NEPC Resources on Value-Added Assessment
State-Level Assessments and Teacher Evaluation Systems after the Passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act: Some Steps in the Right Direction
Kevin Welner provides a commentary on this morning’s release of results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). The lower grades on the Nation’s Report Card are not good news for anyone, but they are particularly bad news for those who have been vigorously advocating for “no excuses” approaches — standards-based testing and accountability policies like No Child Left Behind.
This brief discusses how three recent popular educational reform policies move teaching towards or away from professionalization. These reforms are (1) policies that evaluate teachers based on students’ annual standardized test score gains, and specifically, those based on value-added assessment; (2) fast-track teacher preparation and licensure; and (3) scripted, narrowed curricula. These particular policy reforms are considered because of their contemporary prominence and the fact that they directly influence the way teaching is perceived.
An Analysis of the Use and Validity of Test-Based Teacher Evaluations Reported by the Los Angeles Times: 2011
For the second time, the Los Angeles Times has published results of statistical testing examining the variation in teacher and school performance in the Los Angeles Unified School District. Though this year's Teacher Ratings enable the reader to take into account variability and model sensitivity issues, an improvement over the 2010 report, the resulting ranking system was found to be inaccurate due to unreliable methodology.
The annual MetLife Survey of the American Teacher finds teachers' job satisfaction plummeting from 59% to 44%. Perhaps this is a result of repeated attacks on themselves and their profession?
The research on which the Los Angeles Times relied for its August 2010 teacher effectiveness reporting was demonstrably inadequate to support the published rankings. Using the same L.A. Unified School District data and the same methods as the Times, this study probes deeper and finds the earlier research to have serious weaknesses.
The successor to No Child Left Behind remains to be shaped, but one change seems certain: School success will depend on whether students’ test scores increase, as opposed to just requiring scores above an adequate yearly progress threshold. Growth modeling approaches appear to allow for this policy shift. And this would likely be an improvement over the AYP approach in the current NCLB. Yet like many new technologies, it’s being oversold.
A Practitioner’s Guide to Value-Added Assessment (Educational Policy Studies Laboratory Research Monograph)
Publisher Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University