Letter

Studies With ‘Qualifiers,’ Confusion on Goals

January 30, 2007

To the Editor:

There are two important aspects of your Jan. 10, 2007, article "Study Links Merit Pay to Slightly Higher Student Scores" that deserve more scrutiny.

First, what is meant, in the headline and elsewhere, by the word “slightly”? Is there a significant statistical difference? Too many studies are being produced today with such qualifiers, which offer little help in interpreting study data.

Second, and more importantly, a professor of education policy studies, commenting on the report, is quoted in the article as saying: “Accountability systems and incentives will almost certainly make test scores go up. What we don’t know in the long run is whether students are learning more.” What a telling comment!

I have long predicted that the day would come when students passed the mandated tests and schools got a performing label, yet the nation’s children and graduates were not truly educated. Should our goal not be long-term learning and retention, as opposed to short-term test results?

Sam Weinschenk

Wickenburg, Ariz.

Vol. 26, Issue 21, Page 35

Published in Print: January 31, 2007, as Studies With ‘Qualifiers,’ Confusion on Goals

Studies With ‘Qualifiers,’ Confusion on Goals

Viewed

Emailed

Recommended

Commented

Studies With ‘Qualifiers,’ Confusion on Goals

Get more stories and free e-newsletters!

Viewed

Emailed

Recommended

Commented

Sponsor Insights