Four principal performance measures based on student test scores evaluated in Pennsylvania¶

Element · All elements
Evidence · 5 claims (5 for) · 2 studies (2 associational), q2 · 0 of 2 report an effect size · 5 claims rest on one study

Description¶

The report evaluates four principal performance measures based on student test scores: average achievement, adjusted average achievement, school value-added, and adjusted school value-added. The first two "do not account for students’ past achievement" while the latter two do. Each measure's rating stability and predictive accuracy for principals' future contributions to student achievement were assessed and simulated.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Requires statewide data linking students and principals, as used here from Pennsylvania for 2007/08 to 2013/14
• Requires statewide data linking students and principals over multiple years, as in Pennsylvania's 2007/08 to 2013/14 data

Constraints¶

• Findings apply to the four test-score-based measures studied; the report finds limited or no predictive information for all four
• Measures not accounting for students' past achievement provide no predictive information for future principal contributions

Target Learners¶

• school principals
• K-12 school administrators
• K-12 students in Pennsylvania public schools

Target Learning Goals¶

• measuring principal performance based on student achievement outcomes
• Student achievement as measured by test scores

Claims¶

• School value-added and adjusted school value-added provide at most a small amount of information for predicting principals' future contributions to student achievement [+W]
• School value-added and adjusted school value-added provide, at most, a small amount of information for predicting principals' contributions in the following year [+W]
• Average achievement and adjusted average achievement provide no information for predicting principals' contributions to student achievement in the following year [+W]
• Averaging principal performance measures across multiple recent years does not improve their accuracy for predicting principals' contributions in the following year [+W]
• The study used two sets of analyses—rating stability and the stable component's link to future contributions—to simulate each measure's predictive accuracy [+W]

Related Elements¶

• Value-Added Assessment System for DC Schools and Teachers (2009–2015 project context)
• Value-added measures of teacher effectiveness

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• Hanley Chiang, Moira McCullough, Stephen Lipscomb, Brian Gill. (2016). Can Student Test Scores Provide Useful Measures of School Principals' Performance? Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED570000
• Hanley Chiang, Moira McCullough, Stephen Lipscomb, Brian Gill. (2016). Performance Measures Based on Test Scores – How Well Do They Predict Principals' Impacts? (In Focus Brief). Cambridge, MA: Mathematica Policy Research. https://www.mathematica.org/publications/performance-measures-based-on-test-scores-issue-brief