Systems that measure teachers’ effect on students over time—also known as longitudinal data systems—are at the heart of Race to the Top and other competitive grant programs created by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Such systems can better estimate teachers’ impact on student learning and inform efforts to improve public schools. Reformers’ hopes are particularly high that these "value-added" estimates can help align teacher policies with raising achievement and reducing achievement gaps.
Questions of when and how to use value-added estimates have proved extremely challenging, but the Race to the Top and other programs are bringing these questions to the forefront. The estimates’ technical issues have received much attention, but an overlooked issue is the fact that the very term "value added" may present an emotional barrier to teachers’ participation in these conversations.
Please join the Center for American Progress for the release of "Adding Value to Discussions about Value-Added," a paper that aims to help increase teachers’ participation in conversations about using estimates of their effectiveness to inform policy. The report includes proposed terms to replace "value added," a conceptual framework for linking estimates of effectiveness to decisions about teachers, and a suite of due-diligence principles.
Raegen Miller, Associate Director for Education Research, Center for American Progress
Caitlin Hollister, Teaching Policy Fellow, Teach Plus and Boston Public Schools
Segun Eubanks, Director of Teacher Quality, National Education Association
Robin Chait, Associate Director for Teacher Quality , Center for American Progress
For a full transcript click here.