Principal: Why our new educator evaluation system is unethical - 0 views
-
A few years ago, a student at my high school was having a terrible time passing one of the exams needed to earn a Regents Diploma.
-
Because she was a special education student, at the time there was an easier exam available, the RCT, which she could take and then use to earn a local high school diploma instead of the Regents Diploma.
- ...16 more annotations...
-
Regents Diploma serves as a motivator for our students while providing an objective (though imperfect) measure of accomplishment.
-
If they do not pass a test the first time, it is not awful if they take it again—we use it as a diagnostic, help them fill the learning gaps, and only the passing score goes on the transcript
-
in Mary’s case, to ask her to take that test yet once again would have been tantamount to child abuse.
-
Mary’s story, therefore, points to a key reason why evaluating teachers and principals by test scores is wrong.
-
It illustrates how the problems with value-added measures of performance go well beyond the technicalities of validity and reliability.
-
The basic rule is this: No measure of performance used for high-stakes purposes should put the best interests of students in conflict with the best interests of the adults who serve them.
-
I will just point out that under that system I may be penalized if future students like Mary do not achieve a 65 on the Regents exam.
-
Mary and I can still make the choice to say “enough”, but it may cost me a “point”, if a majority of students who had the same middle school scores on math and English tests that she did years before, pass the test.
-
But I can also be less concerned about the VAM-based evaluation system because it’s very likely to be biased in favor of those like me who lead schools that have only one or two students like Mary every year.
-
When we have an ELL (English language learner) student with interrupted education arrive at our school, we often consider a plan that includes an extra year of high school.
-
four-year graduation rate as a high-stakes measure has resulted in the proliferation of “credit recovery” programs of dubious quality, along with teacher complaints of being pressured to pass students with poor attendance and grades, especially in schools under threat of closure.
-
On the one hand, they had a clear incentive to “test prep” for the recent Common Core exams, but they also knew that test prep was not the instruction that their students needed and deserved.
-
in New York and in many other Race to the Top states, continue to favor “form over substance” and allow the unintended consequences of a rushed models to be put in place.
-
Creating bell curves of relative educator performance may look like progress and science, but these are measures without meaning, and they do not help schools improve.
-
We can raise every bar and continue to add high-stakes measures. Or we can acknowledge and respond to the reality that school improvement takes time, capacity building, professional development, and financial support at the district, state and national levels.