Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 215

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

What Are Value-Added Models Estimating and What Does This Imply for Statistical Practice?

Raudenbush, Stephen W.·2004·Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics

Abstract

The question of how to estimate school and teacher contributions to student learning is fundamental to educational policy and practice, and the three thoughtful articles in this issue represent a major advance. The current level of public confusion about these issues is so severe and the consequences for schooling so great that it is a big relief to see this journal highlight the key issues. A common theme in these articles is that we should compare schools or teachers by comparing their value added to student learning rather than by comparing unadjusted mean levels of achievement or, as is currently common practice, the percent of students in a school or class who are classified as proficient. As Ballou, Sanders, and Wright (BSW) note, it makes no sense to hold schools accountable for mean achievement levels when students enter those schools with large mean differences in achievement. Moreover, given the remarkable mobility of students across schools, particularly in large urban districts, changes in mean achievement at the school level may bear little relation to instructional effectiveness. In contrast, the value-added philosophy is to hold schools and teachers accountable for the learning gains of students they serve. This seems simple enough, yet the technical questions raised in these articles are many: whether and how to adjust for covariates, whether teachers (or schools) should be treated as fixed or random, how to represent cumulative effects of teachers or schools, how to model covariation in student responses and teacher effects, whether and how to incorporate multiple cohorts, and how to formulate models that appropriately handle missing data. A prior question is: What are we trying to estimate with these models? School and teacher effects are causal effects, yet the treatments students experience and the potential outcomes under alternative treatments (Rubin, 1978; Rosenbaum & Rubin, 1983; Holland, 1986) are not clearly defined in these discussions. As a

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3102/10769986029001121

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 215

Metadata

Authors
Raudenbush, S. W.
Venue
Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics
Published
2004-03
Volume
29
Issue
1
Pages
121-129
ISSN
  • 1076-9986 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-1054
OpenAlex
W2019919534
Cited by
215
References
1
FWCI
37.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: What Are Value-Added Models Estimating and What Does This Imply for Statistical Practice? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3102/10769986029001121
The paper
Raudenbush, S. W. (2004). What Are Value-Added Models Estimating and What Does This Imply for Statistical Practice? Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986029001121

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.