The document discusses various issues relating to grading, teacher evaluation, due process, and student assessment, questioning whether we are meeting the intended purposes and applying criteria reasonably and consistently. It raises questions about what defines good teaching, whether students have consistent experiences, and how to make fair evaluations using adequate evidence. Ensuring rational, justified decisions based on reliable evidence applied consistently is emphasized.

2.  What is the purpose of grades?
 Are you being rational?
 Are we meeting that purpose?
 What is the purpose of teacher evaluation/student
assessment? Are we rational?
 Due Process: from an ends-based and care-based
point of view
 Which is subordinate to the other-ends-based or
care-based? Justice vs. Mercy, Individual vs.
Community
 If something visible does NOT happen is it still OK?

3. Who would you rather have you pack your
parachute?
What describes a good teacher? Do we
evaluate those qualities and are they the
same for everyone?
The influence of a good/great teacher on
student learning.

4. We need to be thoughtful about the
incentives we create.
What are we rewarding?

5. We must ensure that reasonable decisions
are made about other people in a rationally
justified way using adequate, reliable evidence in a
consistent way.
 Rumors, gossip, opinions, and/or hearsay
evidence must be disregarded or
independently checked to be sure the evidence
is reliable.

6. We must know what defines the standard
of “good teaching”! If we do not know and
the teacher does not know, then how can
we make personnel decisions!
Our judgments must be consistently
applied!

7. Do our students know what is expected of
them? Is this important? Can we just say
this is a function of application, or
synthesis, or some level of higher
cognition?
Do students with different teachers share a
similar and consistent experience? Is it OK
if they don’t?

8. How many assessments does it take for a
student to be evaluated fairly?
What if a chemistry student earned a 98%
on the final comprehensive, summative
exam, yet has not turned in all of her work.
What should her grade be? What types of
behaviors should help determine a grade?

10. A fundamentalist view is not healthy or
sufficient…care-based and the gum
chewer
Rules-based: What is relevant?
Grading…are we practicing “due process with
our students”

11.  What if unreasonable treatment did no harm and
reasonable treatment produced no good?
 Teacher capriciously assigns a grade.
 Suppose, also, that nothing turned on the grade.
 Student already admitted to their college of choice
and will earn an A in the course.
 Toss the paper down the steps and assign the
grade based upon the step it landed on.

12. I understand the rules based resolution
principle.
I can apply the rules based resolution
principle
I understand the idea of considering
relevant criteria in making decisions.
I understand the pros and cons of each of
the three resolution principles…ends-
based, care-based and rules based.

13. Jackie: Hockey coach
Julie: Special Education teacher
Or….FaCS, Art, Business,Math, English,
etc., etc.

14. Facts vs. Morals vs. Values

15. • Very good coach, brings stability to your program
(6 coaches in 8 years) never a winning season,
former coach of the year winner, has taken a team
to the state tournament, left teaching and
coaching to work in business world and now
wants to return, something the basketball program
has not had previously
• Coach that will be in the building as a part of the
program and to make connections to student-
athletes

16. Candidate #1 (Jackie)
Will be outstanding coach and will bring much needed
stability to the basketball program. Will be member of an
already strong special education department, will be one of
11teachers, reference check indicated “will not hurt
you and will meet deadlines and will have to be reminded a
lot”, would likely not be the worst colleague but also not the
best, predictably an average, middle of the road selection
Candidate #2 (Julie)
As good a teacher as Candidate #1 is a coach…will bring
much to the department and will likely improve it by
the wealth of experience and work ethic they will bring to the
department, akin to a “first round pick”

17. m.socrative.com
ROOM NAME: eds740

18. Our discussion…basketball coach/special education
teacher vs. special education teacher
• Facts
 “What is relevant?”
 “Some coaches do not teach a rigorous curriculum”
 “Whoever tells the stories defines the culture”
 What is our mission?-Reach fullest potential
 For what are we being held accountable?
• Morality
 “We ought to have a ‘superstar’ teacher in every classroom”
 “Every student in co-curricular activities ought to have ‘superstar’
program leaders.”
 Co-curricular programs ought to be subordinate to academic programs
 We ought to have program leaders in our building.
• Values
 Classroom teachers are more important than our program leaders.
 Programs leaders are just as important to our school & students as our
classroom teachers.

19. Richmond (VA) v. Croson-30% of city’s
subcontracts were reserved for minority-
owned companies (J.A. Croson Company
wanted to install stainless steel toilets in
the city jail.
• Need to have evidence for systematically
excluding minorities
Toobin, J. (2007). The nine. New York: Doubleday.

20.  1997: Barbara Grutter: 3.8 G.P.A. and 161 on LSAT and wait listed
to law school
 1995: Jennifer Gratz: 3.8 G.P.A and 25 on ACT and wait listed for
undergraduate College of Literature, Sciences and the Arts and
attended another school
 1997: Patrick Hamacher 3.0 G.P.A. and 28 on ACT and wait listed
for undergraduate College of Literature, Sciences, and the Arts and
attended another school.

21.  Undergraduates: rank based on SAT and grades
• Minority with 3.5 G.P.A. and 1200 SAT admitted
• White candidate would be rejected with same criteria
• Ranking system allowed automatic point increase to all racial
minorities rather than making individual determinations.
• New Michigan Criteria Statement
 Law School: individualized because of fewer
students but gave significant advantages to
minorities.
• Between 3.25 and 3.49 G.P.A. and LSAT of 156-158
 1 of 51 Whites accepted
 10 of 10 Blacks accepted

22.  Michigan: important to develop a diverse
workforce (General Motors, Microsoft, Boeing,
Coca-Cola, GE supported them)
 Military: “highly qualified racially diverse officer
corps educated and trained to command our
nation’s racially diverse enlisted ranks its
essential to the military’s ability to fulfill its
principal mission to provide national security”
 21.7% African American: enlisted
 8.8%: officer corps
 3 service academies and ROTC practice race-
conscious affirmative action in admissions

23. Grutter v. Bollinger: Law school won
because treated students as individuals
much like Harvard
Gratz v. Bollinger: undergraduate school
lost because it was more rigid and closer
to a quota system.

24.  Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
 Medical school reserved 16 of 100 seats for
minorities.
 Struck down, BUT race or ethnic background
may be deemed a “plus” in a particular
applicants file.
 Harvard: The race of a student may tip the
balance in their favor as could geographic origin
or a life spent on a farm may tip the balance in
other candidate’s cases.

28.  Some Americans enjoy baseball.
• Those that don’t enjoy baseball should not stop those
that do from attending games.
 Some Americans may believe or believed
baseball should only be played by white players.
• Is this a value or moral position?
 What about gender equity…Title IX?
• Are there other examples?
 Certain mascots…smoking in public place…donations from
convicts

31.  A high school can be most efficient if every
student is REQUIRED to take two study halls (in
a 7 period day)
 We are staffed based upon teachers teaching 5
periods each day.
 Students often take 7 classes each day.
 Eliminate this option by requiring two study
halls, equals same class sizes and more
efficient operation.

32. Even/consistent class sizes
Elective departments will be affected
Students will not have opportunity to
engage in different experiences
Overall effectiveness of education is
diminished
Are we educating our students to their
fullest potential?

33. In any given circumstances, people who
are the same in those respects
relevant to how they are treated in
those circumstances should receive
the same treatment.
Conversely:
People who are relevantly different should be
treated differently.

34. Irrelevant to educational mission
• Race, sex, religion, and ethnicity
 It is an injustice to treat folks differently based upon these
characteristics in most cases
Relevant to educational mission
• Religion used to admit to a theological seminary
• Race used to remedy a racial discrimination program
• In this case ability (gifted and talented) AND need
(Hispanic community) are relevant

35. Morality Claims
Treat equals equally and unequals unequally
Relevancy Claims
Certain factors are relevant to how people
are to be treated and others are irrelevant
Efficacy Claims (effectiveness)
Particular kinds of treatments produce
desirable results

36. What do we want to achieve? What end
result do we want?
&
Rule Based
 Making decisions based on relevance
allows for the most efficient use of
resources and opportunities (Is this what
we really want?) (equals equal/unequals
unequal)
 If not, we will not be effective and will not
maximize human welfare

37. Inefficient…may not hire the best person
because of “fill-in-the-blank.
Same for educational opportunities.

38.  What characteristics should we look for
when hiring.
 What characteristics should we look for
when evaluating educational opportunity?
 Begin with the end in mind.

39.  What characteristics allows educators to make the
most efficient use of resources?
 Apply this principle to the gifted talented program.
 Apply this principle to Hispanic/Latino students.
 Compare the two in terms of the benefit
maximization to the community.

40. Maybe the gifted/talented program only
produces a little extra benefit (low
efficiency/low effectiveness)
Benefit to society for Hispanic children will
be small in relation to costs
(effective/efficient)

41. Must still consider relevancy
• Hiring of one individual over the other and the
reason
 If because of race, gender, ethnicity, religion, etc
then this diminishes the person as a human being and
what they have accomplished
 If because of ability-then the individual is still worthy
and deserving person

42. Does not require us to select the most
efficient use of resources
Hispanic children should not be denied the
chance for a better life
At times it is important to meet the needs
of some and this is more important than
maximizing the average welfare of all.

45. Is participation
in advanced
placement
programs
representative
of all students?
Are all
students
perceiving the
learning in the
same way?
Is there a
difference in
student
achievement
results by
program
paticipation?
What are the
differences in
student
learning based
on who the
students are
and how they
are taught
algebra?

46. Slavery and Ends-Based
Thinking. 61-62.
• William Seward and his trip
to Virginia in 1835 exposed a
glaring inefficiency.

47. Christopher Langan J. Robert Oppenheimer
Gladwell, Malcolm. (2008). The trouble with
geniuses, part 2. In Outliers: The Story of
success. (pp 91-115). New York: Little,
Brown and Company.

49. What is the problem?
 What are the circumstances out of which the problem arose?
What are the end results I want to receive?
 What is the right thing to do? What is the successful thing to do?
 What is your first inclination for course of action?
What is the continuum of possible solutions?
 What are the advantages and disadvantages of each solution?
Community Acceptability Test
 Does this solution conform to my school, community, district,
professional code of conduct?
 Is it legal?
 Is it safe?
 Does it adhere to the values of the community?
 What would mother think if my decision shows up on the front page of
the newspaper?
Personal Value Test
 Does it adhere to my personal values?
 Can I sleep tonight?
What ethical or moral principals are involved? (benefit maximization,
equal respect, equal treatment, maximin principle)
What is your decision?

50. What is the problem and is it a moral issue?
 What are the circumstances out of which the problem arose?
Who is responsible to respond/do something?
What are the relevant facts?
 Ask a lot of questions & get the details.
What are the end results I want to receive?
 What is the right thing to do? What is the successful thing to do?
 What is your first inclination for course of action?
Community Acceptability Test/Test for right vs. wrong.
 Does this solution conform to my school, community, district,
professional code of conduct?
 Is it legal?
 Does it violate a code or standard regulations?
 Does it adhere to the values of the community?
 What would mother think if my decision shows up on the front
page of the newspaper?
Personal Value Test
 Does it adhere to my personal values?
 Can I sleep tonight?
What ethical or moral principals are involved? (think about the 4 paradigms…justice
v. mercy, short-term v. long term, truth v. loyalty, self v. community.)
Apply the resolution principles…ends-based, care-based, rule-based
What is the continuum of possible solutions?
 What are the advantages and disadvantages of each solution?
 Is there a trilemma option?
What is your decision?
Reflect on your decision.

51. I understand the rules based resolution
principle.
I can apply the rules based resolution
principle
I understand the idea of considering
relevant criteria in making decisions.
I understand the pros and cons of each of
the three resolution principles…ends-
based, care-based and rules based.