An experimental evaluation of three teacher quality measures: Value-added,classroom observations,and student surveys |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Harvard University, United States;2. Harvard University and NBER, United States;3. Dartmouth College and NBER, United States;1. King’s Business School, King’s College London, United Kingdom;2. Centre for Vocational Education Research, United Kingdom;3. National Institute of Economic and Social Research, 2 Dean Trench Street, London SW1P 3HE, United Kingdom;1. Division of Health Policy and Administration, School of Public Health, University of Illinois, Chicago 1603W. Taylor Street, Room 755, Chicago, IL, 60612, United States;2. Economics Department, University of Colorado Denver, Campus Box 181, P.O. Box 173364, Denver, CO, United States, 80217-3364;3. O''Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University Bloomington, 1315 East 10th Street Bloomington, IN, 47405, United States;4. National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Ave, Cambridge, MA, 02138, United States;1. Department of Economics, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States;2. NBER, Cambridge, MA, United States;3. IZA, Bonn, Germany;4. School of Public Affairs, American University, Washington DC, United States;5. Department of Agricultural Economics and Economics, Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana, United States |
| |
| Abstract: | Nearly every state evaluates teacher performance using multiple measures, but evidence has largely shown that only one such measure—teachers’ effects on student achievement (i.e., value-added)—captures teachers’ causal effects. We conducted a random assignment experiment in 66 fourth- and fifth-grade mathematics classrooms to evaluate the predictive validity of three measures of teacher performance: value-added, classroom observations, and student surveys. Combining our results with those from two previous random assignment experiments, we provide additional experimental evidence that value-added measures are unbiased predictors of teacher performance. Though results for the other two measures are less precise, we find that classroom observation scores are predictive of teachers’ performance after random assignment while student surveys are not. These results thus lend support to teacher evaluation systems that use value-added and classroom observations, but suggest practitioners should proceed with caution when considering student survey measures for teacher evaluation. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
