"In the current discourse on teacher evaluation systems,
however, an evaluation system is deemed rigorous based either on how
much of the evaluation rests on direct measures of student learning
outcomes, or the distribution of teachers into the various rating
categories, or both. If an evaluation system relies heavily on No Child
Left Behind-style state standardized tests in reading and mathematics —
say, 40 percent of the overall evaluation or more— its proponents are
likely to describe it as rigorous. Similarly, if an evaluation system
has four performance categories — e.g., ineffective, developing,
effective and highly effective — a system that classifies very few
teachers as highly effective and many teachers as ineffective may be
labeled rigorous.
In these instances, the word rigor obscures the subjectivity
involved in the final composite rating assigned to teachers. The
fraction of the overall evaluation based on student-learning outcomes is
wholly a matter of judgment; and if you believe, as I do, that a
teacher’s responsibility for advancing student learning extends well
beyond the content that appears on standardized tests,
you could conceivably argue that increasing the weight given to
standardized tests in teacher evaluations makes these evaluations less
rigorous. This is, however, a hard sell in the absence of other
concrete measures of student learning outcomes that could supplement the
standardized test results."
aqui.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário