Categories
Archives by date
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | 30 | |||||
In the New York Daily News today, Stanford education professor Erik Hanushek argues that UFT [is] wrong to fight Joel Klein's attempt to release teacher data. Hanushek makes three arguments here: Value-added methods are valuable even if imperfect The public has a right to know about teacher effectiveness Erik Hanushek personally does not want test score […]
Remember the furor over the Los Angeles Times's release of point estimates of value-added measures they had cooked up from test scores? A number of people raked the Times over the coals for violating journalistic ethics, and these included many who think it's either acceptable or necessary to include student outcome data in teacher and […]
My quick impression of the New Teacher Project's Teacher Evaluation 2.0: 90% common sense, 50% reform testosterone. It's a short booklet, and once you read it, you'll probably understand what I mean.
Yesterday, The New Teacher Project Vice President Dan Weisberg spoke at one of the Florida Department of Education What's Working forums, and because it was in Tampa I was able to attend. He spoke the same day that TNTP released its 12-page booklet suggesting six guidelines for teacher evaluation. And, not that this should have been […]
A brief follow-up this morning to my criticism of the Los Angeles Times' disclosure of point estimates from a single model of teacher test-score raising prowess: Dana Goldstein points out that media critic Jack Shafer's commentary is factually wrong (as well as vicious), and the Kingsbury Center's John Cronin takes the same line I do […]