The Weighting Game. – M. Di Carlo

Di Carlo, Matthew. “The Weighting Game.”  The Shanker Blog. May 9, 2012. Retrieved from: http://shankerblog.org/?p=5764

The author uses Florida as an example of why using weights could be misleading when judging school districts and applies the same weighting logic to teacher evaluation and value-added such as ours in Ohio.

Now, back to the original point: All of these issues also apply to teacher evaluations. You can say that value-added scores count for only 40 or 50 percent, but the effective weight might be totally different, depending both on how you incorporate those scores into the final evaluation score, as well as on how much variation there is in the other components. If, for example, a district can choose their own measures for 20 percent of a total evaluation score, and that district chooses a measure or measures that don’t vary much, then the effective weight of the other components will actually be higher than it is “on paper.” And the effective weight is the one that really matters.

All the public attention to weights, specifically those assigned to value-added, seem to ignore the fact that, in most systems, those weights will almost certainly be different – perhaps rather different – in practice. Moreover, the relative role – the effective weight – of value-added (and any other component) will vary not only between districts (which will have different systems), but also, quite possibly, between years (if the components vary differently each year). This has important implications for both the validity of these systems as well as the incentives they represent.

Advertisements

About dublinea
President - Dublin Educators' Association

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: