IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/18010.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Measuring Test Measurement Error: A General Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Donald Boyd
  • Hamilton Lankford
  • Susanna Loeb
  • James Wyckoff

Abstract

Test-based accountability including value-added assessments and experimental and quasi-experimental research in education rely on achievement tests to measure student skills and knowledge. Yet we know little regarding important properties of these tests, an important example being the extent of test measurement error and its implications for educational policy and practice. While test vendors provide estimates of split-test reliability, these measures do not account for potentially important day-to-day differences in student performance. We show there is a credible, low-cost approach for estimating the total test measurement error that can be applied when one or more cohorts of students take three or more tests in the subject of interest (e.g., state assessments in three consecutive grades). Our method generalizes the test-retest framework allowing for either growth or decay in knowledge and skills between tests as well as variation in the degree of measurement error across tests. The approach maintains relatively unrestrictive, testable assumptions regarding the structure of student achievement growth. Estimation only requires descriptive statistics (e.g., correlations) for the tests. When student-level test-score data are available, the extent and pattern of measurement error heteroskedasticity also can be estimated. Utilizing math and ELA test data from New York City, we estimate the overall extent of test measurement error is more than twice as large as that reported by the test vendor and demonstrate how using estimates of the total measurement error and the degree of heteroskedasticity along with observed scores can yield meaningful improvements in the precision of student achievement and achievement-gain estimates.

Suggested Citation

  • Donald Boyd & Hamilton Lankford & Susanna Loeb & James Wyckoff, 2012. "Measuring Test Measurement Error: A General Approach," NBER Working Papers 18010, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:18010
    Note: ED
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w18010.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Altonji, Joseph G & Segal, Lewis M, 1996. "Small-Sample Bias in GMM Estimation of Covariance Structures," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 14(3), pages 353-366, July.
    2. Daniel F. McCaffrey & Tim R. Sass & J. R. Lockwood & Kata Mihaly, 2009. "The Intertemporal Variability of Teacher Effect Estimates," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 4(4), pages 572-606, October.
    3. Daniel Aaronson & Lisa Barrow & William Sander, 2007. "Teachers and Student Achievement in the Chicago Public High Schools," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 25(1), pages 95-135.
    4. Cory Koedel & Julian Betts, 2007. "Re-Examining the Role of Teacher Quality In the Educational Production Function," Working Papers 0708, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
    5. Abowd, John M & Card, David, 1989. "On the Covariance Structure of Earnings and Hours Changes," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 411-445, March.
    6. Daniel G. Sullivan, 2001. "A note on the estimation of linear regression models with Heteroskedastic measurement errors," Working Paper Series WP-01-23, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
    7. Dan Goldhaber & Emily Anthony, 2007. "Can Teacher Quality Be Effectively Assessed? National Board Certification as a Signal of Effective Teaching," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(1), pages 134-150, February.
    8. Petra E. Todd & Kenneth I. Wolpin, 2003. "On The Specification and Estimation of The Production Function for Cognitive Achievement," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(485), pages 3-33, February.
    9. Cameron,A. Colin & Trivedi,Pravin K., 2005. "Microeconometrics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521848053, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cory Koedel & Jiaxi Li, 2016. "The Efficiency Implications Of Using Proportional Evaluations To Shape The Teaching Workforce," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 34(1), pages 47-62, January.
    2. Timothy N. Bond & Kevin Lang, 2018. "The Black–White Education Scaled Test-Score Gap in Grades K-7," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 53(4), pages 891-917.
    3. Jason A. Grissom & Demetra Kalogrides & Susanna Loeb, 2012. "Using Student Test Scores to Measure Principal Performance," NBER Working Papers 18568, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. repec:umc:wpaper:1308 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. J. R. Lockwood & Daniel F. McCaffrey, 2014. "Correcting for Test Score Measurement Error in ANCOVA Models for Estimating Treatment Effects," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 39(1), pages 22-52, February.
    6. Eric Parsons, 2014. "Does Attending a Low-Achieving School Affect High-Performing Student Outcomes?," Working Papers 1407, Department of Economics, University of Missouri, revised 18 Feb 2015.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Buddin, Richard, 2010. "How effective are Los Angeles elementary teachers and schools?," MPRA Paper 27366, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Stacy, Brian & Guarino, Cassandra & Wooldridge, Jeffrey, 2018. "Does the precision and stability of value-added estimates of teacher performance depend on the types of students they serve?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 50-74.
    3. Jesse Rothstein, 2007. "Do Value-Added Models Add Value? Tracking, Fixed Effects, and Causal Inference," Working Papers 1036, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Center for Economic Policy Studies..
    4. Goldhaber, Dan & Cowan, James & Walch, Joe, 2013. "Is a good elementary teacher always good? Assessing teacher performance estimates across subjects," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 216-228.
    5. Jesse Rothstein, 2010. "Teacher Quality in Educational Production: Tracking, Decay, and Student Achievement," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 125(1), pages 175-214.
    6. repec:pri:cepsud:159rothstein is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Goldhaber, Dan & Liddle, Stephanie & Theobald, Roddy, 2013. "The gateway to the profession: Assessing teacher preparation programs based on student achievement," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 29-44.
    8. Dan Goldhaber & Michael Hansen, 2013. "Is it Just a Bad Class? Assessing the Long-term Stability of Estimated Teacher Performance," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 80(319), pages 589-612, July.
    9. Jesse Rothstein, 2007. "Do Value-Added Models Add Value? Tracking, Fixed Effects, and Causal Inference," Working Papers 1036, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Center for Economic Policy Studies..
    10. Condie, Scott & Lefgren, Lars & Sims, David, 2014. "Teacher heterogeneity, value-added and education policy," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 76-92.
    11. Manuel Arellano & Stéphane Bonhomme, 2012. "Identifying Distributional Characteristics in Random Coefficients Panel Data Models," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 79(3), pages 987-1020.
    12. Figlio, D. & Karbownik, K. & Salvanes, K.G., 2016. "Education Research and Administrative Data," Handbook of the Economics of Education,, Elsevier.
    13. Lindsay Fox, 2016. "Playing to Teachers’ Strengths: Using Multiple Measures of Teacher Effectiveness to Improve Teacher Assignments," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 11(1), pages 70-96, Winter.
    14. Goel, Deepti & Barooah, Bidisha, 2018. "Drivers of Student Performance: Evidence from Higher Secondary Public Schools in Delhi," GLO Discussion Paper Series 231, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    15. Donald Boyd & Hamilton Lankford & Susanna Loeb & James Wyckoff, 2013. "Measuring Test Measurement Error," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 38(6), pages 629-663, December.
    16. Richard Buddin & Gema Zamarro, 2009. "Teacher Qualifications and Middle School Student Achievement," Working Papers WR-671-IES, RAND Corporation.
    17. Kata Mihaly & Daniel F. McCaffrey & J. R. Lockwood & Tim R. Sass, 2010. "Centering and reference groups for estimates of fixed effects: Modifications to felsdvreg," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 10(1), pages 82-103, March.
    18. Richard Buddin & Gena Zamarro, 2008. "Teacher Quality, Teacher Licensure Tests, and Student Achievement," Working Papers 555, RAND Corporation.
    19. Harris, Douglas N. & Sass, Tim R., 2011. "Teacher training, teacher quality and student achievement," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(7), pages 798-812.
    20. Araujo P., Maria Daniela & Quis, Johanna Sophie, 2021. "Parents can tell! Evidence on classroom quality differences in German primary schools," BERG Working Paper Series 172, Bamberg University, Bamberg Economic Research Group.
    21. Cory Koedel & Julian R. Betts, 2011. "Does Student Sorting Invalidate Value-Added Models of Teacher Effectiveness? An Extended Analysis of the Rothstein Critique," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 6(1), pages 18-42, January.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:18010. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.