The regulatory strategy invariably focuses on "inputs" - courses taken, requirements met, time spent, and activities engaged in - rather than results, meaning actual evidence of a teacher's classroom prowess, particularly as guaged by student learning. It judges one's "performance" by the subjective opinions of other teachers and professors (including principals). The regulatory strategy's reliance on peer review asumes that good teaching can only be detected via observation by other practitioners. This is the wrong sort of regulation.

Today's regulations, and the additional regulations urged by reformers within the profession, focus on inputs that display little or no relationship to classroom success. This is not education reform. This is the illusion of reform.

Teachers should be evaluated based on the only measure that really matters: whether their pupils are learning.