Advertisement

Quality & Quantity

, Volume 46, Issue 2, pp 627–637 | Cite as

On the stability of value added indicators

  • Maria Eugénia Ferrão
Research Note

Abstract

This paper shows how relevant concepts in educational effectiveness can support public policy in order to improve the performance of educational systems. Specifically, value-added indicators and the property of their stability over time is addressed with reference to application to school/teacher improvement. Findings of a longitudinal study developed in Portugal concerning primary education in mathematics are presented. Variance component models are fitted in order to obtain those indicators yearly to class-school units. Results of this study reveal that value-added indicators can be a useful instrument for progressive improvement in education, particularly in countries with high rates of student retention and evasion. The novelty of this paper is to measure value added over a single year rather than all stage of schooling that refers to more than 1 year.

Keywords

Multilevel modelling Value-added Performance indicators Longitudinal data School/teacher effectiveness School/teacher accountability School/teacher improvement 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bird S.M., Cox D., Farewell V.T., Goldstein H., Holt T., Smith P.C.: Performance indicators: good, bad, and ugly. J. R. Stat. Soc. A 168, 1–27 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Braun H., Wainer H.: Value-added modeling. In: Rao, C.R., Sinharay, S. (eds) Handbook of statistics 26, Psychometrics., pp. 475–501. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2007)Google Scholar
  3. Ferrão M.E., Goldstein H.: Adjusting for measurement error in the value added model: evidence from Portugal. Qual. Quant. 43, 951–963 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fielding A., Yang M., Goldstein H.: Multilevel ordinal models for examination grades. Stat. Model. 3, 127–153 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. GEPE: Taxa de retenção e desistência, Segundo o ano lectivo, por nível de ensino, ciclo de estudo e ano de escolaridade; Continente; Ensino Público. http://www.gepe.minedu.pt/np4/estatisticas (2009). Accessed 8 May 2009. (Official Statistics Department)
  6. Goldstein H.: Methods in school effectiveness research. Sch. Eff. Sch. Improv. 8, 369–395 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Goldstein H., Healy M.: The graphical presentation of collection of means. J. R. Stat. Soc. A 158, 175–177 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Goldstein H., Spiegelhalter D.J.: League tables and their limitations: statistical issues in comparison of institutional performance. J. R. Stat. Soc. A 159, 385–443 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gray J., Goldstein H., Jesson D.: Changes and improvements in schools’ effectiveness: trends over five years. Res. Pap. Educ. 11, 35–51 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gray J., Goldstein H., Thomas S.: Predicting the future: the role of past performance in determining trends in institutional effectiveness at A level. Br. Educ. Res. J. 27, 391–405 (2001)Google Scholar
  11. Kyriakides L., Creemers B.P.M.: A longitudinal study on the stability over time of school and teacher effects on student outcomes. Oxf. Rev. Educ. 34, 521–545 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Leckie G., Goldstein H.: The limitations of using school league tables to inform school choice. J. R. Stat. Soc. A. 172, 835–851 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. OECD: Education at a Glance. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2008a)Google Scholar
  14. OECD: Measuring Improvements in Learning Outcomes—Best Practices to Assess the Value-Added of Schools. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2008b)Google Scholar
  15. Sammons P., Thomas S., Mortimore P.: Forging links: effective schools and effective departments. Paul Chapman, London (1997)Google Scholar
  16. Scheerens J., Bosker R.: The foundations of educational effectiveness. Pergamon, Oxford (1997)Google Scholar
  17. Thomas S., Mortimore P.: Comparison of value-added models for secondary school effectiveness. Res. Pap. Educ. 11, 5–33 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Vicente, P.: Plano Amostral do Projecto 3EM—Eficácia Escolar no Ensino da Matemática. [Sampling Design of project 3EM—School Effectiveness in Math]. In: Ferrão, M.E., Nunes, C., Braumann, C. (eds). Estatística: Ciência Interdisciplinar, Proceedings of the XIV Annual Conference of the Portuguese Statistical Society, pp.849–858. Portuguese Statistical Society, Covilhã (2007)Google Scholar
  19. Yang M., Woodhouse G.: Progress from GCSE to A and AS Level: institutional and gender differences, and trends over time. Br. Educ. Res. J. 27, 245–267 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departamento de MatemáticaUniversidade da Beira InteriorCovilhãPortugal

Personalised recommendations