In this article, I examine the logic of holding teachers and teacher education programs accountable for their students' learning. Using a conceptual tool first proposed by Ryle (1949) called the "task-achievement distinction," I show that current assessment schemes, such as value-added assessment, credit or discredit teachers for achievements that rightly belong to the students; therefore, teachers cannot be held accountable for them. The task-achievement distinction can also be usefully applied to show what teachers can logically be held responsible for: their intention to teach successfully. Implications of this analysis are explored.