|
What do you think, Blue Jersey? - promoted by Rosi
At the forefront of education reform is how we can do a better job identifying and developing excellent teachers. This is of course rooted in the notion that since teacher quality is the greatest in-school determinant of student academic achievement, then in order to improve student learning we need to look at teacher practices within the classroom.
The stakes are high and we cannot be lured into settling on simplistic solutions to solve complex educational issues. Test scores using "value-added measures" (VAM) attempt to measure teacher quality with test scores by employing complex assumptions and statistical modeling to account for nonschool factors affecting student achievement.
While some research has been done using VAM to evaluate teacher effectiveness, there is significant disagreement over which statistical approach is best and to what extent any given one will produce accurate and unbiased measures of a teacher's impact on student achievement. |
| Many researchers have voiced doubts about the efficacy of using test scores to evaluate teachers given the majority of educators teach grade levels or subjects for which there are no standardized tests. We all have heard of instances where teachers feel pressured to "teach to the test" rather than the full curriculum.
And let's not forget how George Bush's "No Child Left Behind" initiative was supposed to "fix our schools" by focusing on test scores. And what has that accomplished? Well, we have lots of student test results from the last ten years and they show that some students aren't learning what they're supposed to be learning. But where does that lead? So far, there hasn't been very much change or improvement in these outcomes.
The only way to make significant headway is to impact teaching in the classroom. Last week I introduced a plan to do just that and it has a research base showing it works. My plan is based on the successful "Teacher Evaluation System" (TES) used by public schools in Cincinnati. A study conducted by researchers from Harvard, Stanford, and Brown and published in the Journal of Human Resources supported the TES approach, finding that using highly trained education professionals to perform rigorous classroom observations can not only fairly and accurately evaluate teachers, but also boost student performance.
NJ Spotlight's John Mooney broke down the specifics of my bill yesterday and I think it's worth reading. His grasp of the details is excellent and he provides important context regarding the issue.
What it means: The bill is counter to those being proffered by both Gov. Chris Christie's administration and Democratic legislators, who are pushing a complete overhaul of not just teacher evaluation -- which puts heavy emphasis on student test scores -- but of how it is used in determining tenure.
...
What it's not: The proposal ramps way down the reliance on test scores that is the underpinning of Christie's proposals, as well as proposed tenure reforms being developed by state Sen. Teresa Ruiz (D-Essex) as part of a bill soon to be reintroduced. "Test scores have a place, but they should also give us pause," Buono said. "When we want to make high-stakes decisions about teachers and students, let's make sure we are doing this the right way."
Academic underpinnings: Buono said she has worked on this proposal for the better part of a year, meeting with academics at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, among others. And it led to a unique press announcement, one that listed a number of academic studies. Typically, legislative press releases do not come with footnotes.
The research is clear regarding what will actually enhance teacher practice in the classroom. It is multiple classroom observations made by well qualified, professionals, immediate feedback for teachers and targeted professional development. Tests are just not the most reliable way to measure, and contribute nothing to improving, teacher effectiveness. |
.gif)
