Learning from what doesn’t work in teacher evaluation

Kevin Close; Audrey Beardsley

doi:10.1177/0031721718797115

Learning from what doesn’t work in teacher evaluation

Kevin Close, Audrey Beardsley

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

9 Scopus citations

Abstract

Recent lawsuits reveal common mistakes plaguing current teacher evaluation systems. Drawing on arguments in court documents for prominent cases, the authors find that evaluation systems using value-added measures (VAM) suffer from a) inconsistent and unreliable teacher ratings, b) bias toward and against teachers of certain types of students, c) easy opportunities for administrators to game the system, and d) a lack of transparency. They urge others to engage with these (and other) arguments to design better, more valid, more useful, and ultimately more defensible teacher evaluation systems.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	15-19
Number of pages	5
Journal	Phi Delta Kappan
Volume	100
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721718797115
State	Published - Sep 1 2018

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Education

Access to Document

10.1177/0031721718797115

Cite this

@article{1f84e850bb8d4c16b62f5ce00b78045f,

title = "Learning from what doesn{\textquoteright}t work in teacher evaluation",

abstract = "Recent lawsuits reveal common mistakes plaguing current teacher evaluation systems. Drawing on arguments in court documents for prominent cases, the authors find that evaluation systems using value-added measures (VAM) suffer from a) inconsistent and unreliable teacher ratings, b) bias toward and against teachers of certain types of students, c) easy opportunities for administrators to game the system, and d) a lack of transparency. They urge others to engage with these (and other) arguments to design better, more valid, more useful, and ultimately more defensible teacher evaluation systems.",

author = "Kevin Close and Audrey Beardsley",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2018 by Phi Delta Kappa International.",

year = "2018",

month = sep,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1177/0031721718797115",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "100",

pages = "15--19",

journal = "Phi Delta Kappan",

issn = "0031-7217",

publisher = "Phi Delta Kappa Inc.",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Learning from what doesn’t work in teacher evaluation

AU - Close, Kevin

AU - Beardsley, Audrey

PY - 2018/9/1

Y1 - 2018/9/1

N2 - Recent lawsuits reveal common mistakes plaguing current teacher evaluation systems. Drawing on arguments in court documents for prominent cases, the authors find that evaluation systems using value-added measures (VAM) suffer from a) inconsistent and unreliable teacher ratings, b) bias toward and against teachers of certain types of students, c) easy opportunities for administrators to game the system, and d) a lack of transparency. They urge others to engage with these (and other) arguments to design better, more valid, more useful, and ultimately more defensible teacher evaluation systems.

AB - Recent lawsuits reveal common mistakes plaguing current teacher evaluation systems. Drawing on arguments in court documents for prominent cases, the authors find that evaluation systems using value-added measures (VAM) suffer from a) inconsistent and unreliable teacher ratings, b) bias toward and against teachers of certain types of students, c) easy opportunities for administrators to game the system, and d) a lack of transparency. They urge others to engage with these (and other) arguments to design better, more valid, more useful, and ultimately more defensible teacher evaluation systems.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85052692453&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85052692453&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0031721718797115

DO - 10.1177/0031721718797115

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85052692453

SN - 0031-7217

VL - 100

SP - 15

EP - 19

JO - Phi Delta Kappan

JF - Phi Delta Kappan

IS - 1

ER -

Learning from what doesn’t work in teacher evaluation

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this