PARCC scores are a poor measuring stick

A GREAT DEAL of Journal column space has been allotted to denunciations of union opposition to merit bonuses meted out by the PED. These salary bumps are given to teachers scoring in the “exemplary” category as determined by the state rubric for evaluation. I have three concerns.

First, the Journal assumes that the state definition of “exemplary” translates to truly outstanding classroom teaching. It can be, but remains heavily skewed toward student scores attached to mandated state standardized tests. Outstanding, even amazing, teaching may not create test scores that qualify one for exemplary status . ... Simply put, PARCC scores often do not reflect the level or quality of teaching. It is a rubric created by those who have never successfully taught K-12 students.

Second, the Journal assumes the tests on which the evaluations for merit pay are based are relevant, valid, reliable, or even grade-appropriate for the student. This is a major reason (some) states have abandoned the PARCC. New Mexico continues to tenaciously embrace this dying consortia.

Third, if New Mexico truly wanted to recognize exemplary teaching, (it) would consult groups such as The Golden Apple Foundation of New Mexico (which) do annually successfully select and recognize great teaching.

Objections to merit pay based on faulty standards are not just a union ploy. The state PED would be well-advised to re-evaluate (its) selection criteria.

DEL HANSEN Albuquerque