|
NYC Using Standardized Tests to Rate Teachers |
|
|
|
|
Written by Robert A. Southworth Jr.
|
|
Wednesday, 23 January 2008 |
|
Jennifer Medina of The New York Times reported two days ago (Jan. 21, 2008) that 2,500 teachers are being evaluated by their student's test scores and some of the teachers don't even know it. Apparently the experimental program is being conducted by the city through the permission of principals and without the full scrutiny of the teachers involved and the unsuspecting public. The Times story brings out an important topic that holds much disagreement among educators—the role and power of teaching—to affect student learning how much of that effect shows up on standardized tests:
New York invited principals from hundreds of elementary and middle
schools with sufficient annual testing data to participate in the
program, which will produce an elaborate stream of data on 2,500
teachers. In 140 schools — a tenth of the roughly 1,400 in the
system — teachers are being measured on how many students in their
classes meet basic progress goals, how much student performance grows
each year, and how that improvement compares with the performance of
similar students with other teachers. In another 140 schools,
principals are being asked to make subjective evaluations of roughly
the same number of teachers so officials can see if the two systems
produce widely disparate results. New York City schools employ roughly
77,000 teachers. In all 280 schools, the principals agreed to
participate in the program. (NYTimes, Jan. 21, 2008).
From my point of view, the testing and assessment point of view, the connection between student learning as it shows up on standardized testing is valid and reliable in only a very general way—for example, perhaps standardized testing measures brain processing speed and that speed produces a constant bell curve of results amongst a wide populatin of students. However, student performance on standardized tests is a poor predictor of student intelligence, future student success, future decisions about students, and a very poor predictor of teachers' efficacy.
Luckily the city is studying subjective evaluations. Now the term subjective may worry parents, but compared to the false objectivity of standardized tests, I would rather trust what my daughter's well-trained teacher had to say about my daughter's learning than a standardized test. What I would suggest is that the city take those subjective evaluations and improve them by building the Capacity of teachers to conduct rigorous formative assessments in their classrooms. Then, I would judge teachers by their ability to help all students make effective annual progress in every classroom. I know this sounds like a non-standardized approach, but my daughters are non-Standard humans, and after all, we all want our kids to be educated, not to be compared to other kids on general characteristics like shoe-size and general intelligence processing speed.
|
