Matching Items (2)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Education Organizing
- Creators: McGuire, Keon
Description
Since the genesis of the long experimental project known as the United States of America, the country has invested in the creation, implementation and maintenance of exclusionary policies and practices which have effectually denied whole and equitable access to educational spaces for Black children. These conventions have presented in a myriad of ways from: ignorance compulsory laws, segregation, disparate rates of school suspensions and expulsions, school closures, school funding inequities, denial of access to rigorous classes, burdensome school admissions policies and the disproportionate funneling of Black children into disabled and low-track class designations. Throughout this constant contortion of approaches to educational exclusion, Black mothers have had to guide, cover and encourage their children as they navigate these barriers and dodge the pitfalls of educational removal. This critical ethnographic oral history seeks to investigate the ways that a grassroots community organizing group led by a cadre of Black othermothers, known as the Aurora Coalition of Black Mothers, strategize to challenge the educational structures that support pushout and the continued exclusion of Black children from schools. Employing the frames of Critical Race Theory, BlackCrit and Black Feminist Thought, this study seeks to interrogate the following overarching concerns: 1) How does the mothers’ standpoint affect their response to school system inequities. 2)What is the influence of their efforts towards school equity? What is revealed is the mothers’ ability to employ a strategic wisdom that acknowledges the limits of systems change, perseveres against the intractability of White supremacy and works towards a freer Black education future for their children.
ContributorsDemps, Dawn M. (Author) / McGuire, Keon (Thesis advisor) / Nakagawa, Kathryn (Thesis advisor) / Bertrand, Melanie (Committee member) / Sampson, Carrie (Committee member) / Stovall, David (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2021
Description
Over the past 20 years in the United States (U.S.), teachers have seen a marked
shift in how teacher evaluation policies govern the evaluation of their performance.
Spurred by federal mandates, teachers have been increasingly held accountable for their
students’ academic achievement, most notably through the use of value-added models
(VAMs)—a statistically complex tool that aims to isolate and then quantify the effect of
teachers on their students’ achievement. This increased focus on accountability ultimately
resulted in numerous lawsuits across the U.S. where teachers protested what they felt
were unfair evaluations informed by invalid, unreliable, and biased measures—most
notably VAMs.
While New Mexico’s teacher evaluation system was labeled as a “gold standard”
due to its purported ability to objectively and accurately differentiate between effective
and ineffective teachers, in 2015, teachers filed suit contesting the fairness and accuracy
of their evaluations. Amrein-Beardsley and Geiger’s (revise and resubmit) initial analyses
of the state’s teacher evaluation data revealed that the four individual measures
comprising teachers’ overall evaluation scores showed evidence of bias, and specifically,
teachers who taught in schools with different student body compositions (e.g., special
education students, poorer students, gifted students) had significantly different scores
than their peers. The purpose of this study was to expand upon these prior analyses by
investigating whether those conclusions still held true when controlling for a variety of
confounding factors at the school, class, and teacher levels, as such covariates were not
included in prior analyses.
Results from multiple linear regression analyses indicated that, overall, the
measures used to inform New Mexico teachers’ overall evaluation scores still showed
evidence of bias by school-level student demographic factors, with VAMs potentially
being the most susceptible and classroom observations being the least. This study is
especially unique given the juxtaposition of such a highly touted evaluation system also
being one where teachers contested its constitutionality. Study findings are important for
all education stakeholders to consider, especially as teacher evaluation systems and
related policies continue to be transformed.
shift in how teacher evaluation policies govern the evaluation of their performance.
Spurred by federal mandates, teachers have been increasingly held accountable for their
students’ academic achievement, most notably through the use of value-added models
(VAMs)—a statistically complex tool that aims to isolate and then quantify the effect of
teachers on their students’ achievement. This increased focus on accountability ultimately
resulted in numerous lawsuits across the U.S. where teachers protested what they felt
were unfair evaluations informed by invalid, unreliable, and biased measures—most
notably VAMs.
While New Mexico’s teacher evaluation system was labeled as a “gold standard”
due to its purported ability to objectively and accurately differentiate between effective
and ineffective teachers, in 2015, teachers filed suit contesting the fairness and accuracy
of their evaluations. Amrein-Beardsley and Geiger’s (revise and resubmit) initial analyses
of the state’s teacher evaluation data revealed that the four individual measures
comprising teachers’ overall evaluation scores showed evidence of bias, and specifically,
teachers who taught in schools with different student body compositions (e.g., special
education students, poorer students, gifted students) had significantly different scores
than their peers. The purpose of this study was to expand upon these prior analyses by
investigating whether those conclusions still held true when controlling for a variety of
confounding factors at the school, class, and teacher levels, as such covariates were not
included in prior analyses.
Results from multiple linear regression analyses indicated that, overall, the
measures used to inform New Mexico teachers’ overall evaluation scores still showed
evidence of bias by school-level student demographic factors, with VAMs potentially
being the most susceptible and classroom observations being the least. This study is
especially unique given the juxtaposition of such a highly touted evaluation system also
being one where teachers contested its constitutionality. Study findings are important for
all education stakeholders to consider, especially as teacher evaluation systems and
related policies continue to be transformed.
ContributorsGeiger, Tray (Author) / Amrein-Beardsley, Audrey (Thesis advisor) / Anderson, Kate (Committee member) / McGuire, Keon (Committee member) / Holloway, Jessica (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020