InterestingAnd perhaps this is where we agree to disagree. I still don't think that separating processes from their results will result in better processes or results. Isn't that one of the definitions of insanity: Performing the same action and expecting a different result?
See, that's the thing. I'm not suggesting, at ALL, that we keep doing the same thing. I'm suggesting that we monitor teacher performance, not kid performance, to make sure we have the best teachers. That means changing behavior.
My missionary comments were very poor, I agree. I do think teacher's have influence. I think a good teacher (or missionary) has a better CHANCE of having better results. However, I don't think that success is a given. Even when most of the building material is good, you may still end up with the worst bits of it. and since the teacher doesn't choose which students he works with, his ability to appriase that material doesn't mean he'll have the better results in the end. Plus there are many other external events in any child's life. Puberty, divorcing parents, marrying parents, marrying siblings, family or friends getting into mental/physical/legal trouble. These can hurt performance. sure the kid'll bounce back, but in the mean time he's hurt the teacher's performance evaluation.
Another problem. Are the students to be evaluated by these same tests? let's say they do, and they live in a wealthy area. then even if they have a rotten teacher, they have a vested interest in performing well on this test, so they buy outside help, in the form of an outstanding tutor, thus artificially raising the teacher's performance evaluation. ANd if they don't, the kids don't have a vested interest in doign well on the test. Maybe they have a teacher who is teaching well but they don't like personally (or who caught them misbehaving), so they intentionally do poorly on the tests to hurt the teacher. Or they just don't care and slack off. whether the test/evaluation is timed or not, the typical kid will want to get out of there and will hurry it, reducing their actual performance.
And yes, I think both of these are likely scenarios, especially when we're dealing with testing teenagers.
I agree to disagree with you, though. No reason why our politics can't be different. We both know we have similar recreational and professional interests.
I do want to say one thing about ADD. ADD is a behavioral disorder that, due to it's nature, affects learning. A teacher who knows the basic signs, or a parent, or a coach, or a doctor, can recommend that a child be examined by a trained professional to diagnose the disorder. By no means is a school examination (written, bubbled, oral, or whatever) a necessary or even likely means of noticing the child needs attention. Some children with ADD test very well in many environments, but they still need help, esp. if they're particularly bright. I just wanted to add that, because what i remember about our discussion of ADD it seemed to be a vague area.