Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the sensitivity of growth and value-added modeling to the way an underlying vertical score scale has been created. Longitudinal item-level data were analyzed with both student- and school-level identifiers for the entire state of Colorado between 2003 and 2006. Eight different vertical scales were established on the basis of choices made for three key variables: the item response theory modeling approach, the calibration approach, and the student proficiency estimation approach. Each scale represented a methodological approach that was psychometrically defensible. Longitudinal values from each scale were used as the outcome in a commonly used value-added model (the “layered model” popularized by William Sanders) as a means of estimating school effects. Our findings suggest that while the ordering of estimating school effects is insensitive to the underlying vertical scale, the precision of such value-added estimates can be quite sensitive to the combinations of choices made in the creation of the scale.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
