Chris Cerf on measuring teacher effectiveness

Cerf on the importance of measuring teacher effectiveness:

"Value added analysis" has become the holy grail of the accountability systems urban school districts across the country are rushing to build. Opponents express the  reasonable concern that isolating "teacher effect" as an independent variable is immensely complex, given the many factors that contribute to achievement trends. But isn't that the point?

The debate is no longer over whether,  but how evidence of student learning will increasingly inform the management of a school. In unsophisticated hands, achievement data can be used as a far too blunt instrument to meet basic standards of fairness. Wouldn't opponents of  "value added" serve their interests far better if, instead of opposing "value added" analysis altogether, they put their shoulder into the challenge of designing data systems that take into account the complexity of each individual classroom and working with districts to ensure that they are used responsibly?

-----------------------
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Measuring Teacher Effectiveness
<http://www.broadacademy.org/fellows/fellow.php?alumni_id=21&amp;category_id=4>  
First off, thanks, Andy, for giving me a toe in the water into the blogosphere. Opinions here are my own and not those of the NYC Department of Education, where I serve as deputy chancellor.

Let's start with two truths, one rooted in public policy and the other in social science. The first is that the only measure of success school systems should care about is how well students are actually learning. We can debate the most appropriate ways to evaluate student learning, whether graduation rates, test performance, or something else. But let's hope we are past the point of evaluating success based on "inputs"– how much we care, whether a particular program or approach appears compelling, how many students in a class feels like the appropriate number, how many degrees or certificates our educators possess, etc.