The Los Angeles has posted its list of the most and least effective third-, fourth- and fifth-grade teachers and schools with teachers’ comments. A few teachers are challenging the data, saying that they’re listed as teaching in years when they were on leave. The value-added analysis of schools is interesting.
On City Journal, dducation researcher Marcus Winters looks at the pros and cons of value-added analysis and comes out against release individual teachers’ scores.
Test-score analysis is “correct” on average—it can tell us a great deal about aggregate teacher quality. It can also help to evaluate individual teachers. But given its messiness—especially when tied to stakes as high as people’s jobs—it cannot be used in isolation.
Critics go too far, however, when they claim that these limitations justify abandoning the value-added approach altogether. The real lesson is that test scores are best used to raise red flags about a teacher’s objective performance; rigorous subjective assessment should follow, to ensure that the teacher is truly performing poorly. If both analyses show that a teacher is ineffective, then action should be taken, including removal from the classroom.
Economic Policy Institute also sees Problems with the Use of Student Test Scores to Evaluate Teachers.