This article evaluates the work of Gargani and Strong, who claim to have developed and validated an observation system that requires only 4 hr of training, but one that can identify effective teachers using just 20 min of one video-taped lesson. Although the authors find some aspects of their work as well done, they find, more generally, that their claims are premature and inflated. Their work suffers from several problems including inattention to relevant historical work, no demonstrated ecological validity, no working theory, and lacks a clear conception of what RATE is.