The VAM scam

Teaching is both a science and an art. Teachers and schools have an immense amount of influence on students, and the right atmosphere is essential. However, not every factor that causes positive change in students can be measured. In fact, the positive change itself may be difficult to discern. Students come to school from a variety of backgrounds, and readiness for learning does not happen in a vacuum but is a direct result of what happens before a child even walks through the door.

In searching for a relatively impartial definition of VAM (value-added model) as it directly relates to teacher evaluation, I found this:

Value-Added Models for the Pittsburgh Public Schools

Free free to read the whole thing. Keep in mind while you are reading it that the school district (or maybe the Gates Foundations...who keeps track anymore) paid Mathematica Policy Research to do this. This money could have been used to hire more teachers and reduce class sizes, which DOES improve student outcomes.

What frustrates me about test-dependent evaluations for teachers on the one hand is that the tests themselves are culturally biased, visually inappropriate, and illustrate only how that child performed on those days at that time in that subject matter. On the other hand, the "value added" for my own child is not measurable even if measuring teacher effectiveness by student test scores were valid (which is a conversation I can't believe we're still having).

My child is a kindergartener in the Pittsburgh Public Schools. He entered kindergarten reading at probably a high first grade level. I hadn't had that tested, but this is my estimate as a teacher with other teachers and reading experts as resources. His math skills were similarly advanced upon entering kindergarten, even before meeting his teacher.

His teacher (whose name I won't mention here but I plan to refer to her by name when I write letters to the principal and superintendent), through her presentation of the kindergarten material, has helped him to explore what he already knows in new ways. He takes what he learns in class and runs with it. He multiplies and divides. He adds and subtracts double-digit numbers easily, in his head. He reads at an even higher level than he did when he came into kindergarten, despite the fact that the books covered in kindergarten do not present him with a challenge.

She makes him feel worthwhile, that every new step he takes in his learning is a great one, even if he is surpassing curricular expectations and potentially generating extra work for her. She never holds him back, even though she makes sure that he doesn't dominate class discussion (he isn't a commanding personality, even though he is confident and self-assured) and allows everyone a chance to participate.

She emphasizes the value of self-discipline and positive peer interactions. My son has embraced the routines and procedures that accompany the school experience, and having a teacher who expects his best has also allowed him to blossom both academically and personally.

How in the world can VAM gauge the effects of my son's teacher on his progress when the tests that will be given to him are not on his current level and will not measure what he has actually learned this year? How can VAM measure his teacher's qualitative influence on him when there is no test that measures personal emotional growth? How does VAM account for the fact that my son came in at a high level and has educated parents and grandparents who are very involved in his education? Does VAM also take into consideration the fact that my son comes to school clean and healthy, having had enough food to eat? According to the chart on page 11 of the report by Mathematica, those factors are not considered. "Free and reduced lunch program" is included, but there is a wide range of family income and stability that could be covered under the program. One child receiving free or reduced lunch could be living in a stable home with two parents; another could be homeless or living with a grandparent.

We waste so much money on trying to quantify the effects of teachers. So much money, in fact, that we probably could have restored music and art classes to previous levels and still had enough left over for some useful technology upgrades.

Meanwhile, kindergarten students are taking the Tripod survey.  They can't all read, but they can answer questions about teacher effectiveness?

Something has gone terribly wrong.