Stacey Isaacson, by all human reports, is a fantastically gifted and effective teacher. But let a couple of dodos at the Tammany Courthouse “measure” her performance, using a formula out of RubeGoldberg, and you’ll “discover” that she’s really “worse” than 93% of her colleagues!

The calculation for Ms. Isaacson’s 3.69 predicted score is even more daunting. It is based on 32 variables — including whether a student was “retained in grade before pretest year” and whether a student is “new to city in pretest or post-test year.”

Those 32 variables are plugged into a statistical model that looks like one of those equations that in “Good Will Hunting” only Matt Damon was capable of solving.
The process appears transparent, but it is clear as mud, even for smart lay people like teachers, principals and — I hesitate to say this — journalists.

Ms. Isaacson may have two Ivy League degrees, but she is lost. “I find this impossible to understand,” she said.

Experience with the bureaucratic mind suggests that the “statistical model” becomes more onerous as the performance of students rises.

Drop me a line at rjk@dailyblague.com
This entry was posted on Monday, March 7th, 2011 at 10:30 am.