Rhee's test scores

[Anonymous]

In this morning's issue of Themail@DC Watch (http://www.dcwatch.com/themail/2011/11-03-30.htm), Gary Imhoff writes of Michelle Rhee's test score miracles. Taking off from a US Today article (http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2011-03-28-1Aschooltesting28_CV_N.htm?csp=hf), he points out that there are significant issues about the validity of those test results due to extremely high numbers of erasures. Given that major bonuses, and even jobs, depended on those results, it seems to me there is good reason to treat the issue seriously.

I was always skeptical of teaching to tests, and by coincidence an op-ed piece in today's Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/31/opinion/31lee.html?hp) is relevant to that issue. And I had heard that test results may have been skewed by encouraging low achieving students to be absent on the day of the tests. But I never imagined that there may have been actual doctoring of the test papers as now appears may have happened.

Rhee has responded to Politico (http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0311/Rhee_DC_defends_test_investigation.html?showall) and Salon (http://www.salon.com/life/education/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2011/03/29/rhee_cheating). To me, it looks like her response consists of (a) labeling the charges as an attack on hard-working students and teachers, (b) calumny from her enemies, and (c) just statistics that don't prove cheating. The first is pure misdirection, the second is an attack on the messenger, and the third is a distortion of the fact that statistics only purport to give strong evidence, not proof. None of it actually responds to the fact that her policies offered monetary motivation to take the actions that, according to statistics, very likely occurred.

I think the big question for DC right now is Gray's reaction to this and how it affects Henderson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In this morning's issue of Themail@DC Watch (http://www.dcwatch.com/themail/2011/11-03-30.htm), Gary Imhoff writes of Michelle Rhee's test score miracles. Taking off from a US Today article (http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2011-03-28-1Aschooltesting28_CV_N.htm?csp=hf), he points out that there are significant issues about the validity of those test results due to extremely high numbers of erasures. Given that major bonuses, and even jobs, depended on those results, it seems to me there is good reason to treat the issue seriously.

I was always skeptical of teaching to tests, and by coincidence an op-ed piece in today's Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/31/opinion/31lee.html?hp) is relevant to that issue. And I had heard that test results may have been skewed by encouraging low achieving students to be absent on the day of the tests. But I never imagined that there may have been actual doctoring of the test papers as now appears may have happened.

Rhee has responded to Politico (http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0311/Rhee_DC_defends_test_investigation.html?showall) and Salon (http://www.salon.com/life/education/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2011/03/29/rhee_cheating). To me, it looks like her response consists of (a) labeling the charges as an attack on hard-working students and teachers, (b) calumny from her enemies, and (c) just statistics that don't prove cheating. The first is pure misdirection, the second is an attack on the messenger, and the third is a distortion of the fact that statistics only purport to give strong evidence, not proof. None of it actually responds to the fact that her policies offered monetary motivation to take the actions that, according to statistics, very likely occurred.

I think the big question for DC right now is Gray's reaction to this and how it affects Henderson.

Statistics are pretty damning. It would be hard to imagine why a certain school or schools would have a highly unusual number of erasures from incorrect to correct answers. These are the kinds of things for which lots of data exists.