PARCC, Teacher Evaluations & "Junk Statistics": An Expert Speaks
In the spring of last year, nj.com posted a story about the PARCC exam -- the new, semi-national standardized test that has been a large source of controversy -- and how it would affect teacher evaluations in the state.
I happened to notice a really great comment from "Rutgers Professor" just below the article. The scholar in question is Gerald A. Goldin. I don't know him personally, but I had certainly heard about him: he is the definition of a scholar, distinguished in both his field and the teaching of his field.
It bothered me, frankly, that someone as knowledgable as Goldin, who had written a genuine essay within his comment, wasn't featured more prominently in this post. Since I'm at Rutgers myself, I contacted him to ask if I could publish what he wrote.
I didn't hear back from him until later in the fall; he was away, and then I was away, and you know how that goes. Dr, Goldin, however, was very gracious and agreed to let me reprint what he wrote. I only apologize I haven't done so until now.
What you're about to read is important; Gerald Goldin's opinion on how PARCC will be used matters. I know the state has dropped the percentage of SGP used in a teacher's total evaluation to 10 percent, but even that's too much for a method that is fundamentally invalid.
I'm honored to host this essay on my blog. Thanks, Dr. Goldin, for this contribution.
* * *
An 8th thing to know: Junk statistics
I read with interest the on-line article (March 16, 2015), “7 things to know about PARCC’s effect on teacher evaluations” at www.nj.com/education/.
As a mathematical scientist with knowledge of modeling, of statistics, and of mathematics education research, I am persuaded that what we see here could fairly be termed "junk statistics"
- See more at: http://jerseyjazzman.blogspot.com/2016/01/parcc-teacher-evaluations-junk.html#sthash.fg1qMgMJ.dpuf
