Hillary Clinton is “saying everything teachers unions want to hear,” writes Lauren Camera on U.S. News.
“I have for a very long time also been against the idea that you tie teacher evaluation and even teacher pay to test outcomes,” she told New Hampshire teachers. “There’s no evidence. There’s no evidence.”
Is she right on the “no evidence claim? asks Stephen Sawchuk on Teacher Beat.
There have been a number of empirical studies showing that value-added measures, which are based on test scores, do pick up on differences in teacher performance.
Whether value-added measures should be used to evaluate or pay teachers is another question, Sawchuk writes. In addition to “technical challenges,” there is a risk of encouraging test prep and ignoring all the non-tested things that make up a good education.
Research on whether performance pay improves learning is mixed.
He concludes that Clinton “glossed over” what studies say about teacher effectiveness.