Uncertainty in Rank Estimation

Implications for Value-Added Modeling Accountability Systems

Published In: Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, v. 27, no. 3, Fall 2002, p. 255-270

by J. R. Lockwood, Thomas A. Louis

Read More

Access further information on this document at jeb.sagepub.com

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

Accountability for public education often requires estimating and ranking the quality of individual teachers or schools on the basis of student test scores. Although the properties of estimators of teacher-or-school effects are well established, less is known about the properties of rank estimators. The authors investigate performance of rank (percentile) estimators in a basic, two-stage hierarchical model capturing the essential features of the more complicated models that are commonly used to estimate effects. The authors use simulation to study mean squared error (MSE) performance of percentile estimates and to find the operating characteristics of decision rules based on estimated percentiles. Each depends on the signal-to-noise ratio (the ratio of the teacher or school variance component to the variance of the direct, teacher- or school-specific estimator) and only moderately on the number of teachers or schools. Results show that even when using optimal procedures, MSE is large for the commonly encountered variance ratios, with an unrealistically large ratio required for ideal performance. Percentile-specific MSE results reveal interesting interactions between variance ratios and estimators, especially for extreme percentiles, which are of considerable practical import. These interactions are apparent in the performance of decision rules for the identification of extreme percentiles, underscoring the statistical and practical complexity of the multiple-goal inferences faced in value-added modeling. Our results highlight the need to assess whether even optimal percentile estimators perform sufficiently well to be used in evaluating teachers or schools.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/research-integrity.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.