An Empirical Comparison of Statistical Models for Value-Added Assessment of School Performance

Carmen D. Tekwe, Randy L. Carter, Chang-Xing Ma, James Algina, Maurice E. Lucas, Jeffrey Roth, Mario Ariet, Thomas Fisher and Michael B. Resnick

Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 2004, vol. 29, issue 1, 11-36

Abstract: Hierarchical Linear Models (HLM) have been used extensively for value-added analysis, adjusting for important student and school-level covariates such as socioeconomic status. A recently proposed alternative, the Layered Mixed Effects Model (LMEM) also analyzes learning gains, but ignores sociodemographic factors. Other features of LMEM, such as its ability to apportion credit for learning gains among multiple schools and its utilization of incomplete observations, make it appealing. A third model that is appealing due to its simplicity is the Simple Fixed Effects Models (SFEM). Statistical and computing specifications are given for each of these models. The models were fitted to obtain value-added measures of school performance by grade and subject area, using a common data set with two years of test scores. We investigate the practical impact of differences among these models by comparing their value-added measures. The value-added measures obtained from the SFEM were highly correlated with those from the LMEM. Thus, due to its simplicity, the SFEM is recommended over LMEM. Results of comparisons of SFEM with HLM were equivocal. Inclusion of student level variables such as minority status and poverty leads to results that differ from those of the SFEM. The question of whether to adjust for such variables is, perhaps, the most important issue faced when developing a school accountability system. Either inclusion or exclusion of them is likely to lead to a biased system. Which bias is most tolerable may depend on whether the system is to be a high-stakes one.

Keywords: empirical comparison; hierarchical linear model; layered mixed effects model; simple fixed effects model; simple versus complex methods; value-added assessment (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2004
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3102/10769986029001011 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:jedbes:v:29:y:2004:i:1:p:11-36

DOI: 10.3102/10769986029001011

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().