A Great Neck, Long Island, teacher and her husband were in state Supreme Court on Wednesday in efforts to get her test-based performance evaluation thrown out and to halt the use of standardized test scores from students to rate teachers statewide.

"The State Education Department does not get a pass on irrational and unreasonable actions simply because they ... were getting a grant from the federal government," Bruce Lederman told Acting Albany County Supreme Court Justice Roger McDonough.

Lederman, a New York City-area lawyer, is representing his wife, Sheri Lederman.

She is a veteran fourth-grade teacher who has long won plaudits for her work. But she was tagged as "ineffective'' in the student growth part of her 2013-14 evaluation.

That prompted the Ledermans to delve into the tests that are used to rate teachers and they say they found a raft of problems.

Under the state's teacher evaluation program, a fourth-grade teacher like Lederman would be scored in part on how her students performed on standardized tests. But the expectations for those tests include results from the previous year, too.

For example, if a student aced the addition and subtraction questions in the third grade math test, there is an expectation of continued success. Therefore, if those same students failed the division questions in fourth grade, it would reflect poorly on Lederman.

The tests employ complicated algorithms, which consider factors like socioeconomics and disabilities of the students. But Bruce Lederman said those formulas are unreliable at best.

He argued that the system also artificially sets up a certain percentage of teachers for failure, similar to how corporations including General Electric used to "rank and yank,'' employees, or fire the lowest-rated workers each year.

Many firms have since moved away from that model, which Lederman compared to a "Survivor'' game.

"The magic of the numbers brings a suspension of common sense,'' he said.

But even if the state is using a flawed system, it doesn't mean it has been "arbitrary and capricious," said McDonough. "That's an incredibly high standard," he said.

McDonough also pointed out that the system appears to employ the concept of a bell curve, which has long been in use in academia.

To boost his argument, Lederman offered affidavits from Sheri Lederman's school administrators, co-workers and parents. Also offered were observations by leading academics including Aaron Pallas, who pointed out problems with using these tests to evaluate teachers.

Among the points made, was that the testing model was "flawed because it predetermined that a set percentage of teachers would be ineffective regardless of actual effectiveness and student achievement,'' Pallas stated in his affidavit. He is a Columbia University sociology and education professor who has written widely on the use of standardized tests.

The suit is one of several that have been filed regarding the use of test scores to evaluate teachers.

New York State United Teachers, the state's major teachers union, is backing suits by teachers in Syracuse and Rochester, where there were jumps in the number of teachers rated "ineffective.'' The union contends the evaluation doesn't give enough weight to the poverty that disadvantages many of the students there.

The Lederman suit centers on the old testing regimen — since the governor and lawmakers passed a new program last spring, test scores can potentially count for half of a teachers overall rating.

The judge will rule on the case in the coming months.

rkarlin@timesunion.com • 518-454-5758 • @RickKarlinTU