Top navigation CEA Mobile Join CEA Feedback Contact Login CEA Stronger Together

PEAC Acts on Teachers' Concerns: Mastery Exam Results Cannot be Used in Evaluations

CEA President Sheila Cohen and CEA Executive Director Mark Waxenberg, who both serve on PEAC, said mastery tests are not designed for the evaluation of teachers or administrators.


March 30, 2017

The Performance Evaluation Advisory Council (PEAC) yesterday took a giant step forward in addressing teachers' concerns regarding the use of state mastery examination results in teacher evaluations. PEAC defined the clear use and purpose of the state mastery exam, agreeing that it should not be used to evaluate teachers.

PEAC unanimously agreed to recommend new guidelines for educator support and evaluation programs to the State Board of Education. These new guidelines support the use of state mastery tests scores to inform educator goal setting and to inform professional development planning, but prohibit their use as a measure of goal attainment or in the calculation of the summative rating for an educator.

CEA President Sheila Cohen, who serves on the advisory council along with CEA Executive Director Mark Waxenberg, said yesterday's consensus is the result of much time, effort, rich dialogue and debate, and puts everything into perspective.

Cohen said, "I feel confident with these guidelines. Using assessments in a way that corresponds to their purpose and design provides more ways for teachers and administrators to work together toward innovative goals that improve student achievement. Mastery tests, however, are not designed for the evaluation of teachers or administrators."

The new guidelines provide a list outlining how the mastery test can be used.

What can the state test be used for:

What can the state test NOT be used for:

1. Informing goals for individual educators Inclusion in the calculation of the rating in the summative evaluation
2. Informing professional development for individual educators Measure of SLO/goal attainment
3. Discussion at the summative evaluation conference
4. Informing collaborative goals
5. Informing professional learning for groups or teams of educators
6. Any communications around planning
7. Development of curriculum
8. Program evaluation
9. Selecting or evaluating effectiveness of materials/resources
10. School/district improvement planning
11. Informing whole school professional development to support school improvement

Waxenberg said there has been strong dialogue and innovation going on in schools across the state and these new guidelines will help further develop and advance that progress.

"This is good work," added Waxenberg. "It clears up a lot of concern and sets us in the right direction for the future."

Cohen concluded, "We are hopeful that the State Board of Education will adopt PEAC's recommendation at its April 5 meeting so that we can continue to move forward and to improve the educational opportunities for all public school students in Connecticut."


Back to Top