You switched premises there from ranking students (knowledge of a subject) to ranking teachers (job performance).
Au contraire. You responded to a phrase, taken out of context of the full sentence:
The purpose of grades is not to rank a group or track aggregate outcomes.
This may have been true in the past, however
mandated data collection tracks aggregate outcomes and ranks teachers and schools
by the grades assigned to their pupils.
which reforms are successful and which aren't
In the context of your post, what do you mean by successful? Equal outcomes?
assess the degree to which an individual student met the requirements of an individual assignment
...
data...could be gamed
Yes, the assignment of grades can be gamed by various
grading practices intended to report equal outcomes, including
differentiated task demands.
(Consider the impact of "differentiated task demands" on a teacher's ability to "assess the degree to which an individual student met the requirements of an individual assignment.") people employed to identify and minimize those risks
What title/role might fulfill this function of assuring there is no gaming of the grading system?
