Contemporary teacher evaluation policies are built upon multiple-measure systems including, primarily, teacher-level value-added and observational estimates. However, researchers have not yet investigated how using these indicators to evaluate teachers might distort validity, especially when one indicator seemingly trumps, or is trusted over the other. Accordingly, in this conceptual piece, we introduce and begin to establish evidences of three conceptual terms related to the validity of the inferences derived via these two measures in the context of teacher evaluation: (1) artificial inflation, (2) artificial deflation, and (3) artificial conflation. We define these terms by illustrating how those with the power to evaluate teachers (e.g., principals) within such contemporary evaluation systems might (1) artificially inflate or (2) artificially deflate observational estimates when used alongside their value-added counterparts, or (3) artificially conflate both estimates to purposefully (albeit perhaps naively) exaggerate perceptions of validity.

中文翻译：

---

使用教师增值和主要观察估计时的潜在无效来源：人为通货膨胀、通货紧缩和合并

当代教师评估政策建立在多种衡量系统之上，主要包括教师层面的增值和观察评估。然而，研究人员尚未调查使用这些指标来评估教师如何可能会扭曲有效性，尤其是当一个指标似乎胜过或被信任时。因此，在这篇概念文章中，我们介绍并开始建立三个概念术语的证据，这些术语与在教师评估的背景下通过这两种措施得出的推论的有效性有关：（1）人为膨胀，（2）人为通货紧缩，以及(3)人为混杂。我们通过说明那些有权评估教师的人（例如，