Models for value-added modeling of teacher effects

Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 67-101

  McCaffrey, Daniel F ^a   Lockwood, J R ^a   Koretz, Daniel ^b   Louis, Thomas A ^c   Hamilton, Laura ^a  

^a RAND CORPORATION   (United States)

^b HARVARD GRADUATE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION   (United States)

^c JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Accountability; Model misspecification; Omitted variables

Indexed keywords

EID: 2942640295     PISSN: 10769986     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/10769986029001067     Document Type: Review

References (30)

1. Ballou, D. (2002). Sizing up test scores. Education Next, 2(2), 10-15.
2. Ballou, D., Sanders, W., & Wright, P. (2004). Controlling for students background in value-added assessment of teachers. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 29(1), 37-66.
3. Burket, G. R. (1984). Response to Hoover. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 3, (4) 15-16.
4. Daniels, M. J., & Kass, R. E. (1998). A note on first-stage approximation in two-stage hierarchical models. Sankhya, Ser. B, 60, 19-30.
5. Diggle, P. J., Liang, K.-Y., & Zeger, S. L. (1996). Analysis of longitudinal data. New York: Oxford University Press.
6. Feldt, L. (1958). A comparison of the precision of three experimental designs employing a concomitant variable. Psychometrika, 23, 335-353.
7. Goldstein, H. (1994). Multilevel cross-classified models. Sociological Methods & Research, 22(3), 364-375.
8. Goldstein, H. (1995). Multilevel statistical models. London UK: Arnold.
9. Hanushek, E. (1992). The trade-off between child quantity and quality. Journal of Political Economy, 100(1). 85-117.
10. Hoover, H. D. (1984a). The most appropriate scores for measuring educational development in the elementary schools: GES. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 3(4), 8-14.
11. Hoover, H. D. (1984b). Rejoinder to Burket. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 3(4), 16-18.
12. Ihaka, R., & Gentleman, R. (1996). R: A language for data analysis and graphics. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 5, 299-314.
13. Lee, V., & Bryk, A. (1989). A multilevel model of the social distribution of high school achievement. Sociology of Education, 62, 172-192.
14. Little, R. S. A., & Rubin, D. B. (1987). Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
15. Lockwood, J. R., Louis, T. A., & McCaffrey, D. F. (2002). Uncertainty in rank estimation: Implications for value-added modeling accountability systems. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 27(3), 255-270.
16. Meyer, R. (1997). Value-added indicators of school performance: A primer. Economics of Education Review, 16, 183-301.
17. Pederson, E., Faucher, T. A., & Eaton, W. W. (1978). A new perspective on the effects of first grade teachers on children's subsequent adult stat. Harvard Educational Review, 48(1), 1-13.
18. Puma, M. J., Karweit, N., Price, C., Ricciuti, A., Thompson, W., & Vaden-Kieman, M. (1997). Prospects: Student Outcomes Final Report (Technical Report 1997-04-00). Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates, Inc.
19. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
20. Raudenbush, S. W., & Willms, J. D. (1995). The estimation of school effects. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 20, 307-335.
21. Rowan, B., Correnti, R., & Miller, R. J. (2002). What large-scale, survey research tells us about teacher effects on student achievement: Insights from the Prospects study of elementary schools. Teachers College Record, 104, 1525-1567.
22. Sanders, W., Saxton, A., & Horn, B. (1997). The Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System: A quantitative outcomes-based approach to educational assessment. In J. Millman (Ed.), Grading teachers, grading schools: Is student achievement a valid evaluational Measure? (pp. 137-162). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.
23. Searle, S. R., Casella, G., & McCulloch, C. E. (1992). Variance components. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
24. Shkolnik, J., Hikawa, H., Suttorp, M., Lockwood, J., Stecher, B., & Bohrnstedt, G. (2002). Appendix D: The relationship between teacher characteristics and student achievement in reduced-size classes: A study of 6 California districts. In G. W. Bohrnstedt, & B. M. Stecher (Eds.), What we have learned about class size reduction in California Technical Appendix. Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research.
25. Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (1994). Modeled variance in two-level models. Sociological Methods & Research, 22, 342-363.
26. Thum, Y. M. (2002). Measuring progress towards a goal: Estimating teacher productivity using a multivariate multilevel model for value-added analysis. A Milken Family Foundation Report. Available at http://www.mff.org/publications/publications.taf.
27. Webster, W. J., & Mendro, R. L. (1997). The Dallas Value-Added Accountability System. In J. Millman (Ed.), Grading teachers, grading schools: Is student achievement a valid evaluation measure? (pp. 81-99). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.
28. Wertz, C. E., & Linn, R. L. (1970). A general linear model for studying growth. Psychological Bulletin, 73(1), 17-22.
29. Yang, L., & Tsiatis, A. A. (2001). Efficiency study of estimators for a treatment effect in a pretest-posttest trial. The American Statistician, 55(4), 314-321.
30. Yen, W. M. (1986). The choice of scale for educational measurement: An IRT perspective. Journal of Educational Measurement, 23, 299-326.