Learn About: 21st Century | Charter Schools | Homework
Home / Edifier


The EDifier

September 2, 2011

Can standardized tests be useful?

Filed under: teachers,Testing — Tags: , , — Jim Hull @ 1:38 pm

Standardized tests are not always popular with teachers. As a matter of fact, just one in four teachers nationwide see standardized tests as a very important measure of student achievement. Ama Nyamekye, a former New York City teacher, was one of those teachers who did not see much use in standardized tests when she first entered the classroom. As a matter of fact, before she even entered the classroom she railed against standardized tests with other educators who felt they were an attack on teachers, particularly those working in poor public schools.

However, in this week’s EdWeek (login required) she tells her story of how she now sees the value of standardized tests after getting some advice from her principal at her school in the South Bronx, which is one of America’s poorest communities. The principal asked her one simple question: “How do you know the kids are really getting it?” Ama couldn’t confidently answer the question. She thought she was a good teacher and her students performed well on the assignments and exams she prepared, but she needed more information to accurately answer the question.

To do so she turned to, you guessed it, standardized tests. Specifically, the New York State Comprehensive English Regents Exam. She administered it to her students, and what she found changed her view of the value of standardized tests. She states that:

“I discovered holes in my curriculum. I once dismissed standardized testing for its narrow focus on discrete set of skills, but I learned that my self-made assignments were more problematic. It turned out they were skewed in my favor.”

And that is why there is a need for standardized tests. The tests are not an attack on teachers or anyone else. They are to provide teachers, administrators, and parents information about how students are doing. Yes, how students perform on teacher designed assignments and exams provide information as well, but as in Ama’s case, they are not always the most accurate measure of what students are learning. Ama realized after reviewing her standardized test scores that she had designed her assignments and exams based around what she felt she effectively taught and not around what students needed to learn. This didn’t make Ama a bad teacher, it made her human. As humans, sometimes we need an external measure to give us some objective feedback on how well we are actually doing. That is why standardized tests are useful.

Unfortunately, far too many teachers and many others still do not realize Ama’s point. True, standardized tests are not perfect and can’t possibly evaluate all of what a student knows. But neither can any other measure. So the concern shouldn’t be about students taking standardized tests, but how best to use the data from those tests to improve student performance. – Jim Hull

For more information on standardized testing check out the Center’s Guide to Standardized Testing. And for information on how to use all types of education data more effectively, check out the Center’s Data-First.com.





August 4, 2011

Class size or student achievement?

Filed under: Reading,teachers,Uncategorized — Tags: , , — rstandrie @ 4:22 pm

I’ll admit I’m biased in favor of small class sizes. In elementary school, I was overlooked and unhappy in classes of 25-30 children. Though I was a fairly good student, I woke up with stomachaches at the thought of going to school, and that didn’t stop until I switched to a very small school in fourth grade. The teacher I had that year, Mrs. Wasser, did wonders for my interest in school and my confidence in my abilities, especially in math.

A new study by a Michigan State professor, “Teacher Effects in Early Grades: Evidence from a Randomized Study,” has pointed out that the good teacher I had may have had as much effect in my improvement as the small class size. It examined a group of students who participated in the Tennessee STAR study and found that students who had consistently good teachers K-2 (that is, teachers who were at 85 percentile of teacher effectiveness distribution) had up to one-third of a year’s growth in reading achievement. This effect was comparable to the cumulative effect of small classes in the early grades.

It’s important to note that a teacher at the 85th percentile of effectiveness is a very good teacher. And having a good teacher three years in a row would a stellar start in education for anyone. But I think this study points out that a good education will never be due to one single factor — and that there’s more research to be done about how class size and teacher effectiveness interact.

But if both class size and good teachers can have a significant impact on student learning, frankly, I think that’s a good thing. Read our guides on what makes a good teacher and on class size for more information about both these topics.

Oh, and one more thing: Thank you, Mrs. Wasser.

–Rebecca St. Andrie





July 22, 2011

New York City stops pay for performance

Filed under: Pay for Performance,teachers,Uncategorized — Tags: , , — rstandrie @ 10:01 am

The New York Times is reporting that a “program that distributed $56 million in performance bonuses to teachers and other school staff members over the last three years will be permanently discontinued” because a study by the RAND corporation found that ”the bonuses had no positive effect on either student performance or teachers’ attitudes toward their jobs.”

Before you react, consider this encouraging quote from the article: 

“The results add to a growing body of evidence nationally that so-called pay-for-performance bonuses for teachers that consist only of financial incentives have no effect on student achievement….Teachers also reported that improving as teachers and seeing their students learn were bigger motivators than a bonus, [the researchers] said.”

In an arena where attacks can often be cloaked under the phrase “It’s for the sake of the children,” it’s refreshing to see tangible evidence that children’s learning truly is a powerful motivator. And some of the other reasons given by the researchers for the program’s ineffectiveness, such as not understanding how the awards were determined, also point out that the logistical can be just as important (and far less divisive to fix) than the ideological.

In fact, several of the results of the RAND study seem to correlate with the Center’s earlier research review, “Promise or peril? Teacher pay for performance,” which pointed out that it is often how these programs are developed and structured that makes a difference.

So if your state or district is considering pay for performance, educate yourself first. There’s no use spending money on something that doesn’t work. –Rebecca St. Andrie





May 18, 2011

The times, they are a-changin’

Filed under: Teacher evaluation,teachers — Tags: , — Jim Hull @ 3:51 pm

Until recently, Denver was the poster child for evaluating teachers based on student achievement. But boy, the times are changing. Now, the vast majority of states and a number of districts all over the country are changing or seriously considering changing how they evaluate their teachers. Specifically, they are considering evaluating teachers at least in part on how they impact their students’ achievement.

Houston is the latest school district to revamp its teacher evaluation system to include measures of student achievement. Although not all the details about the new system have been released, this article sounds like Houston took the Center’s advice in our report, Building a Better Evaluation System, by basing teacher evaluations on multiple measures, not just student test scores.

As a matter for fact, student achievement will account for about half of a teacher’s evaluation, with the other half determined through observations and lesson plan reviews. In the observations, teachers will be evaluated on 20 factors related to their instructional practice and professionalism, including their attendance and communication with parents.

But one thing really stuck out to me as having the greatest potential to really support and improve instruction. In part, Houston’s system evaluates teachers based on whether teachers design effective lesson plans, engage student in higher-level work, and use various instructional techniques for different learning styles.

If done correctly, this information not only can more accurately distinguish less effective teachers from more effective teachers, but can be an effective tool for improving instruction for all teachers. And improving instruction is really where the real value of a comprehensive teacher evaluation system lies.

Unfortunately, all too often the debate about evaluation systems focuses too narrowly on how the results can be used for high-stakes personnel decisions, such as salary increases or whether to fire a teacher. But such decisions typically impact the most and least effective teachers, respectively, while the vast majority of teachers fall between these two extremes.

So using teacher evaluations to inform teachers about the effectiveness of their own instruction can boost the effectiveness of a larger number of teachers – thereby impacting a greater number of students. In this case, a quality comprehensive teacher evaluation system like Houston’s, if implemented correctly, can have a dramatic positive impact on our schools. – Jim Hull





April 13, 2011

Evaluating teachers: the discussion continues

Filed under: Teacher evaluation,teachers — Tags: , — rstandrie @ 4:22 pm

It’s still in the news. More and more reports are published, and more legislation is passed, recommending teacher evaluation be linked to student scores. Has the conversation come to your district yet?

Whether it has or not, remember that you can get educated about the many different claims and ideas through the Center’s newest original report, “Building a better evaluation system.” All of the Center’s guides have plenty of supporting material. In this case, that includes examples of systems that use value-added measures and an overview of all the different tools currently used to evaluate teachers. Check it out! –Rebecca St. Andrie





« Newer Posts — Older Posts »
RSS Feed