Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Testing And Career Ladders topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Utah lawmakers question how to measure gains from career ladders, ask whether current tests will do the job
Summary
Legislators pressed education panelists on whether Utah's career ladder investments and a proposed large funding increase can be shown to improve student outcomes, and whether the state's core assessments can be used for statewide comparisons instead of or alongside NAEP. The committee dissolved after the exchange.
Legislators questioned Tuesday whether Utah has the standards and tests needed to prove that recent investments in teachers and curriculum are producing measurable student gains.
The debate centered on the career ladder program and how to hold spending accountable. Speaker 4 asked panel members to "justify in accountability" whether the state's sizable investment in career ladders has been successful and whether children are "smarter now than they were 6 years ago." Speaker 2, a panel member, said career ladders have produced "a much better teacher evaluation program" and stronger staff development, enabling teachers to grow and support curriculum development and supervision. Speaker 2 cautioned, however, that "we don't have any research design to show that 1 to 1 ratio." Speaker 1 added that in Tennessee, which spent "a hundred million dollars on the career ladder program," studies that matched students of top-ladder teachers with students of random teachers showed "no statistical difference."
Why it matters: Lawmakers debating potential new funding want to know whether more money will produce demonstrable results. Speaker 6 asked bluntly whether putting about $130 million into education next year would "get a product, a better product on the end" and whether there is any way of proving improved outcomes. Several legislators warned that spending large sums "without establishing standards" risks wasting resources if there is no reliable way to measure how close districts are to the state curriculum standard.
Panelists and legislators discussed testing options. Speaker 2 said the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is "at this time, it's as good as we have to compare Utah with other states." At the same time, Speaker 5 asked whether Utah's own core assessment work could be used for statewide comparisons so the state would not have to create an entirely new testing program. Speaker 2 replied that "those core tests in 3 areas now are finished and we will start testing statewide," adding that these tests are "directly related to the curriculum" and will provide baseline data that can be used to chart progress from year to year.
Panel'level claims and limits: Panelists argued career ladders improved teacher practices and administrative capacity, but acknowledged a lack of randomized or quasi-experimental research design tying those changes directly to student achievement. The Tennessee example cited in the hearing was used to caution against assuming large investments automatically translate to better student outcomes.
Committee action and next steps: The committee expressed appreciation to state school board members in attendance and then the committee was dissolved as a whole on a motion by Speaker 3, who noted the motion "carries" on a voice vote. The committee adjourned until Monday at 10 a.m. on a subsequent voice vote.
Notable quotes from the record include Speaker 1: "It's embarrassing to live in Utah and to have high education officials of this state say we're doing a good job. We're a little bit better than average." Speaker 2 told the panel: "If we can just get the proper software support back to the teacher and the student ... we have everything in place to make gigantic strides."
