With respect to value -
added measures of student achievement tied to individual teachers, current research suggests that high - stakes, individual - level decisions, or comparisons across highly dissimilar schools or student populations, should be avoided.
In a briefing paper prepared for the National Academy of Education (NAE) and the American Educational Research Association, Linda Darling - Hammond and three other distinguished authors reached the following conclusion: «With respect to value -
added measures of student achievement tied to individual teachers, current research suggests that high - stakes, individual - level decisions, as well as comparisons across highly dissimilar schools or student populations should be avoided.»
Dr. Marzano will be on hand to discuss next - generation evaluation models, the most up - to - date research on evaluation and value -
added measures of student achievement, and what has been learned as states implement federal and local directives to reform K - 12 teaching and learning.
Not exact matches
Indeed, the whole point
of «value -
added»
measures is to control for observed traits such as
students» prior
achievement and characteristics.
A teacher's contribution to a school's community, as assessed by the principal, was worth 10 percent
of the overall evaluation score, while the final 5 percent was based on a
measure of the value -
added to
student achievement for the school as a whole.
To test the sensitivity
of our results to this methodological decision, we constructed a value -
added indicator that
measures a teacher's contribution to
student achievement (accounting for a wide variety
of student and classroom characteristics that could affect
achievement independent
of the teacher's ability).
Mostly based on «value
added,» a statistical
measure of the contribution the teachers make to
student achievement on standardized tests.
Teachers should be rewarded for producing useful
student outcomes, most notably,
student learning gains,
measured by value -
added standards (i.e., improvement) rather than by levels
of achievement at the end
of a course.
(To generate the weights, we regressed a teacher's average
student -
achievement gain in one class against the three different
measures from another class, resulting in weights
of.758,.200, and.042 on value -
added,
student survey, and classroom observation, respectively).
We do not find any statistically significant relationship between the number
of years a teacher has taught and
students»
achievement, though this is probably due to the necessary omission
of first - year teachers (because we can not
measure their value
added for a previous school year).
We excluded kindergarten and first - grade teachers because earlier
achievement exams were not available for their
students; this prevented us from developing a «value -
added»
measure of student learning.
We compared a principal's assessment
of how effective a teacher is at raising
student reading or math
achievement, one
of the specific items principals were asked about, with that teacher's actual ability to do so as
measured by their value
added, the difference in
student achievement that we can attribute to the teacher.
While there are many ways to link teacher instruction to
student achievement, one family
of methods — Value -
Added Measures (VAMs)-- has generated national headlines (such as this article about Los Angeles teachers).
Measures of teachers» value
added in previous years are an even better predictor
of future gains in
students»
achievement than are principal ratings.
Our basic value -
added model
measures the effectiveness
of a principal by examining the extent to which math
achievement in a school is higher or lower than would be expected based on the characteristics
of students in that school, including their
achievement in the prior year.
We find a positive correlation between a principal's assessment
of how effective a teacher is at raising
student achievement and that teacher's success in doing so as
measured by the value -
added approach: 0.32 for reading and 0.36 for math.
When they insist that ideas like school choice, performance pay, and teacher evaluations based on value -
added measures will themselves boost
student achievement, would - be reformers stifle creativity, encourage their allies to lock elbows and march forward rather than engage in useful debate and reflection, turn every reform proposal into an us - against - them steel - cage match, and push researchers into the awkward position
of studying whether reforms «work» rather than when, why, and how they make it easier to improve schooling.
At the same time, he
added, the
measure of Kansas» success won't be in funneling more money to schools but in actually translating that to higher
student achievement.
The value -
added measures are designed to provide estimates
of the independent effect
of the teacher on the growth in a
student's learning and to separate this from other influences on
achievement such as families, peers, and neighborhoods.
After analyzing a truly staggering amount
of data, the researchers conclude that teacher effectiveness can be
measured by using «value -
added» analysis
of student achievement growth on standardized tests.
The three - year survey
of 3,000 teachers in seven school districts by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation found that the controversial method
of measuring student academic growth, known as value -
added, was a valid indicator
of whether teachers helped boost
student achievement.
Growth
measures — like «value
added» or «
student growth percentiles» — are a much fairer way to evaluate schools, since they can control for prior
achievement and can ascertain progress over the course
of the school year.
The Scholars» Paradise model would use «scale scores» or a «performance index» for the «academic
achievement» indicator;
measure growth using a two - step value -
added metric; pick robust «indicators
of student success or school quality,» such as chronic absenteeism; and make value
added count the most in a school's final score.
The Education Trust, for example, is urging states to use caution in choosing «comparative» growth models, including growth percentiles and value -
added measures, because they don't tell us whether
students are making enough progress to hit the college - ready target by the end
of high school, or whether low - performing subgroups are making fast enough gains to close
achievement gaps.
The question should instead be, «If scales from a testing regime are used within a value -
added process, is there evidence that
measures of student progress are influenced by the distribution
of student achievement levels in schools or classrooms because
of a lack
of equal - interval scales?»
Contemporary accountability policies have created the
added expectation that districts will differentiate support to schools on the basis
of achievement results from state testing programs and other accountability
measures, with particular attention to be given to schools where large numbers
of students are not meeting standards
of proficiency.
None
of the
measures of data use had a significant effect on
student achievement when
added to the equation on their own, nor did they have any unique explanatory value when combined with the four demographic
measures in the final equation.
The favorite way
of measuring gains, or lack thereof, in
student learning is through «value -
added» models, which seek to determine what each teacher has
added to the educational
achievement of each
of his or her
students.
Since joining the Association in June 2007, Eileen led the Association in notable efforts including: developing a model that
measures «value -
added» growth in
achievement, which is used for A-F rankings
of all Arizona schools; creating trainings that enable teachers and school leaders to collaboratively use data; launching joint purchasing programs; filing lawsuits for equitable funding for all K - 12
students; increasing positive public perceptions
of charters; and, building a comprehensive program to support prospective charter school operators.
The most controversial
of them include what is known as value -
added models1 that use data from standardized tests
of students as part
of the overall
measure of the effect that a teacher has on
student achievement.
As described in an earlier brief, some research provides evidence that value -
added measures — at least those that compare teachers within the same school and adjust well for
students» prior
achievement — do not favor teachers who teach certain types
of students.
As examples, studies that use
student test performance to
measure teachers» effectiveness — adjusted for prior
achievement and background characteristics — demonstrate that, on average, teachers
add more to their
students» learning during their second year
of teaching than they do in their first year, and more in their third year than in their second.
Flawed as they are, value -
added measures appear to be better predictors
of student achievement than the teacher characteristics that we currently use for high - stakes employment and compensation decisions.
The meaning
of this term is never explained, and the most likely way to meet the vague requirement was to assign large or significant weight — 50 percent in some cases — to
measures of student achievement growth, such as value -
added.
You write, «I respectfully disagree with your suggestion that the closest thing states have to an objective
measure of student achievement [value -
added growth scores based on standardized tests] should not be part
of the equation.»
While the Department will likely
add more academic performance
measures in the future, for 2014 officials also included the level
of participation in state assessments,
achievement gaps between
students with disabilities and the general population as well as scores on the National Assessment
of Educational Progress, a standardized test used to gauge academic growth across the country.
Anacortes now has a busy team
of 12 teachers, principals, administrators, and association representatives working to finish the evaluation pilot,
adding multiple
measures such as
achievement results, peer assistance and review, and
student surveys to the observation work.
In addition, we should have the capability to
measure the value -
added to each
student's
achievement on an annual basis, as a diagnostic
measure of annual progress
of the
student and the effectiveness
of educators.
In contrast to the traditional methods
of measuring school effectiveness (including the adequate yearly progress system set up under NCLB), value -
added models do not look only at current levels
of student achievement.
We study mid-career teachers for whom we observe an objective
measure of productivity — value -
added to
student achievement — before, during, and after evaluation.
States are using both
student -
achievement measures (
measures of student learning at a specific point in time) and growth
measures (changes in
student learning over time), including value -
added estimates based on state assessments when available, to capture
measures of student success aligned with individual teachers or teams
of teachers.
The author estimates
measures of value
added for a subset
of elementary teachers and show that charter movers were less effective than other mobile teachers and colleagues within their sending schools, by 3 to 4 percent
of a
student - level standard deviation in
achievement.
Earlier studies released by the MET project had examined three potential
measures of teacher quality: observations
of teachers keyed to teaching frameworks, surveys
of students» perceptions
of their teachers, and a value -
added method, which attempts to isolate teachers» contributions to their
students» academic
achievement.
Some proponents
of teacher evaluation reforms have conjectured that if districts would eliminate the bottom 5 to 10 percent
of teachers each year, as
measured by value -
added student test scores, U.S.
student achievement would increase by a substantial amount — enough to catch up to high - achieving countries like Finland.3 However, there is no real - world evidence to support this idea and quite a bit to dispute it.
In addition, value -
added measures based on these tests, which are not designed to
measure achievement that is well above or below grade level, are both unstable and biased for teachers who serve certain groups
of students.
CAP's report notes that the discussion
of publishing teachers» names along with their value -
added score (a
measure of a teacher's efficacy, relative to other teachers in the group, in promoting
student achievement) began when the Los Angeles Times published a report featuring the performance ratings for Los Angeles Unified School District teachers.
Nonacademic indicators like school climate or Social Emotional Learning, and next - generation
achievement measures like value -
added or growth calculations are key facets
of many state plans under the new Every
Student Succeeds Act, or ESSA (the federal law replaced No Child Left Behind in 2015.)
Sixty percent
of the ASCD SmartBrief readers who responded to this poll work in districts where teacher evaluation is based on value -
added or
student achievement measures.
For example, suppose that every year a fifth grade teacher is assigned highly gifted
students whose learning is not captured by the yearly
achievement test, and that her value -
added measure does not account for the gifted status
of these
students.
Finally, districts should monitor
student achievement, along with scores for teacher observations, to determine whether the use
of value -
added measures in evaluations is doing what is most important — improving teaching and learning.