What kind of objective measuring of student/teacher performance SHOULD we have?

[crazy canuck]

In an ideal world, schools would be evaluated by having every student and every parent rate them on a scale of, say, 1-10 as to how well they think that the school prepared them (or their children) for success over the five years from "graduation." A pre-K though five school thus gets rated by 10th graders and their parents, etc.   That's really the only measure I see as meaningful, and it isn't objective. If it turns out that a skill the school taught isn't subjectively useful, then even if it is well-taught it doesn't get the school any credit.  A school could have the best bullwhip-cracking department in the country, and objectively score really well on the standardized tests for bullwhip-cracking, but that doesn't mean that it is a good school.

Now, maybe 5 years isn't enough to tell if skills are useful, maybe five years is too long because too much could have changed in the meantime, and maybe 10th graders aren't in a good position to evaluate how well they have been served by the skills and knowledge taught in their pre-K through 5 school, but you get the general idea.  Let the customers evaluate the utility of a school.

Thoughts?  Any way to make this doable in the real world?

I recently filled out a lengthy survey regarding these sorts of metrics for the private school my sons attend.   One of the questions was how well I rated the school for preparing my boys for university.  Well neither is in university so I have no idea.  I think they are receiving an excellent education.  My sense of it is that their teachers are exceptional.  But I don't really have a meaningful point of reference.  Are there teachers in other schools that are just as good.  Anecdotal statements of other parents suggest that might be the case.  Are there worse teachers.  Stronger anecdotal evidence confirming that view.  But I really have no way of making a valid judgment.

The best I can say is that my sons enjoy school very much.  They come home with stories about how excellent Mr W is and how Ms. V's class was awesome etc;  I compare that with the number of times they complain about things and conclude that based on the overwhelming positive vs negative comments the boys are being taught well.

I like your idea about asking some time in the future but then there is a problem of fading memories and the fact that whether a kid succeeds in University may be due to factors entirely unrelated to the quality of their high school education.   In my time in university and anecdotal evidence from parents of recent university participants, managing to study while being away from home for the first time and exploring that freedom is a significant determinant of success.  That may have little to do with the quality of the education they received in high school.

[crazy canuck]

Ultimately the purpose of schooling is to prepare the young to become productive workers.  So the best measurements are what the users of the labour think, and whether they are really willing to put down something tangible, such as pay or university places. Hence, the best measurements are graduate pay and university admission rates.

drone on

[The Brain]

You seem confused.

  I did not.  I was just amazed.  Who'd have figured that the one guy in the world for whom there's "no great mystery about measuring [job] performance" would post to the same small discussion board I do?

Come back when you're sober.

[grumbler]

  I did not.  I was just amazed.  Who'd have figured that the one guy in the world for whom there's "no great mystery about measuring [job] performance" would post to the same small discussion board I do?

Come back when you're sober.

You seem confused.

[Berkut]

In an ideal world, schools would be evaluated by having every student and every parent rate them on a scale of, say, 1-10 as to how well they think that the school prepared them (or their children) for success over the five years from "graduation." A pre-K though five school thus gets rated by 10th graders and their parents, etc.   That's really the only measure I see as meaningful, and it isn't objective. If it turns out that a skill the school taught isn't subjectively useful, then even if it is well-taught it doesn't get the school any credit.  A school could have the best bullwhip-cracking department in the country, and objectively score really well on the standardized tests for bullwhip-cracking, but that doesn't mean that it is a good school.

Now, maybe 5 years isn't enough to tell if skills are useful, maybe five years is too long because too much could have changed in the meantime, and maybe 10th graders aren't in a good position to evaluate how well they have been served by the skills and knowledge taught in their pre-K through 5 school, but you get the general idea.  Let the customers evaluate the utility of a school.

Thoughts?  Any way to make this doable in the real world?

I think the general idea of using the customers to evaluate teachers is a very good idea. I can't imagine it ever being possible for political reasons, at least not in places like New York with stupidly powerful teachers unions.

[Martinus]

You would have to first change parents' mentality, though. It used to be that if a kid brought a D from school, parents would be mad with the kid. Now they are mad with the teacher.

[Valmy]

You would have to first change parents' mentality, though. It used to be that if a kid brought a D from school, parents would be mad with the kid. Now they are mad with the teacher.

Most parents are still mad at the kid. But we live in an era where confidence in institutions is low and nutcases are empowered to see conspiracies and oppression everywhere. That goes far beyond just parents.

[grumbler]

You would have to first change parents' mentality, though. It used to be that if a kid brought a D from school, parents would be mad with the kid. Now they are mad with the teacher.

We'd either have to change the mentality, or change the myth about the mentality of "parents now."  Sure, there are parents today that refuse to accept that their kids are at fault, but there have always been such parents and always will be.  There will, apparently, also always be people who believe that "parents now" or "kids these days" are significantly different from the way they've always been.

[Valmy]

You would have to first change parents' mentality, though. It used to be that if a kid brought a D from school, parents would be mad with the kid. Now they are mad with the teacher.

We'd either have to change the mentality, or change the myth about the mentality of "parents now."  Sure, there are parents today that refuse to accept that their kids are at fault, but there have always been such parents and always will be.  There will, apparently, also always be people who believe that "parents now" or "kids these days" are significantly different from the way they've always been.

Well yeah there is that to.

[Berkut]

You would have to first change parents' mentality, though. It used to be that if a kid brought a D from school, parents would be mad with the kid. Now they are mad with the teacher.

Yeah, the problem here is that you don't know what you are talking about.

This is trite and standard "Woe is society" bitching. I am sure it happens, but mostly people don't blame the school for their kids getting bad grades any more now than they have ever before - or rather, I've never seen any actual evidence other than whines like this from people like you.

I know lots of parents, we spend plenty of time bitching about schools and our kids, and we all well understand that the vast majority of the input into your kids grades comes from the kid, not the teacher.

[DGuller]

Before we can solve any of this, people in today's society need to stop complaining about how kids or society these days are worse than they were in the past.  Back in the days people knew better than that.

[crazy canuck]

  Back in the days people knew better than that.