Does the Model Matter? Exploring the Relationship Between Different Student Achievement-Based Teacher Assessments

Dan D. Goldhaber · Joe Walch · Brian Gabele

81 citations0/0 files storedStatistics and Public Policy

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

School Choice and Performance Educational Assessment and Improvement Teacher Education and Assessments

Abstract

Policymakers have demonstrated an interest in using measures of student achievement to inform high-stakes teacher personnel decisions, but the idea of using student outcomes as a teacher performance measure is complex to implement for a variety of reasons, not least of which is the fact that there is no universally agreed upon statistical methodology for translating student achievement into a measure of teacher performance. In this article, we use statewide data from North Carolina to evaluate different methodologies for translating student test achievement into measures of teacher performance at the elementary level. In particular, we focus on the extent to which there are differences in teacher effect estimates generated from different modeling approaches, and to what extent classroom level characteristics predict these differences. We find models that only include lagged achievement scores and student background characteristics are highly correlated with specifications that also include classroom characteristics, while value-added models (VAMs) estimated with school fixed effects have a lower correlation. Teacher effectiveness estimates based on median student growth percentiles are highly correlated with estimates from VAMs that include student background characteristics, despite the fact that the two methods for estimating teacher effectiveness are, at least conceptually, quite different. But even when the correlations between performance estimates generated by different models are quite high for the workforce as a whole, there are still sizable differences in teacher rankings generated by different models that are associated with the composition of students in a teacher's classroom.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 81 citations exist upstream.

References

1986The Economics of Schooling: Production and Efficiency in Public Schools.2003On the Specification and Estimation of the Production Function for Cognitive Achievement 2006Teachers and Student Achievement in the Chicago Public High Schools 1979Conceptual and Empirical Issues in the Estimation of Educational Production Functions 1994Estimates of the Economic Returns to Schooling from a New Sample of Twins 2010Generalizations about Using Value-Added Measures of Teacher Quality 1998Teachers, Schools, and Academic Achievement 2008Estimating Teacher Impacts on Student Achievement: An Experimental Evaluation

Cited by

2013The Random Assignment of Students Into Elementary Classrooms 2016Screen Twice, Cut Once: Assessing the Predictive Validity of Applicant Selection Tools 2019Principal Sorting and the Distribution of Principal Quality 2013Is a good elementary teacher always good? Assessing teacher performance estimates across subjects 2016Principal holistic judgments and high-stakes evaluations of teachers

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.