Jerry Becker Research

Jerry Becker 7:51 PM (13 hours ago) to JERRY-P-BECKER. *************************************** From American Educational Research Association, November 11, 2015. See http://www.aera.net/Publications/Journals/EducationalResearcher/EducationalResearcher441/EducationalResearcher442/tabid/15857/Default.aspx for detailed statement ' See, also, http://dianeravitch.net/2015/11/11/aera-issues-warning-against-use-of-vam/ ************************************** WASHINGTON, D.C., November 11-In a statement released today, the American Educational Research Association (AERA) advises those using or considering use of value-added models (VAM) about the scientific and technical limitations of these measures for evaluating educators and programs that prepare teachers. The statement, approved by AERA Council, cautions against the use of VAM for high-stakes decisions regarding educators. In recent years, many states and districts have attempted to use VAM to determine the contributions of educators, or the programs in which they were trained, to student learning outcomes, as captured by standardized student tests. The AERA statement speaks to the formidable statistical and methodological issues involved in isolating either the effects of educators or teacher preparation programs from a complex set of factors that shape student performance. "This statement draws on the leading testing, statistical, and methodological expertise in the field of education research and related sciences, and on the highest standards that guide education research and its applications in policy and practice," said AERA Executive Director Felice J. Levine. The statement addresses the challenges facing the validity of inferences from VAM, as well as specifies eight technical requirements that must be met for the use of VAM to be accurate, reliable, and valid. It cautions that these requirements cannot be met in most evaluative contexts. The statement notes that, while VAM may be superior to some other models of measuring teacher impacts on student learning outcomes, "it does not mean that they are ready for use in educator or program evaluation. There are potentially serious negative consequences in the context of evaluation that can result from the use of VAM based on incomplete or flawed data, as well as from the misinterpretation or misuse of the VAM results." The statement also notes that there are promising alternatives to VAM currently in use in the United States that merit attention, including the use of teacher observation data and peer assistance and review models that provide formative and summative assessments of teaching and honor teachers' due process rights. The statement concludes: "The value of high-quality, research-based evidence cannot be over-emphasized. Ultimately, only rigorously supported inferences about the quality and effectiveness of teachers, educational leaders, and preparation programs can contribute to improved student learning." Thus, the statement also calls for substantial investment in research on VAM and on alternative methods and models of educator and educator preparation program evaluation. ------------------------------------ Related Resources: Special Issue of Educational Researcher (March 2015)- Value Added Meets the Schools: The Effects of Using Test-Based Teacher Evaluation on the Work of Teachers and Leaders - SEE http://www.aera.net/Publications/Journals/EducationalResearcher/EducationalResearcher441/EducationalResearcher442/tabid/15857/Default.aspx