4 ms·

In practice, year to year, the ability of kids varies. While you might have a strong group one year, the next year things can be much different. Imagine the j

In practice, year to year, the ability of kids varies. While you might have a strong group one year, the next year things can be much different. Imagine the jockeying by teachers to get the best students if it meant their job or a raise. Do the less able kids get kicked the the curb because teachers are worried about getting fired?

derefr 16y ago
Define "the best students." With my assumption of measurement by derivatives above, those would be the students whose knowledge changed the most during the lesson—those who knew the least before and the most after. Thus, teachers would be jockeying for the students most in need of education, not the students who already know the most (because the pretest scores would reveal that the teacher hadn't changed their knowledge very much over the year.) Rather than the current No Child Left Behind policy of regression to the mean, this would assign the most "learning-intensive" teachers to the students most in need of learning, and assign the students who self-study or are otherwise pre-informed to teachers who are more "lenient", likely diving further into interesting sidebars and tangents. Both groups would be better off for it.
- ryanhuff 16y ago
  "best students" meaning those who are eager to learn and have supportive family situations. Teachers can't do it on their own.
  - yummyfajitas 16y ago
    Students who knew a lot going into 3'rd grade and still knew a lot coming out of 3'rd grade will not have a high derivative. Thus, merit based pay would reward their teacher the same as if students knew very little going into 3'rd grade and knew very little coming out. The only way I can see to game derefr's system is to pack your class with students who used to have bad family situations, but who's family situations have recently improved. I rather doubt there are enough students in that situation to pack many classes.

derefr 16y ago

Define "the best students." With my assumption of measurement by derivatives above, those would be the students whose knowledge changed the most during the lesson—those who knew the least before and the most after. Thus, teachers would be jockeying for the students most in need of education, not the students who already know the most (because the pretest scores would reveal that the teacher hadn't changed their knowledge very much over the year.) Rather than the current No Child Left Behind policy of regression to the mean, this would assign the most "learning-intensive" teachers to the students most in need of learning, and assign the students who self-study or are otherwise pre-informed to teachers who are more "lenient", likely diving further into interesting sidebars and tangents. Both groups would be better off for it.

ryanhuff 16y ago
"best students" meaning those who are eager to learn and have supportive family situations. Teachers can't do it on their own.
- yummyfajitas 16y ago
  Students who knew a lot going into 3'rd grade and still knew a lot coming out of 3'rd grade will not have a high derivative. Thus, merit based pay would reward their teacher the same as if students knew very little going into 3'rd grade and knew very little coming out. The only way I can see to game derefr's system is to pack your class with students who used to have bad family situations, but who's family situations have recently improved. I rather doubt there are enough students in that situation to pack many classes.