The education market reforms were to make quite a few alterations to the education system. These alterations made targeted at creating an education market. This was to ensure that, there were stiff competitions amongst schools for pupils who were considered as customers. As an effect, bad schools were to lose customers hence closing them down, leaving only schools that were to be considered as good open. From race to top as well as waiting for superman made 2010 a year of a banner for the educational market reforms that dominates national disclosure. By contrast, in research, there has been a rather different image for the three pillars of this kind of paradigm namely: merit pay, charter schools as well as the use of value added estimates in decisions that were considered high-stake. In this paper, am going to show that, 2010 was not especially good year for such like policies, (Matthew, 2011).
The best experimental; evaluation of teacher merit pay shows that teachers getting bonuses were not able to increase the test scores for their students, more as compared to these not receiving bonuses. The reactions from educational market reforms, were that, merit pay was not to create short-term rise in test score, other than improving applicant quality to professionals and their subsequent retentions. This does not only mean that merit is just a leap of pay, it never has its results proven with rigor degree, also the case of education and eacher experience needs to be reassessed. It has been shown that, former researches underestimated the benefits of teacher's experience, and that value added score of teachers might show some improvement after years.
Concerning charter schools, the experimental evaluation has also shown that, there are no tests score gains of charter middle schools, though the research done after wards showed some sort of improvements. The reality is that the later has been much ignored while the former had been touted. As a result, such like conflicting results need further discussions. Under the same, results published on American journal shows no improvements for charters. In addition, a measure of innovation and creativity has been associated negatively with score gains. Further more, there have been only few positive correlations between the achievements and policies. The reasons as to why charter continues to why only a few charters are doing well have remained much elusive. As a result, some of the best work ever achieved on charters as well as merit pay was in 2010having very lackluster outcomes, just like a massive wave of funding and publicity awarded these policy measures a starring duty in the national education policy, (Weick, 1976).
This same year was much bountiful for value added research.
The outcomes were much in line as compared with a decade studies on the effects of teachers. It has been shown that recently, there hass been new evidence that other measures of teacher qualities like student perception, has maintained significant correlations with value added scores. In contrast to claims made by media that preliminary made results validates the use of value added scores, have sown some evidence that some teacher instructional actions are connected to better student achievement outcomes. There were also some teacher quality papers that public attention was not attracted to. Most of them explained that, understanding teacher impacts on test scores is still a toll order to attain.
It is also shown that, teachers in schools with high poverty gets lower value added score, as compared to these in high effluent schools, however the difference is just little and is not due to top teachers. In addition, there are fewer consistences on effects of experience in poverty schools, which might explain discrepancies. These contextual variations in the estimates of value-added have significant implications for their use in high-stake decisions. They also indicate the significance of addressing some of the most significant questions about such measures use in actual decisions, (Dewey & Dewey, 1915).
In conclusion, though the year 2010 will be remembered as a watershed year for educational market reforms, this urgency wave and policy alterations unfolds concurrently with steady flow of studies, concluding that extreme care, other than haste is in order.