Abstract
It seems that the application of value added modeling (VAM) in educational settings has been gaining momentum in the past decade or so due to the interest in using test scores to evaluate teachers or schools, and currently myriads of VAM models are available for VAM researchers and practitioners. Despite the large number of VAM models, McCaffrey et al. (2004) summarized the relations among them and concluded that many can be viewed as special cases of persistence models. In persistence models, student scores are calculated based on the sum of teacher effects across years. Since different students may change teachers every year and have different membership in multiple group units, such models are also referred to as “multiple membership” models (Browne et al. 2001 Rasbash and Browne 2001). Persistence models differ from each other in the value of the persistence parameter, which, ranging from 0 to 1, denotes how teacher effects at the current year persist into the subsequent years, may it be vanished, undiminished, or diminished. The Variable Persistence (VP) model (Lockwood et al. 2007 McCaffrey et al. 2004) had been considered more flexible due to its free estimation of the persistence parameter, while other persistence models constrain its value to be either 0 or 1.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Browne, W. J., Goldstein, H., & Rasbash, J. (2001). Multiple membership multiple classification (MMMC) models. Statistical Modelling: An International Journal, 1, 103–124.
Carlin, B., & Louis, T. (2000). Bayes and empirical Bayes methods for data analysis (2nd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall/CRC Press.
Diggle, P. J., Liang, K.-Y., & Zeger, S. L. (1996). Analysis of longitudinal data. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gelman, A., Carlin, J., Stern, H., & Rubin, D. (1995). Bayesian data analysis. London: Chapman & Hall.
Gilks, W. R., Richardson, S., & Spiegelhalter, D. J. (1996). Markov chain Monte Carlo in practice. London: Chapman & Hall.
Harris, D., & Sass, T. (2006). Value-added models and the measurement of teacher quality. Unpublished manuscript.
Karl, A., Yang, Y., & Lohr, S. (2012a). Efficient maximum likelihood estimation for multiple membership mixed models used in value-added modeling. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 59, 13–27.
Karl, A. T., Yang, Y., & Lohr, S. (2012b). GPvam: Maximum likelihood estimation of multiple membership mixed models used in value-added modeling. R Package Version 2.0-0. http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/GPvam/index.html
Lockwood, J., McCaffrey, D., Mariano, L., & Setodji, C. (2007). Bayesian methods for scalable multivariate value-added assessment. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 32, 125–150.
Mariano, L., McCaffrey, D., & Lockwood, J. (2010). A model for teacher effects from longitudinal data without assuming vertical scaling. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 35, 253–279.
McCaffrey, D., Lockwood, J., Koretz, D., Louis, T., & Hamilton, L. (2004). Models for value-added modeling of teacher effects. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 29, 67–101.
Meyer, R. (1997). Value-added indicators of school performance: A primer. Economics of Education Review, 16, 183–301.
Rasbash, J., & Browne, W. (2001). Modelling non-hierarchical structures. In A. Leyland & H. Goldstein (Eds.), Multilevel modelling of health statistics (pp. 93–103). West Sussex, England: Wiley.
Raudenbusch, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods, second edition. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Rowan, B., Correnti, R., & Miller, R. J. (2002). What large-scale, survey research tells us about teacher effects on student achievement: Insights from the prospects study of elementary schools. Teachers College Record, 104, 1525–1567.
Sanders, W., Saxton, A., & Horn, B. (1997). The Tennessee value-added assessment system: A quantitative outcomes-based approach to educational assessment. In J. Millman (Ed.), Grading teachers, grading schools: Is student achievement a valid evaluational measure? (pp. 137–162). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Schmidt, W. H., Houang, R. T., & McKnight, C. C. (2005). Value-added research: Right idea but wrong solution? In R. Lissitz (Ed.), Value added models in education: Theory and applications (pp. 145–165). Maple Grove, MN: JAM Press.
Shkolnik, J., Hikawa, H., Suttorp, M., Lockwood, J., Stecher, B., & Bohrnstedt, G. (2002). Appendix D: The relationship between teacher characteristics and student achievement in reduced-size classes: A study of 6 California districts. In G. W. Bohrnstedt & B. M. Stecher (Eds.), What we have learned about class size reduction in California Technical Appendix. Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research.
Spiegelhalter, D., Thomas, A., Best, N., Gilks, W., & Lunn, D. (2002). BUGS: Bayesian inference using Gibbs sampling. Cambridge, England: MRC Biostatistics Unit. www.mrc-bsu.cam.ac.uk/bugs/.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Luo, Y., Jiao, H., Lissitz, R. (2015). An Empirical Study of the Impact of the Choice of Persistence Models in Value Added Modeling upon Teacher Effect Estimates. In: van der Ark, L., Bolt, D., Wang, WC., Douglas, J., Chow, SM. (eds) Quantitative Psychology Research. Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics, vol 140. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19977-1_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19977-1_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-19976-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-19977-1
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)