Reformy Disconnect: “Quality Based” RIF?
I addressed this point previously in my post on cost-effectiveness of quality based layoffs, but it was buried deep in the post.
Reformers are increasingly calling for quality based layoffs versus seniority based layoffs, as if a simple dichotomy. Sounds like a no brainer when framed in these distorted terms.
I pointed out in the previous post that if the proposal on the table is really about using value-added teacher effect estimates versus years of service, we’re really talking about the choice between significantly biased and error prone – largely random – layoffs versus using years of service. It doesn’t sound as much like a no brainer when put in those terms, does it? It is actually quite difficult to determine which, in this case, is
