The Folly of Value-Added Modeling
“Every classroom should have a well-educated, professional
teacher, and school systems should recruit, prepare and retain teachers who are
qualified to do the job” (Baker, 2010); of course, every patient “should [also]
have a well-educated, professional [doctor]”; every client “should [also] have
a well-educated, professional [lawyer as well]…” However, no one would attempt to apply
value-added modeling to evaluate doctors and lawyers because it is foolish.
Should a well-educated, professional teacher be evaluated through
value-added modeling then? It is what we know through research that answers
this question with an emphatic “No”: “Student test scores alone are not
sufficiently reliable and valid indicators of teacher effectiveness to be used
in high-stakes personnel decisions… [Furthermore,] drilling students on narrow
tests does not necessarily translate into broader skills that students will use
outside of test-taking situations” (Baker).
Multiple-choice tests (convergent thinking) do not measure
essential communication skills and other proficiencies such as synthesizing and
conducting research, validating information, applying knowledge, valuing and
cultivating beliefs, and other divergent critical thinking.
It is what we should already know regarding underachievement
in public schools across the nation that needs to be the nation’s focus. The
significant causes of underachievement in public schools across the nation are poverty,
malnutrition, household unemployment, urban violence, dysfunctional parenting and
divorce…
What influences students’ achievement? According to research:
“Both previous teachers and, in secondary schools, current teachers of other
subjects—as well as tutors or instructional specialists…; the quality of curriculum
materials…; class size…; school attendance and a variety of out-of-school
learning experiences at home, with peers…, [and] summer programs…; family
resources, student health, [and] family mobility…[affect students’ achievement]”
(Baker).
What also alters students’ achievement are the “quality of
principal leadership, school finance, availability of counseling and special
education services…, turnover rates of teachers, and so forth…” (Berliner,
2012).
What are some of the undesirable consequences of mandating value-added
modeling? As stated by Richard Rothstein, et al. in Grading Education: Getting Accountability Right (2008): “Research and experience indicate that approaches to teacher evaluation that
rely heavily on test scores can lead to narrowing and over-simplifying the
curriculum, and to misidentifying both successful and unsuccessful teachers.
These and other problems can undermine teacher morale, as well as provide
disincentives for teachers to take the neediest students… When attached to
individual merit pay plans, such approaches may also create disincentives for
teacher collaboration” (Baker).
Value-added modeling does not address the existing inequities
of students from various socio-economic backgrounds or with special needs. What’s
more, “value-added scores are affected by difference in the types of students
who happen to be in [a teacher’s] classroom…” (Baker). [According to Timothy Sass (2008)]: “Researchers have found that teachers’ effectiveness
ratings differ from class to class, from year to year, and from test to test,
even when these are within the same content area… A teacher who appears to be
very effective (or ineffective) in one year might have a dramatically different
result the following year… [In addition,] using test scores to evaluate
teachers unfairly disadvantage teachers of the neediest students” (Baker).
The Folly of Bush’s and Obama’s Federal
Mandates
No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top do not effectively contribute
to students’ learning; there is no evidence to support the claims that these federal
mandates are successful, despite the declarations of Arne Duncan and President
Obama. Evidence is available, however, that substantiates school reform
mandates undermine local governance and democratic education (National Education Policy Center, NEPC).
Moreover, according to research from NEPC, what is essential for
student learning and success requires
·
[Moving]
from a punitive to a participatory model for engaging local communities in reform
efforts;
·
[Encouraging]
the adoption by states and locales of curriculum standards that include a
substantive focus on (as opposed to mere lip service to) the knowledge, skills,
and dispositions necessary for effective participation in a democratic society;
·
[Curtailing]
the privatization of public resources through Supplemental Education Services
(SES) and school choice;
·
[Seeking]
ways to promote integrated schools in order to ensure access to equal
educational opportunities and the diverse context of learning that all students
need for inculcation of democratic character” (Howe, 2012).
Establishing a system of compliance in the nation’s public
schools, one that is driven by billionaire capitalistic bullies that finance segregated
and biased charter (and Teach for America) enterprises where students become hostages
of for-profit schemes, is a devious ploy. Federal mandates that ignore the
significant causes of student failure; that devalue the teaching profession and
demean professionally-trained educators; mandates that also use standardized tests
to regulate public school funding and to determine teachers’ expertise while advancing
for-profit corporations (such as Pearson Education, Inc.) and robbing public school
funds (by way of vouchers) reveal an obvious faulty and damaging policy.
The Folly of Teacher Evaluations Knotted to Student Testing
To ask what is right, good or obligatory is to enter the
realm of normative ethics – ideals or rules of conduct that constitute moral standards
(not only for student learning but for teacher evaluation as well).
“[It is true] there is no simple shortcut to the
identification and removal of ineffective teachers. It must surely be done, but
such actions will unlikely be successful if they are based on over-reliance on
student test scores whose flaws can so easily provide the basis for successful
challenges to any personnel action.
“Districts seeking to remove ineffective teachers must invest the time and resources in a comprehensive approach to evaluation that incorporates concrete steps for the improvement of teacher performance based on professional standards of instructional practice, and unambiguous evidence for dismissal, if improvements do not occur… [Test] scores should be only one element among many considered in teacher profiles…
“Given the importance of teachers’ collective efforts to improve overall student achievement in a school, an additional component of documenting practice and outcomes should focus on the effectiveness of teacher participation in teams and the contributions they make to school-wide improvement, through work in curriculum development, sharing practices and materials, peer coaching and reciprocal observation, and collegial work with students…
“Districts seeking to remove ineffective teachers must invest the time and resources in a comprehensive approach to evaluation that incorporates concrete steps for the improvement of teacher performance based on professional standards of instructional practice, and unambiguous evidence for dismissal, if improvements do not occur… [Test] scores should be only one element among many considered in teacher profiles…
“Given the importance of teachers’ collective efforts to improve overall student achievement in a school, an additional component of documenting practice and outcomes should focus on the effectiveness of teacher participation in teams and the contributions they make to school-wide improvement, through work in curriculum development, sharing practices and materials, peer coaching and reciprocal observation, and collegial work with students…
“Professional organizations should [also] assume greater
responsibility for developing standards of evaluation that districts can use.
Such work, which must be performed by professional experts, should not be
pre-empted by political institutions acting without evidence…
“What is now necessary is a comprehensive system that gives teachers the guidance and feedback, supportive leadership, and working conditions to improve their performance, and that permits schools to remove persistently ineffective teachers without distorting the entire instructional program by imposing a flawed system of standardized quantification of teacher quality” (Baker).
“What is now necessary is a comprehensive system that gives teachers the guidance and feedback, supportive leadership, and working conditions to improve their performance, and that permits schools to remove persistently ineffective teachers without distorting the entire instructional program by imposing a flawed system of standardized quantification of teacher quality” (Baker).
Value-added modeling and federal mandates do not effectively evaluate
a teacher’s performance. Besides, it is not difficult to realize the attacks on
public school teachers, their unions, and community public schools are part of a
greater execution of capitalistic self-interests for the wealthy and powerful; that
we are witnessing a blitzkrieg deconstruction of the middle class,
privatization of public ownership and industry, cuts to needed spending, and
the elimination of the public sphere and social funding.
As stated by Professor William Ayers at the University of
Illinois (at Chicago), part of the government and corporate agenda is “[to turn]
over public assets and spaces to private management; [to dismantle] and [oppose]
any independent, collective voice of teachers; and [reduce] to a single narrow
metric that claims to recognize an educated person in a test score.” In short, the unethical “winner-take-all” economy generated by and for wealthy and powerful egomaniacs comes at the expense of everyone else. It is destroying the nation’s public school systems and their teachers and the representative democracy they embody.
-Glen Brown
Baker, Eva L. et al. (Paul E. Barton, Linda Darling-Hammond, Edward Haertel, Helen F. Ladd, Robert L. Linn, Diane Ravitch, Richard Rothstein, Richard J. Shavelson, and Lorrie A. Shepard). 2010. “Problems with the Use of Student Test Scores to Evaluate Teachers.” Briefing Paper #278. Washington D.C. Economic Policy Institute. http://www.epi.org/publication/bp278/
They are based on over-reliance on student test scores whose flaws can so easily provide over here the basis for successful challenges to any personnel action.
ReplyDelete