How sensitive are the evaluations of a school's effectiveness to the selection of covariates in the applied value-added model?

IF 2.8 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1007/s11092-022-09386-y
Jessica Levy, Martin Brunner, Ulrich Keller, Antoine Fischbach
{"title":"How sensitive are the evaluations of a school's effectiveness to the selection of covariates in the applied value-added model?","authors":"Jessica Levy,&nbsp;Martin Brunner,&nbsp;Ulrich Keller,&nbsp;Antoine Fischbach","doi":"10.1007/s11092-022-09386-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There is no final consensus regarding which covariates should be used (in addition to prior achievement) when estimating value-added (VA) scores to evaluate a school's effectiveness. Therefore, we examined the sensitivity of evaluations of schools' effectiveness in math and language achievement to covariate selection in the applied VA model. Four covariate sets were systematically combined, including prior achievement from the same or different domain, sociodemographic and sociocultural background characteristics, and domain-specific achievement motivation. School VA scores were estimated using longitudinal data from the Luxembourg School Monitoring Programme with some 3600 students attending 153 primary schools in Grades 1 and 3. VA scores varied considerably, despite high correlations between VA scores based on the different sets of covariates (.66 < <i>r</i> < 1.00). The explained variance and consistency of school VA scores substantially improved when including prior math and prior language achievement in VA models for math and prior language achievement with sociodemographic and sociocultural background characteristics in VA models for language. These findings suggest that prior achievement in the same subject, the most commonly used covariate to date, may be insufficient to control for between-school differences in student intake when estimating school VA scores. We thus recommend using VA models with caution and applying VA scores for informative purposes rather than as a mean to base accountability decisions upon.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11092-022-09386-y.</p>","PeriodicalId":46725,"journal":{"name":"Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability","volume":"35 1","pages":"129-164"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9127485/pdf/","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-022-09386-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

There is no final consensus regarding which covariates should be used (in addition to prior achievement) when estimating value-added (VA) scores to evaluate a school's effectiveness. Therefore, we examined the sensitivity of evaluations of schools' effectiveness in math and language achievement to covariate selection in the applied VA model. Four covariate sets were systematically combined, including prior achievement from the same or different domain, sociodemographic and sociocultural background characteristics, and domain-specific achievement motivation. School VA scores were estimated using longitudinal data from the Luxembourg School Monitoring Programme with some 3600 students attending 153 primary schools in Grades 1 and 3. VA scores varied considerably, despite high correlations between VA scores based on the different sets of covariates (.66 < r < 1.00). The explained variance and consistency of school VA scores substantially improved when including prior math and prior language achievement in VA models for math and prior language achievement with sociodemographic and sociocultural background characteristics in VA models for language. These findings suggest that prior achievement in the same subject, the most commonly used covariate to date, may be insufficient to control for between-school differences in student intake when estimating school VA scores. We thus recommend using VA models with caution and applying VA scores for informative purposes rather than as a mean to base accountability decisions upon.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11092-022-09386-y.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一所学校的有效性评估对应用增值模型中协变量的选择有多敏感?
在评估增值(VA)分数来评估学校的有效性时,应该使用哪些协变量(除了先前的成就),目前还没有最终的共识。因此,我们在应用VA模型中检验了学校在数学和语言成绩方面的有效性评价对协变量选择的敏感性。四个协变量集被系统地组合起来,包括来自相同或不同领域的先前成就,社会人口和社会文化背景特征,以及特定领域的成就动机。学校的VA分数是根据卢森堡学校监测项目的纵向数据估计的,该项目涉及153所小学一年级和三年级的3600名学生。尽管基于不同协变量集的VA评分之间存在高度相关性,但VA评分差异很大。66 r补充信息:在线版本包含补充信息,获取地址:10.1007/s11092-022-09386-y。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability
Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.60%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: The main objective of this international journal is to advance knowledge and dissemination of research on and about assessment, evaluation and accountability of all kinds and on various levels as well as in all fields of education.  The journal provides readers with an understanding of the rich contextual nature of evaluation, assessment and accountability in education. The journal is theory-oriented and methodology-based and seeks to connect research, policy making and practice.  The journal publishes outstanding empirical works, peer-reviewed by eminent scholars around the world.Aims and Scope in more detail: The main objective of this international journal is to advance knowledge and dissemination of research on and about evaluation, assessment and accountability: - of all kinds (e.g. person, programme, organisation), - on various levels (state, regional, local), - in all fields of education (primary, secondary, higher education/tertiary, as well as non-school sector) and across all different life phases (e.g. adult education/andragogy/Human Resource Management/professional development).The journal provides readers with an understanding of the rich contextual nature of evaluation, assessment and accountability in education. The journal is theory-oriented and methodology-based and seeks to connect research, policy making and practice. Therefore, the journal explores and discusses: -       theories of evaluation, assessment and accountability, -       function, role, aims and purpose of evaluation, assessment and accountability, -       impact of evaluation, assessment and accountability, -       methodology, design and methods of evaluation, assessment and accountability, -       principles, standards and quality of evaluation, assessment and accountability, -       issues of planning, coordinating, conducting, reporting of evaluation, assessment and accountability.The journal also covers the quality of different instruments or procedures or approaches which are used for evaluation, assessment and accountability.The journal only includes research findings from evaluation, assessment and accountability, if the design or approach of it is meta-reflected in the article.The journal publishes outstanding empirical works, peer-reviewed by eminent scholars around the world.
期刊最新文献
IRTrees for skipping items in PIRLS How representative is the Swedish PISA sample? A comparison of PISA and register data Dimensions of teachers’ data literacy: A systematic review of literature from 1990 to 2021 Examining pre-service teachers’ feedback on low- and high-quality written assignments Legitimising capital: parent organisations and their resistance to testing in England
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1