An Evaluation of Empirical Bayes ’ Estimation of Value-Added Teacher Performance Measures August 19 , 2014

Empirical Bayes' (EB) estimation is a widely used procedure to calculate teacher value-added. It is primarily viewed as a way to make imprecise estimates more reliable. In this paper we review the theory of EB estimation and use simulated data to study its ability to properly rank teachers. We compare the performance of EB estimators with that of other widely used value-added estimators under different teacher assignment scenarios. We find that, although EB estimators generally perform well under random assignment of teachers to classrooms, their performance generally suffers under non-random teacher assignment. Under nonrandom assignment, estimators that explicitly (if imperfectly) control for the teacher assignment mechanism perform the best out of all the estimators we examine. We also find that shrinking the estimates, as in EB estimation, does not itself substantially boost performance. An Evaluation of Empirical Bayes’ Estimation of Value-Added Teacher Performance Measures

[1]  C. Hansen.  Asymptotic properties of a robust variance matrix estimator for panel data when T is large , 2007 .

[2]  Cassandra M. Guarino,et al.  Can Value-Added Measures of Teacher Education Performance Be Trusted? , 2012 .

[3]  C. Morris.  Parametric Empirical Bayes Inference: Theory and Applications , 1983 .

[4]  Paul Wright,et al.  Controlling for Student Background in Value-Added Assessment of Teachers , 2004 .

[5]  Raj Chetty,et al.  Measuring the Impacts of Teachers I: Evaluating Bias in Teacher Value-Added Estimates , 2014 .

[6]  Jesse Rothstein,et al.  Teacher Quality in Educational Production: Tracking, Decay, and Student Achievement , 2008 .

[7]  Lars Lefgren,et al.  Principals as Agents: Subjective Performance Measurement in Education , 2005 .

[8]  Thomas J. Kane,et al.  Estimating Teacher Impacts on Student Achievement: An Experimental Evaluation , 2008 .

[9]  Jesse Rothstein,et al.  Student Sorting and Bias in Value-Added Estimation: Selection on Observables and Unobservables , 2009, Education Finance and Policy.

[10]  Sean F. Reardon,et al.  Assumptions of Value-Added Models for Estimating School Effects , 2009, Education Finance and Policy.

[11]  Thomas A Louis,et al.  Jump down to Document , 2022 .

[12]  Daniel F. McCaffrey,et al.  Controlling for Individual Heterogeneity in Longitudinal Models, with Applications to Student Achievement , 2007, 0706.1401.

[13]  Jeffrey M. Woodbridge.  Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data , 2002 .

[14]  S. Corcoran,et al.  Teacher Effectiveness on High- and Low-Stakes Tests. , 2011 .

[15]  Stephen W. Raudenbush,et al.  Adaptive Centering with Random Effects: An Alternative to the Fixed Effects Model for Studying Time-Varying Treatments in School Settings , 2009, Education Finance and Policy.

[16]  Raj Chetty,et al.  The Long-Term Impacts of Teachers: Teacher Value-Added and Student Outcomes in Adulthood , 2011 .

[17]  Mark D. Reckase,et al.  Can Value-Added Measures of Teacher Performance Be Trusted? , 2012, Education Finance and Policy.

[18]  Brian A. Jacob,et al.  Can Principals Identify Effective Teachers? Evidence on Subjective Performance Evaluation in Education , 2008, Journal of Labor Economics.

[19]  N. Horton.  Multilevel and Longitudinal Modeling Using Stata , 2006 .