Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Room
Browse By Unit
Browse By Session Type
Search Tips
What to do in Chicago
Personal Schedule
Sign In
X (Twitter)
Efforts to improve human capital often pivot on the availability of valid and credible measures of educator performance. While existing literature deals with the technical properties associated with student growth models, little research examines how educators interpret and respond to them. Grounded in measurement and expectancy theories, this paper uses data from a multi-year, mixed-methods study to examine how educators responded to student growth models in the context of a pay-for-performance program where significant rewards were based on these measures. The study demonstrates the difficulty of developing measures that, in the minds of educators, are valid, clear, credible and fair. It underscores the importance of addressing the unintended consequences that may occur when high stakes get attached to these measures.