College ratings to trust
If you are, as the law school applicant in my family has begun to call them, a prestige whore, then I guess the U.S. News & World Report America's Best Colleges rankings are for you. Those lists are based heavily on what colleges think of each other---what is called the reputational score. The higher the rank, the wider the smile on your grandmother's face when you get in.
But if you want an introduction to a lesser known, but to my mind more useful, rating of undergraduate institutions, take a close look at my colleague Daniel de Vise's examination of the National Survey of Student Engagement, part of washingtonpost.com's new higher education page.
The NSSE, or "Nessie" to its friends, tells you not how much esteem the masses hold for a college, but how much value it has added to its students' lives. It does not ask college presidents at other schools to rate the campus. It asks students who actually studied there. The questions are based on the most extensive research of what makes a valuable college experience: How many short papers did you write? How often did you talk to professors out of class about what you were learning? How much contact did you have with students of different backgrounds?
Continue reading this post »Fairfax doublespeak on school openings and MoCo’s gamble
The adults who work in Fairfax County government are allowed to take unscheduled leave today because, presumably, the streets are not plowed well enough for business as usual. Yet kids (and adults) are supposed to get to Fairfax County public schools. How nice: They get two extra hours to get there.
Something is wrong with this picture.
If the roads aren’t clear enough to order all county government employees to go to work, (as emergency service personnel were told to do), how can county officials be confident that the roads are clear enough for school buses to pick up tens of thousands of students?
Continue reading this post »




















RESPONDED ON FEBRUARY 16, 2010 9:44 AM
Students Need Evaluation Too
It is not clear that their intention to use value-added scores will necessarily be the right way to do it. As Randi Weingarten said, value-added scores should measure students at the beginning of the school year and the end of the school year to see how much progress they made in the classroom of a specific teacher of a specific subject. If Houston is comparing cohort to cohort, then they don't have accurate information because students are not randomly assigned, and cohorts are not necessarily comparable. The information will also be flawed unless it takes into account progress over three years. There is a solid body of research showing that value-added scores are not stable from year to year. A teacher who is the "best" one year may not be in the top category a year or two later; conversely, a teacher who got very low value-added scores one year may get very good results the next year or the one after. It would be interesting to see if there is a district anywhere in the U.S. that has used value-added scores to evaluate teachers and actually improved student performance. Tennessee has been doing it for some 20 years, and I can't see any big improvement in the state's performance on NAEP. Now, would Terry Grier, the superintendent in Houston, please come up with a plan to hold students accountable for doing their homework, showing up in class everyday, and taking their studies seriously? And while he is at it, how about an accountability plan for parents? Give them grades based on whether their children go to school ready to learn. Did they get breakfast? Do they have a quiet place to study? Are their TV and computer habits monitored? If we are serious about student performance, we must evaluate the teacher, but also the student and his or her family. Teachers are important but they are not the sole source of student performance.
RESPONDED ON FEBRUARY 16, 2010 9:31 AM
Groping Our Way to the Future