3 ms·
A few come to mind: cheating (see Atlanta Journal-Constitution series on this) encouraging absenteeism amongst low performers damaging the test materials of
by DataWorker 14y ago
A few come to mind:
cheating (see Atlanta Journal-Constitution series on this)
encouraging absenteeism amongst low performers
damaging the test materials of low performing students to get their scores excluded
getting low performers into IEPs so they don't test, take the alternate or receive accommodations
sabotage other teachers in various ways
vie for the most favorable students by pulling strings with the administration
I'm sure if there's actual motivation one might find even more.
- yummyfajitas 14y agoMost of these issues can be addressed simply by completely separating education and evaluation. I.e., teachers take the day off when tests are administered, some bureaucrat shows up and does it instead. Treating damaged test materials/absent students as a score of 0 is the simplest way to prevent hacking the student body. vie for the most favorable students by pulling strings with the administration The most favorable students are those who will perform better than their statistical predictor. How do teachers know who those will be?
- WalterBright 14y agoThe teachers know who the good students are, just like the students know who the good teachers are.
- yummyfajitas 14y agoIf the statistical predictor in vam also knows who the good students are, this won't help. All it will do is raise the bar for that teacher.
- WalterBright 14y agoThe teachers know who the good students are, just like the students know who the good teachers are.