Test Scaling and Value-Added Measurement
AbstractConventional value-added assessment requires that achievement be reported on an interval scale. While many metrics do not have this property, application of item response theory (IRT) is said to produce interval scales. However, it is difficult to confirm that the requisite conditions are met. Even when they are, the properties of the data that make a test IRT scalable may not be the properties we seek to represent in an achievement scale, as shown by the lack of surface plausibility of many scales resulting from the application of IRT. An alternative, ordinal data analysis, is presented. It is shown that value-added estimates are sensitive to the choice of ordinal methods over conventional techniques. Value-added practitioners should ask themselves whether they are so confident of the metric properties of these scales that they are willing to attribute differences to the superiority of the latter. © 2009 American Education Finance Association
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by MIT Press in its journal Education Finance and Policy.
Volume (Year): 4 (2009)
Issue (Month): 4 (October)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://mitpress.mit.edu/journals/
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- I20 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - General
- I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Cory Koedel & Rebecca Leatherman & Eric Parsons, 2012.
"Test Measurement Error and Inference from Value-Added Models,"
1201, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
- Koedel Cory & Leatherman Rebecca & Parsons Eric, 2012. "Test Measurement Error and Inference from Value-Added Models," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-37, November.
- Gadi Barlevy & Derek Neal, 2012.
"Pay for Percentile,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 102(5), pages 1805-31, August.
- Gadi Barlevy & Derek Neal, 2011. "Pay for Percentile," NBER Working Papers 17194, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Barlevy, Gadi & Neal, Derek, 2009. "Pay for Percentile," IZA Discussion Papers 4383, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Gadi Barlevy & Derek Neal, 2009. "Pay for percentile," Working Paper Series WP-09-09, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
- Cory Koedel & Mark Ehlert & Eric Parsons & Michael Podgursky & P. Brett Xiang, 2014.
"Selecting Growth Measures for School and Teacher Evaluations,"
1401, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
- Cory Koedel & Mark Ehlert & Eric Parsons & Michael Podgursky, 2012. "Selecting Growth Measures for School and Teacher Evaluations," Working Papers 1210, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
- Barrett, Nathan & Toma, Eugenia F., 2013. "Reward or punishment? Class size and teacher quality," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 41-52.
- Wiswall, Matthew, 2013. "The dynamics of teacher quality," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 61-78.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Karie Kirkpatrick).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.