Value-added teacher estimates as part of teacher evaluations: Exploring the effects of data and model specifications on the stability of teacher value-added scores;Las estimaciones de valor agregado docente como parte de las evaluaciones docentes: Explorando los efectos de los datos y las especificaciones de los modelos en la estabilidad de las puntuaciones de valor agregado docentes

Education Policy Analysis Archives

Volumn 21, Issue , 2013, Pages

  Kersting, Nicole B ^a   Chen, Mei Kuang ^a   Stigler, James W ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Accountability; Stability; Teacher evaluations; Value added analysis; Value added estimates; Value added models

Indexed keywords

EID: 84873335058     PISSN: None     EISSN: 10682341     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Aaronson, D., Barrow, L., & Sander, W., 2007. Teachers and student achievement in the Chicago public high schools, Journal of Labor Economics, 25(1), 95-135.
2. Ballou, D. (2005). Value-added assessment: Lessons from Tennessee. In Value added models in education: Theory and applications, edited by Robert Lissetz, pp. 272-303.
3. Ballou, D., Sanders, W., & Wright, P. (2004). Controlling for student background in value-added assessment of teachers. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 29(1), 37-65.
4. Briggs, D. & Domingue, B. (2011). Due diligence and the evaluation of teachers: A review of the value-added analysis underlying the effectiveness rankings of Los Angeles Unified School District teachers by the Los Angeles Times. Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center. Retrieved from http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/due-diligence.
5. Buddin, R. (2010). How effective are Los Angeles elementary teachers and schools?, MPRA Paper 27366, University Library of Munich, Germany.
6. Buddin, R. (2011). Measuring teacher and school effectiveness at improving student achievement in Los Angeles elementary schools. MPRA Paper 31963, University Library of Munich, Germany.
7. Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Publishers.
8. Ferrão, M. (2012). On the stability of value added indicators. Quality & Quantity, 46(2), 627-637. doi:10.1007/s11135-010-9417-6.
9. Goldhaber, D. & Hansen, M. (2010). "Is It Just a Bad Class? Assessing the Stability of Measured Teacher Performance. " CEDR Working Paper 2010-3. University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Web. Retrieved from http://www.cedr.us/publications.html.
10. Harris, D. N. (2011). Value-added measures and the future of educational accountability. Science, 333(6044),826-827. doi: 10.1126/science.1193793.
11. Harris, D. N. & Sass, T. R. (2010). What makes for a good teacher and who can tell? Unpublished paper.
12. Harris, D. N., Sass, T. R., & Semykina, A. (2012). Value-Added Models and the Measurement of Teacher Productivity. Unpublished paper.
13. Hattie, J. (2003). Teachers make a difference. Paper presented at the 2003 Australian Council for Educational Research Conference. Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved November 11, 2012, from http://www.education.auckland.ac.nz/webdav/site/education/shared/hattie/docs/teachers-make-a-difference-ACER-(2003).pdf
14. Henry, G. T., Fortner, C. K., & Bastian, K. C. (2012). The effects of experience and attrition for novice high-school science and mathematics teachers. Science, 335(6072), 1118-1121. doi:10.1126/science.1215343.
15. Hill, H. C., Kapitula, L., & Umland, K. (2011). A validity argument approach to evaluating teacher value-added scores. American Educational Research Journal, 48(3), 794-831. doi:10.3102/0002831210387916.
16. Hiebert, J. & Grouws, D. (2007). The effects of classroom mathematics teaching on students' learning. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 371-404). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
17. Kane, T., Staiger, D. (2008). Estimating Teacher Impacts on Student Achievement: An Experimental Evaluation. NBER Working Paper 14607.
18. Kane, Thomas J. and Douglas O. Staiger. (2002a). "Volatility in School Test Scores: Implications for Test-Based Accountability Systems. " In Brookings Papers on Education Policy,2002, edited by D. Ravitch. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
19. Kane, T. J., & Staiger, D. O. (2002b). The promise and pitfalls of using imprecise school accountability measures. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16, 91-114.
20. Koedel, C., & Betts, J., 2007. Re-Examining the Role of Teacher Quality in the Educational Production Function, Working paper, University of California, San Diego.
21. McCaffrey, D., Sass, T., Lockwood, J., and Mihaly, K. (2009). The Inter-Temporal Variability of Teacher Effects Estimates, Education Finance and Policy, Fall 2009, Vol. 4, No. 4: 572-606.
22. McCaffrey, D. F., Lockwood, J., Koretz, D., Louis, T. A., & Hamilton, L. (2004). Models for value-added modeling of teacher effects. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 29(1), 67-101.
23. Measures of Effective Teaching Project (2010). Learning about teaching: initial findings from the measures of effective teaching project. MET Project Research Paper. Retrieved from http://www.metproject.org/downloads/Preliminary_Findings-Research_Paper.pdf.
24. Milanoswki, A. (2004). The relationship between teacher performance evaluation scores and student achievement: evidence from Cincinnati. Peabody Journal of Education, 79(4), 33-53.
25. National Council on Teacher Quality. (2011). State of the states. Trends and Early Lessons on Teacher Evaluations and Effectiveness Policies. New York. Retrieved 09/26/2012 from http://www.nctq.org/p/publications/docs/nctq_stateOfTheStates.pdf.
26. NCLB (2001). No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Public Law No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425. Noell, G. H., & Burns, J. L. (2006). Value-added assessment of teacher preparation: An illustration of emerging technology. Journal of Teacher Education, 57, 37-50.
27. Papay, J. P. (2011). Different Tests, Different Answers. American Educational Research Journal, 48(1):163-193.
28. Raudenbush, S. W. (2004). What are value-added models estimating and what does this imply for statistical practice? Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 29 (1), 121-129.
29. Roderick, M., B. A. Jacob, and A. S. Bryk. 2002. The impact of high-stakes testing in Chicago on student achievement in promotional gate grades. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 24(4)(Winter):333-357.
30. Rothstein, J. (2007). Do Value-Added Models Add Value? Tracking, Fixed Effects, and Causal Inference, Working Papers 1036, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Center for Economic Policy Studies.
31. Rothstein, J. (2010). Teacher quality in educational production: Tracking, decay, and student achievement. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125(1), 175-214.
32. 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 school. Teachers College Record, 104(8), 1525-1567.
33. Sanders, W.L., & Rivers, J.C. (1996). Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future student academic achievement. Research Progress Report. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Value-Added Research and Assessment Center.
34. Sanders, W.L., Saxton, A.M., & Horn, S.P. (1997). The Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System (TVAAS): A quantitative, outcomes-based approach to educational assessment. In Millman, J. (ed.), Grading Teachers, Grading Schools, Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
35. Schochet, Peter Z. and Hanley S. Chiang (2010). Error Rates in Measuring Teacher and School Performance Based on Student Test Score Gains (NCEE 2010-4004). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
36. The New Teacher Project. (2007). Teacher hiring, transfer and assignment in Chicago Public Schools. New York: Author. Retrieved January 25, 2008, from http://tntp.org/assets/documents/TNTPAnalysis-Chicago.pdf?files/TNTPAnalysis-Chicago.pdf