A few weeks ago the LA Times began a controversy by releasing individual teacher test data on the value their teaching allegedly added to student performance. Much has been written on both sides of the issue, a lot of it centered on how much of this information ought to be public (e.g., teachers’ names) or private (between teacher and school district). At the same time, many observers have questioned the so-called statistical validity of using this data, even though so-called ‘value-added’ data is supposed to be a step ahead of previous models. A new study, from the Economic Policy Institute, sheds new light on this topic: value-added data is not all it’s been hyped to be.
The report opens:
“Student test scores are not reliable indicators of teacher effectiveness, even with the addition of value-added modeling (VAM), a new Economic Policy Institute report by leading testing experts finds. Though VAM methods have allowed for more sophisticated comparisons of teachers than were possible in the past, they are still inaccurate, so test scores should not dominate the information used by school officials in making high stakes decisions about the evaluation, discipline and compensation of teachers,”
Visit the new page on the BTU website: “HOT ISSUE: Improving Teacher Effectiveness” to read more about this issue which will undoubtedly be an issue in our contract negotiations with BPS this year.