What Are Value-Added Models Estimating and What Does This Imply for Statistical Practice?

By Stephen Raudenbush. 2004

247 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4e795b5b6704c8c809e432b2c1edf2d48fac09e4

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

1. J. Papay
2. Douglas O. Staiger
3. Jonah E. Rockoff
4. H. Hill
5. Tina Seidel
6. Erica Litke
7. L. Major
8. Cesare Aloisi

In Statistics and Probability

1. Erica Litke
2. K. Umland
3. L. Kapitula
4. L. Major
5. Ariel Mankin
6. Cesare Aloisi
7. H. Hill
8. A. Amrein-Beardsley

Citations in the corpus

• Teaching Effectiveness Research in the Past Decade: The Role of Theory and Research Design in Disentangling Meta-Analysis Results (2007, background): “, 1986), the predominance of covariate adjustment models (Raudenbush, 2004; Rowan et al., 2002), and the approach taken in interpreting natural variations in teaching (D.”
• Teacher Quality and Quality Teaching: Examining the Relationship of a Teacher Assessment to Practice (2012, background): “Given the difficulties in making causal inferences based on value-added scores (Raudenbush 2004), the possibility of test preparation behaviors artificially inflating scores (Koretz 2008), and the amount of noise and potential bias in these scores (McCaffrey et al. 2003), finding that exclusion…”
• Different Tests, Different Answers (2011, background): “Others, however, assert that the many assumptions underlying these models make such claims tenuous at best (Koretz, 2002; Raudenbush, 2004; Rothstein, 2007; Rubin, Stuart, & Zanutto, 2004) and that low-stakes uses may be most appropriate.”
• Teacher stress, teaching-efficacy, and job satisfaction in response to test-based educational accountability policies (2016, background): “Given the significance of teacher effectiveness on student learning (Nye, Konstantopoulos, & Hedges, 2004; Raudenbush, 2004), the increasing reliance on student test performance as a proxy for teacher effectiveness, and the concomitant increases in pressure on educators, there is a clear need for…”
• Searching for Effective Teachers with Imperfect Information (2010, background): “…cation of causal teacher effects with observational data are extraordinarily strong and rarely tested (Andrabi, Das, Khwaja, and Zajonc, 2009; McCaffrey, Lockwood, Koretz, Louis, and Hamilton, 2004; Raudenbush, 2004; Rothstein, 2010; Rubin, Stuart, and Zanutto, 2004; Todd and Wolpin, 2003).”
• Methodological Concerns About the Education Value-Added Assessment System (2008, background): “One major finding about the EVAAS value-added output and score reports is that, of the districts and schools that have implemented the EVAAS model, too few appear to be using output data in formative ways (Raudenbush, 2004).”
• Norm- and Criterion-Referenced Student Growth. (2009, background): “…growth analyses over the last decade has been to determine, using sophisticated statistical techniques, the amount of student progress/growth that can be justifiably attributed to the school or teacher (Braun, 2005; Rubin, Stuart, & Zanutto, 2004; Ballou, Sanders, & Wright, 2004; Raudenbush, 2004).”
• The Legal Consequences of Mandating High Stakes Decisions Based on Low Quality Information: Teacher Evaluation in the Race-to-the-Top Era (2013, unknown): “On its face, imputation is problematic when it comes to attribution of responsibility for student outcomes to the teacher, as some of those outcomes are statistically generated for students who were not even there (Raudenbush, 2004; Rubin, Stuart, & Zanutto, 2004).”
• Conceptualising and Evaluating Teacher Quality: Substantive and Methodological Issues (2008, background): “…decision-making about the quality of teaching, such as those involved in performance-related pay (see: Bosker & Witziers, 1995; Braun, 2005; Goldstein, 1997; Goldstein & Spiegelhalter, 1996; Kupermintz, 2002; McCaffrey, Lockwood et al., 2003; Raudenbush, 2004; Rowe, 2000; Saunders, 1999).”
• Do Student Achievement Outcomes Differ Across Teacher Preparation Programs? An Analysis of Teacher Education in Louisiana (2012, background): “The use and misuse of value-added assessments in evaluating the work of individual teachers is the source of an active professional and policy debate (Baker et al., 2010; Glazerman et al., 2010; Hanson, 1988; Harris, 2009; Raudenbush, 2004; Tekwe et al., 2004).”
• The importance of contextual variables when judging fairness: An examination of counterfactual thoughts and fairness theory (2011, background): “When repeated observations are collected on a set of individuals (within-subject variation) and the measurement occasions are not identical for all persons (between-subject variation), the multiple observations can be properly conceived as nested within persons (Raudenbush, 2004).”
• What Makes Great Teaching? Review of the Underpinning Research. (2014, background): “Reardon and Raudenbush (2009) set out to examine the assumptions required to interpret value-added estimates of learning gain as a causal effect of teaching.”