Validity First: The Politics, Governance, and Consequences of Teacher Evaluation.
Saved in:
| Title: | Validity First: The Politics, Governance, and Consequences of Teacher Evaluation. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Amrein-Beardsley, Audrey1 (AUTHOR) audrey.beardsley@asu.edu, Holloway, Jessica2 (AUTHOR), Lewis, Steven2,3 (AUTHOR), Stone, Courtney1,3 (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Education Sciences. May2026, Vol. 16 Issue 5, p766. 16p. |
| Subject Terms: | *Test validity, *Teacher evaluation, *Education policy, *Predictive validity, *Value-added assessment (Education), *Teacher effectiveness, Government accountability |
| Abstract: | Debates over teacher evaluation and teacher effectiveness have largely focused on methodological refinement, particularly the technical adequacy of value-added models (VAMs). Far less attention has been paid to the validity of the evidentiary foundations on which these systems rest. In this theoretical synthesis of validity theory related to use, interpretation, and consequences, we argue that validity must be treated not as a technical property of measures alone, but as an interpretive, political, and governance-laden construct that precedes legitimate policy use. We examine achievement tests as the primary evidentiary base for teacher effectiveness claims, highlighting persistent misalignments between test purposes, interpretations, and high-stakes uses. We then show how VAMs extend rather than resolve these foundational validity problems by amplifying weak inferential links between student test scores and judgments of teacher quality. Drawing on contemporary validity theory, we emphasize the centrality of interpretation–use arguments and consequential validity in accountability contexts. We conclude by outlining what a validity-first approach to teacher evaluation would require and why unresolved validity questions represent ethical and political failures in education policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Education Sciences is the property of MDPI and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Education Research Complete |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: ehh DbLabel: Education Research Complete An: 194185500 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Validity First: The Politics, Governance, and Consequences of Teacher Evaluation. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Amrein-Beardsley%2C+Audrey%22">Amrein-Beardsley, Audrey</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> audrey.beardsley@asu.edu</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Holloway%2C+Jessica%22">Holloway, Jessica</searchLink><relatesTo>2</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Lewis%2C+Steven%22">Lewis, Steven</searchLink><relatesTo>2,3</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Stone%2C+Courtney%22">Stone, Courtney</searchLink><relatesTo>1,3</relatesTo> (AUTHOR) – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Education+Sciences%22">Education Sciences</searchLink>. May2026, Vol. 16 Issue 5, p766. 16p. – Name: Subject Label: Subject Terms Group: Su Data: *<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Test+validity%22">Test validity</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+evaluation%22">Teacher evaluation</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Education+policy%22">Education policy</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Predictive+validity%22">Predictive validity</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Value-added+assessment+%28Education%29%22">Value-added assessment (Education)</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+effectiveness%22">Teacher effectiveness</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Government+accountability%22">Government accountability</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Debates over teacher evaluation and teacher effectiveness have largely focused on methodological refinement, particularly the technical adequacy of value-added models (VAMs). Far less attention has been paid to the validity of the evidentiary foundations on which these systems rest. In this theoretical synthesis of validity theory related to use, interpretation, and consequences, we argue that validity must be treated not as a technical property of measures alone, but as an interpretive, political, and governance-laden construct that precedes legitimate policy use. We examine achievement tests as the primary evidentiary base for teacher effectiveness claims, highlighting persistent misalignments between test purposes, interpretations, and high-stakes uses. We then show how VAMs extend rather than resolve these foundational validity problems by amplifying weak inferential links between student test scores and judgments of teacher quality. Drawing on contemporary validity theory, we emphasize the centrality of interpretation–use arguments and consequential validity in accountability contexts. We conclude by outlining what a validity-first approach to teacher evaluation would require and why unresolved validity questions represent ethical and political failures in education policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Education Sciences is the property of MDPI and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=ehh&AN=194185500 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.3390/educsci16050766 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 16 StartPage: 766 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Test validity Type: general – SubjectFull: Teacher evaluation Type: general – SubjectFull: Education policy Type: general – SubjectFull: Predictive validity Type: general – SubjectFull: Value-added assessment (Education) Type: general – SubjectFull: Teacher effectiveness Type: general – SubjectFull: Government accountability Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Validity First: The Politics, Governance, and Consequences of Teacher Evaluation. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Amrein-Beardsley, Audrey – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Holloway, Jessica – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Lewis, Steven – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Stone, Courtney IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 05 Text: May2026 Type: published Y: 2026 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 22277102 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 16 – Type: issue Value: 5 Titles: – TitleFull: Education Sciences Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
