It's taken as an article of faith among proponents of value-added teaching evaluation that teachers are the single most important variable determining student success in school. But what if the statisticians inadvertently used their own research to undermine the central premise of their argument?
Not content to leave a bad idea alone, policymakers now seem intent on applying value-added methods as a means of assessing teacher effectiveness. To just about anyone who has ever actually spent a significant amount of time teaching, this is a terrible idea. But the policy machine marches on anyway—how come?
What do you get when you put unreasonable expectations on teachers and parents to make sure kids do things that adults they've never met really, really think they ought to do? You get homework. Even in first grade.
Out in Oklahoma, a state representative wants to repeal and replace AP US history. Here we go again.
The battle lines in the debate over ESEA reauthorization—the debate to put NCLB behind us, once and for all—are now as clear as they've ever been, but the bills likely to come out of Congress do more to push an ideological agenda than they do to improve education. Don't expect big changes any time soon.
Looking at all the ways my kids are being graded has me thinking: is there anything we can do about it? We could start by slowing down to think about the nature of intelligence, what graded assessment tells us about it, and what it would take to think about it differently.
Just when you thought you'd seen it all: along comes a report card for a four-year-old. And it's probably even more ridiculous than you thought it would be.
It was report card day today for our first grader. I'm still trying to figure out how he's doing.
Remember a while back when I suggested that maybe efforts to scrap No Child Left Behind might not actually accomplish the goals we really want them to if we think about the larger items on the agenda? Well, it's time to start evaluating what we're up against.
James R. Delisle stirred a hornet's nest recently when he proclaimed, right here in the pages of Ed Week, that differentiated instruction doesn't work. I think he's focused on the wrong thing.