Year: 2017
Type: dissertation
Abstract: In the first decade of the 21st century, researchers and policymakers in K-12 education began to focus on evaluating teacher and school performance based on students’ standardized test scores. One evaluative technique, value-added assessment (VAA), has been given particular attention. This research presents a comprehensive study of the theoretical, technical, historical and political dimensions VAA. Theoretically, the assumptions that underlie value-added diverge significantly from the observed operations of the schools and classrooms these models are supposed to evaluate. Technically, even if the theoretical assumptions are accepted, teachers’ actual value-added rankings are shown to be unstable across time periods and classrooms for individual teachers based on publicly-available data from New York City schools. Historical discourse analysis shows how the political and technical evolution of VAA fit a pattern common to prior technical innovations in educational assessment. Finally, making a case study of the Vergara v. California trial, this research demonstrates the political force of VAA data in spite of its known limitations. These findings are considered in the context of sociological theories of science and policy.
Author: Daniel Douglas
Language: English
Subfield: Education
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
SDG: Quality education
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W2604686223