happens, they are paid largely in stock options that have no value if the value of the firm doesn't grow.
What else would you score?[\quote] It doesn't take a lot of brains to read the Times Business listing of executive salaries and bonuses in the millions, exclusive of stock options. Nor to read the stories of CEOs anmd others, 'teaching to the test' to manmipulate the bottom linems anmd score more options while the company actually declined.

What I'd try to measure would beTeaching: the ability to present a complex topic clearly, in a form the students can assimilate and in a way that motivates them to to try to understand it. It includes being aware of how much the student understands, and altering the presentation accordingly. But no teaching method force an unwilling or incapable student to learn. Even harder if the 'learning' has been rigidly dictated by bureaucrats who never meet the kids. When you have a school population as uniform as steel, then you can legitimately begin to score—and discipline—teachers who turn out lemons. So who lost their job/pension/options for the Aztek, of for keeping pontiac and other wasteful divisions alive at GM?

Nice sentence, it's results, nothing else....

So no complaints about teaching to the test and only the test then. I'm curious though: Is driver ed in there? Safe sex and personal health?