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

[frunk]

You can measure how well students do on tests, as well as their post-graduation performance.  The difficult part is separating other factors (income, environment, family, individual circumstance) from the school based ones to determine what contributes to the result.

[grumbler]

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?

[grumbler]

I don't think we should waste any time or money trying to measure student and teacher performance.  Let the SATs/ACTs do that like they always have.

The SATs and ACTs are poor indicators of success in vocational or artistic training.  They measure success in preparation for college, and even then only in a gross fashion.  They are a classic example of the "one size fits none" solution, and universities are increasingly ignoring them.

[grumbler]

... So we are still left with the basic problem.  How can one judge what makes a good school and whether it has good teachers.  Without that kind of information people make random or poor choices.

The same way one judges which universities fit the student's ambitions and abilities.  Information is key, but it's not like there are not models of how to get information out there.

[Monoriu]

In HK, we officially divide all schools into three categories (used to be 9 bands decades ago).  Band 1, Band 2, Band 3.  How well do they do in standardised tests.  That categorisation is officially done.  Band 1 are the best schools.  Band 3 are the worst.  Problem solved

[grumbler]

In HK, we officially divide all schools into three categories (used to be 9 bands decades ago).  Band 1, Band 2, Band 3.  How well do they do in standardised tests.  That categorisation is officially done.  Band 1 are the best schools.  Band 3 are the worst.  Problem solved

All that does is assign arbitrary labels to schools.  Problem:  Not Solved.

[Monoriu]

In HK, we officially divide all schools into three categories (used to be 9 bands decades ago).  Band 1, Band 2, Band 3.  How well do they do in standardised tests.  That categorisation is officially done.  Band 1 are the best schools.  Band 3 are the worst.  Problem solved

All that does is assign arbitrary labels to schools.  Problem:  Not Solved.

Well, it is not exactly arbitrary.  The exam scores are very clear and objective, and the exam is administered by a central authority.  If not, we'll be subject to judicial review.  I see why a lot of people don't like it though.  Starting from age 6, the kids are assigned a label that they are the worst students, they are hopeless and there is no point to do anything in their lifes. 

[crazy canuck]

... So we are still left with the basic problem.  How can one judge what makes a good school and whether it has good teachers.  Without that kind of information people make random or poor choices.

The same way one judges which universities fit the student's ambitions and abilities.  Information is key, but it's not like there are not models of how to get information out there.

I agree.  I was just describing the downside of implementing a similar system without that sort of information.

[DGuller]

You can't incentivize performance without being able to measure it.  And if you can't measure it fully, ignoring it may be a better option.  People are capable of doing a good job for reasons other than direct performance incentives.  Incentives work best where they can work, but they can't work everywhere.

I don't think anyone has established that performance can't be measured.

Well, given the existence of this thread, there is a bit of an uncertainty about that.  Personally, I'm not even sure that you can measure individual student's performance all that well by statistical means.  Sure, you can test their math skills, and I think that everyone should major in math, but there is more to education than math.  So much more that focusing on the testable subjects can do too much damage to the untestable subjects.

[Admiral Yi]

Well, given the existence of this thread, there is a bit of an uncertainty about that.  Personally, I'm not even sure that you can measure individual student's performance all that well by statistical means.  Sure, you can test their math skills, and I think that everyone should major in math, but there is more to education than math.  So much more that focusing on the testable subjects can do too much damage to the untestable subjects.

The existence of cheating doesn't by itself invalidate the measure.

[DGuller]

Well, given the existence of this thread, there is a bit of an uncertainty about that.  Personally, I'm not even sure that you can measure individual student's performance all that well by statistical means.  Sure, you can test their math skills, and I think that everyone should major in math, but there is more to education than math.  So much more that focusing on the testable subjects can do too much damage to the untestable subjects.

The existence of cheating doesn't by itself invalidate the measure.

Where did I say anything about cheating?

[grumbler]

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?

[Admiral Yi]

Where did I say anything about cheating?

Oops, wrong thread.

I think my original point is still valid though, that no one has established that performance can't be measured.

[Monoriu]

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.

[DGuller]

No.