No items found.
Value-Added Models (VAMs) has been embraced by many states and school districts as part of educational accountability systems. Value-Added Assessment (VAA) Models attempt to estimate effects of individual teachers or schools on student achievement while accounting for differences in student background. This paper provides a summary of the American Statistical Associations analysis of the efficacy of value-added modeling in education.
American Statistical Association. (2014). ASA statement on using value-added models for educational assessment. Alexandria, VA.
The purpose of this study is to assess whether academic achievement in fact increases after the introduction of high-stakes tests. The first objective of this study is to assess whether academic achievement has improved since the introduction of high-stakes testing policies in the 27 states with the highest stakes written into their grade 1-8 testing policies.
Amrein-Beardsley, A., & Berliner, D. C. (2002). The Impact of High-Stakes Tests on Student Academic Performance.
This article examines the effectiveness and related issues of current methods of principal evaluation of teachers.
Burns M. (2011). Do Principals Know Good Teaching When They See It?. Educational policy, 19(1), 155-180.
In this paper we take up the question of model choice and examine three competing approaches. The first approach, (SGPs) framework, eschews all controls for student covariates and schooling environments. The second approach, value-added models (VAMs), controls for student background characteristics and under some conditions can be used to identify the causal effects of schools and teachers. The third approach, also VAM-based, fully levels the playing field so that the correlation between school- and teacher-level growth measures and student demographics is essentially zero. We argue that the third approach is the most desirable for use in educational evaluation systems.
Ehlert, M., Koedel, C., Parsons, E., & Podgursky, M. (2013). Selecting growth measures for school and teacher evaluations: Should proportionality matter?. National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research, 21.
This study examines principals’ time spent on instructional functions. The results show that the traditional walk-through has little impact, but principals provide coaching, evaluation, and focus on educational programs can make a difference.
Grissom, J. A., Loeb, S., & Master, B. (2013). Effective Instructional Time Use for School Leaders: Longitudinal Evidence from Observations of Principals. Educational Researcher, 42(8), 433-444.
Policymakers and school administrators have embraced value-added models of teacher effectiveness as tools for educational improvement. Teacher value-added estimates may be viewed as complicated scores. This Paper examines the use of value-added modeling as a tool to identify effective teachers from ineffective instructors.
Haertel, E. H. (2013). Reliability and Validity of Inferences about Teachers Based on Student Scores. William H. Angoff Memorial Lecture Series. Educational Testing Service.
This article discusses the current focus on using teacher observation instruments as part of new teacher evaluation systems being considered and implemented by states and districts. They argue that if these teacher observation instruments are to achieve the goal of supporting teachers in improving instructional practice, they must be subject-specific, involve content experts in the process of observation, and provide information that is both accurate and useful for teachers. They discuss the instruments themselves, raters and system design, and timing of and feedback from the observations.
Hill, H., & Grossman, P. (2013). Learning from teacher observations: Challenges and opportunities posed by new teacher evaluation systems. Harvard Educational Review, 83(2), 371-384.
This paper examines how well principals can distinguish between more and less effective teachers. To put principal evaluations in context, we compare them with the traditional determinants of teacher compensation-education and experience-as well as value-added measures of teacher effectiveness.
Jacob, B. A., & Lefgren, L. (2008). Can principals identify effective teachers? Evidence on subjective performance evaluation in education. Journal of Labor Economics, 26(1), 101-136.
In this study the authors designed the Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) project to test replicable methods for identifying effective teachers. In past reports, the authors described three approaches to measuring different aspects of teaching: student surveys, classroom observations, and a teacher's track record of student achievement gains on state tests.
Kane, T. J., McCaffrey, D. F., Miller, T., & Staiger, D. O. (2013). Have We Identified Effective Teachers? Validating Measures of Effective Teaching Using Random Assignment. Research Paper. MET Project. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
This study examines implementation of alternative student growth measures in a sample of eight school districts that were early adopters of the measures. It builds on an earlier Region al Educational Laboratory Mid-Atlantic report that described the two types of alternative student growth measures—alternative assessment–based value-added models and student learning objectives—in the early-adopting districts.
McCullough, M., English, B., Angus, M. H., & Gill, B. (2015). Alternative student growth measures for teacher evaluation: Implementation experiences of early-adopting districts (No. 8a9dfcb1bc6143608448114ea9b69d06). Mathematica Policy Research.