The politics and statistics of value-added modeling for accountability of teacher preparation programs created by Jane Arnold Lincove
Material type:data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6b0ba/6b0ba83dea1b2061c05bcfba62c4cc7e8d358d60" alt="Text"
- text
- unmediated
- volume
- 0022-4871
- LB1738
Item type | Current library | Call number | Vol info | Copy number | Status | Notes | Date due | Barcode | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
Main Library - Special Collections | LB1738 JOU (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | Vol. 65, No. 1 pages 24-38 | SP24650 | Not for loan | For in-house use only |
Despite questions about validity and reliability, the use of value-added estimation methods has moved beyond academic research into state accountability systems for teachers, schools, and teacher preparation programs (TPPs). Prior studies of value-added measurement for TPPs test the validity of researcher-designed models and find that measuring differences across programs is difficult. This study is the first to examine the reliability and usefulness of a value-added model for TPPs developed through a collaborative stakeholder process and mandated by state law for use in accountability. Based on the experience of developing a test-based metric for Texas TPPs, our results suggest that although value-added results are statistically robust, accountability status for individual programs is very sensitive to decisions about accountability criteria, the selection of teachers, and the selection of control variables.
There are no comments on this title.