Proxy pre-test value-added estimates show bias, but may still carry information about teacher effectiveness¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2021: tool and model accuracy changes quickly
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? Despite evidence of bias in proxy pre-test value-added estimates, the authors argue the estimates may still reflect important information about teacher effectiveness. → Elias Walsh 2018
Evidence¶
Elias Walsh 2018¶
Elias Walsh, Dallas Dotter, Albert Y. Liu. (2018). Can More Teachers Be Covered? The Accuracy, Credibility, and Precision of Value-Added Estimates with Proxy Pre-Tests. Working Paper 64. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research. https://www.mathematica.org/publications/can-more-teachers-be-covered-the-accuracy-credibility-and-precision-of-value-added-estimates
q2 · i? · associational · r2
The authors' interpretation from the Oklahoma statewide analysis: proxy pre-test estimates show bias, yet "these estimates may still reflect important information about a teacher's effectiveness." This is an author discussion point, not a separately tested result.
"Despite evidence of bias, we discuss how these estimates may still reflect important information about a teacher's effectiveness."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Bias, not precision loss, drives the difference in proxy pre-test value-added estimates — related
- Empirical Bayes shrinkage could be used to address bias in proxy pre-test value-added estimates — related
- Omitting same-subject pre-tests affects value-added estimates more than excluding other student background characteristics — related
- The report explicitly discusses limitations of the Oklahoma value-added model — related
- The paper clarifies confusion about the use of value-added information in teacher evaluation — a broader claim this one bears on
- Standardized test proficiency provides biased information about school quality, indicating a need for alternative metrics — related
- Multiple sources of student information can be accumulated to estimate teacher effectiveness — related
- The working paper examines the sensitivity and precision of teacher value-added estimates under specifications differing in student-level, peer-level, and double-lagged achievement controls — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
proxy-pretest-estimates-biased-but-informative |
title |
Proxy pre-test value-added estimates show bias, but may still carry information about teacher effectiveness |
description |
Proxy pre-test value-added estimates show bias, but may still carry information about teacher effectiveness |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2018 |
recheck_by |
2021 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-08 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — elias-walsh-2018 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.