Examining High and Low Value-Added Mathematics Instruction: Can Expert Observers Tell the Difference

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Penn collection
CPRE Working Papers
Degree type
Discipline
Subject
Educational Administration and Supervision
Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research
Educational Methods
Teacher Education and Professional Development
Funder
Grant number
License
Copyright date
Distributor
Related resources
Author
Hill, Heather C
Blazar, David
Humez, Andrea
Litke, Erica
Beisiegel, Mary
Barmore, Johanna
Chin, Mark
Corey, Douglas
Roesler, Sara
Salzman, Lucas R
Contributor
Abstract

The question of how to measure effective teachers and teaching has long been of interest to policymakers and school leaders. While recent policy initiatives have focused on the use of value-added measures (VAM) to assess teacher quality, there is a much longer tradition of using observations of practice to make such determinations. However, empirical evidence suggests these two indicators often identify different sets of teachers as effective. For example, the Measures of Effective Teaching project finds low correlations between teachers’ VAM scores and their quality of instruction as measured by observational metrics. Studies with the explicit intent of identifying differences in instruction between teachers with high and low VAM scores also have generally failed to uncover substantial differences across classrooms. In this study, we take advantage of a dataset containing both videotaped lessons and value-added scores to mount an exploratory study of the instruction of teachers with high- and low-value-added rankings. Specifically, we seek to answer two questions: First, what is the degree of convergence between observers’ impressions of mathematics instruction and teachers’ mathematics value-added scores? Second, are there a set of instructional practices that consistently characterize high but not low-value-added ranked teachers’ classrooms, and vice versa?

Advisor
Date Range for Data Collection (Start Date)
Date Range for Data Collection (End Date)
Digital Object Identifier
Series name and number
Publication date
2013-11-01
Volume number
Issue number
Publisher
Publisher DOI
Journal Issue
Comments
View on the CPRE website (http://www.cpre.org/hill).
Recommended citation
Collection