A Comparison of Growth Percentile and Value-Added Models of Teacher Performance. Working Paper #39

Autor/inn/en	Guarino, Cassandra M.; Reckase, Mark D.; Stacy, Brian W.; Wooldridge, Jeffrey M.
Institution	Michigan State University, Education Policy Center
Titel	A Comparison of Growth Percentile and Value-Added Models of Teacher Performance. Working Paper #39
Quelle	(2014), (42 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	Weitere Informationen
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Teacher Influence; Teacher Competencies; Teacher Effectiveness; Achievement Gains; Simulation; Classification; Teacher Placement; Scores; Student Evaluation; Computation; Academic Achievement; Equations (Mathematics); Regression (Statistics); Elementary Schools; Grade 3; Student Placement; Correlation; Grade 5; Grade 6; Grouping (Instructional Purposes) + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Lehrkunst; Effectiveness of teaching; Instructional effectiveness; Lehrerleistung; Unterrichtserfolg; Achievement gain; Leistungssteigerung; Simulation program; Simulationsprogramm; Classification system; Klassifikation; Klassifikationssystem; Schulnote; Studentische Bewertung; Schulleistung; Equations; Mathematics; Gleichungslehre; Regression; Regressionsanalyse; Elementary school; Grundschule; Volksschule; School year 03; 3. Schuljahr; Schuljahr 03; Schülerpraktikum; Korrelation; School year 05; 5. Schuljahr; Schuljahr 05; School year 06; 6. Schuljahr; Schuljahr 06; Grouping; Gruppenbildung
Abstract	School districts and state departments of education frequently must choose between a variety of methods to estimating teacher quality. This paper examines under what circumstances the decision between estimators of teacher quality is important. We examine estimates derived from student growth percentile measures and estimates derived from commonly used value-added estimators. Using simulated data, we examine how well the estimators can rank teachers and avoid misclassification errors under a variety of assignment scenarios of teachers to students. We find that growth percentile measures perform worse than value-added measures that control for prior year student test scores and include teacher fixed effects when assignment of students to teachers is nonrandom. In addition, using actual data from a large diverse anonymous state, we find evidence that growth percentile measures are less correlated with value-added measures with teacher fixed effects when there is evidence of nonrandom grouping of students in schools. This evidence suggests that the choice between estimators is most consequential under nonrandom assignment of teachers to students, and that value-added measures controlling for teacher fixed effects may be better suited to estimating teacher quality in this case. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Education Policy Center. Michigan State University, 201 Erickson Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824-1034. Tel: 517-355-4494; Fax: 517-432-6202; e-mail: EPC@msu.edu; Web site: http://education.msu.edu/epc
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2018/2/05