How Does Value Added Compare to Student Growth Percentiles?

REFERENCES

• Betebenner, D.W. (2007), Estimation of Student Growth Percentiles for the Colorado Student Assessment Program, Dover, NH: National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment.
   Google Scholar
• Betebenner, D., Wenning, R.J., and Briggs, D.C. (2011), Student Growth Percentiles and Shoe Leather, Dover, NH: National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment.
   Google Scholar
• Briggs, D., and Betebenner, D. (2009), Is Growth in Student Achievement Scale Dependent? unpublished manuscript.
   Google Scholar
• Buonaccorsi, J.P. (2010), Measurement Error: Models, Methods, and Applications, Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
   Google Scholar
• Castellano, K.E. (2011), “Unpacking Student Growth Percentiles: Statistical Properties of Regression-Based Approaches with Implications for Student and School Classifications,” Doctoral dissertation, Iowa City, IA, University of Iowa.
   Google Scholar
• Castellano, K.E., and Ho, A.D. (2013), “Contrasting OLS and Quantile Regression Approaches to Student ‘Growth’ Percentiles,” Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 38, 190–215.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ——— (2012), “Simple Choices among Aggregate-Level Conditional Status Metrics: From Median Student Growth Percentiles to Value-Added Models,” unpublished manuscript.
   Google Scholar
• Chetty, R., Friedman, J.N., and Rockoff, J.E. (2014), “Measuring the Impacts of Teachers I: Evaluating Bias in Teacher Value-Added Estimates,” American Economic Review, 104, 2593–2632.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colorado Department of Education (2008), “Colorado's Academic Growth Model: Report of the Technical Advisory Panel for the Longitudinal Analysis of Student Assessment Convened Pursuant to Colorado HB 07–1048,” Denver, CO: Colorado Department of Education.
   Google Scholar
• ——— (2014), “Measures of Student Learning: Approaches for Selecting and Using Multiple Measures in Teacher Evaluation,” Denver, CO: Colorado Department of Education.
   Google Scholar
• District of Columbia Public Schools (2011), “IMPACT: The District of Columbia Public Schools Effectiveness Assessment System for School-Based Personnel, 2011–2012. Group 1: General Education Teachers with Individual Value-Added Student Achievement Data,” Washington, DC: District of Columbia Public Schools.
   Google Scholar
• Ehlert, M., Koedel, C., Parsons, E., and Podgursky, M. (2012), “Selecting Growth Measures for School and Teacher Evaluations: Should Proportionality Matter?” CALDER Working Paper no. 80, National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
   Google Scholar
• Glazerman, S., and Max, J. (2011), “Do Low-Income Students Have Equal Access to the Highest-Performing Teachers?” NCEE Evaluation Brief. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
   Google Scholar
• Goldhaber, D., Walch, J., and Gabele, B. (2012), “Does the Model Matter? Exploring the Relationship between Different Student Achievement-Based Teacher Assessments,” Seattle, WA: Center for Education Data and Research.
   Google Scholar
• Hawaii Department of Education (2013), “Hawaii Growth Model Frequently Asked Questions,” Honolulu, HI: Hawaii Department of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Herrmann, M., Walsh, E., Isenberg, E., and Resch, A. (2013), “Shrinkage of Value-Added Estimates and Characteristics of Students with Hard-to-Predict Achievement Levels,” Mathematica Policy Research Working Paper no. 17, Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research.
   Google Scholar
• Hock, H., and Isenberg, E. (2012), “Methods of Accounting for Co-Teaching in Value-Added Models,” Mathematica Policy Research Working Paper no. 6, Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research.
   Google Scholar
• Isenberg, E., and Hock, H. (2011), Design of Value-Added Models for IMPACT and TEAM in DC Public Schools, 2010–2011 School Year, Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research.
   Google Scholar
• Isenberg, E., Max, J., Gleason, P., Potamites, L., Santillano, R., Hock, H., and Hansen, M. (2013), “Access to Effective Teaching for Disadvantaged Students,” NCEE Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
   Google Scholar
• Kane, T.J., McCaffrey, D.F., Miller, T., and Staiger, D.O. (2013), Have We Identified Effective Teachers? Validating Measures of Effective Teaching Using Random Assignment, Seattle, WA: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Kane, T.J., and Staiger, D.O. (2008), “Estimating Teacher Impacts on Student Achievement: An Experimental Evaluation,” working paper, Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
   Google Scholar
• Mansfield, R.K. (2012), “Teacher Quality and Student Inequality,” working paper, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
   Google Scholar
• McCaffrey, D.F., Lockwood, J.R., Koretz, D.M., and Hamilton, L.S. (2003), Evaluating Value-Added Models for Teacher Accountability, Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Morris, C.N. (1983), “Parametric Empirical Bayes Inference: Theory and Applications,” Journal of American Statistical Association, 78, 47–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sass, T., Hannaway, J., Xu, Z., Figlio, D., and Feng, L. (2012), “Value Added of Teachers in High-Poverty Schools and Lower-Poverty Schools,” Journal of Urban Economics, 72, 104–122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright, S.P. (2010), An Investigation of Two Nonparametric Regression Models for Value-Added Assessment in Education, Cary, NC: SAS Institute, Inc.
   Google Scholar