Assessing the "Rothstein Falsification Test": Does It Really Show Teacher Value-Added Models Are Biased?

Autor/inn/en	Goldhaber, Dan; Chaplin, Duncan Dunbar
Titel	Assessing the "Rothstein Falsification Test": Does It Really Show Teacher Value-Added Models Are Biased?
Quelle	In: Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 8 (2015) 1, S.8-34 (27 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1934-5747
DOI	10.1080/19345747.2014.978059
Schlagwörter	Teacher Evaluation; Teacher Effectiveness; Teacher Influence; Models; Test Bias; Academic Achievement; Standardized Tests; Grade 5; Elementary School Teachers; Equations (Mathematics); Computation; Statistical Significance; Prediction; Error Patterns; Simulation + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Teacher appraisal; Lehrerbeurteilung; Effectiveness of teaching; Instructional effectiveness; Lehrerleistung; Unterrichtserfolg; Analogiemodell; Testkritik; Schulleistung; Standadised tests; Standardisierter Test; School year 05; 5. Schuljahr; Schuljahr 05; Elementary school; Teacher; Teachers; Grundschule; Volksschule; Lehrer; Lehrerin; Lehrende; Equations; Mathematics; Gleichungslehre; Vorhersage; Fehlertyp; Simulation program; Simulationsprogramm
Abstract	In an influential paper, Jesse Rothstein (2010) shows that standard value-added models (VAMs) suggest implausible and large future teacher effects on past student achievement. This is the basis of a falsification test that "appears" to indicate bias in typical VAM estimates of teacher contributions to student learning on standardized tests. We find that the "Rothstein falsification test" generates large and implausible future teacher effects even when students are randomly assigned to classrooms. Importantly, we also show that although the test can determine when students are tracked to teachers, this tracking result does not necessarily imply bias in estimates of teacher effectiveness. The primary reason that the test does not imply bias is that tracking could be based on lagged student achievement, which is usually accounted for in VAMs. Specifically, we show theoretically and through simulations that the test proposed in Rothstein will often falsify VAMs that are unbiased and fail to falsify VAMs that are biased. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01