Student Assessment Opt Out and the Impact on Value-Added Measures of Teacher Quality

Abstract

Student assessment nonparticipation (or opt out) has increased substantially in K-12 schools in states across the country. This increase in opt out has the potential to impact achievement and growth (or value-added) measures used for educator and institutional accountability. In this simulation study, we investigated the extent to which value-added measures of teacher quality are affected as a result of varying degrees of opt out, as well as a result of various types of nonrandom opt out. Results show that the magnitude of opt out and choice of classification scheme has a greater impact on value-added estimates than the type of opt-out patterns simulated in this study. Specifically, root mean square differences in value-added estimates increased as magnitude of opt out increased. In addition, teacher effectiveness classification agreement decreased as opt out magnitude increased. One type of opt out, where the highest achieving students in the highest achieving classrooms opted out, had the largest impact on stability than the other types of opt outs.

NCME Presidential Address 2020: Valuing Educational Measurement

“…In the United States, public protests against educational tests are vehement, frequent, and well organized. The "opt-out movement" resulted in up to 90% of public school students in some districts refusing to take the statewide tests mandated under No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), and these refusals were supported by parents and teachers (Bennett, 2016;Marland, Harrick, & Sireci, 2019). Examples of these grassroots and well-coordinated efforts can be found across the states.…”

Unraveling the building blocks of success: exploring the nexus between school structure and effectiveness in Israeli primary schools

“…The method used in this study is regression analysis with an improvement in achievement component (Canaan et al, 2019;Chetty et al, 2011;Darling-Hammond et al, 2011;Goldschmidt et al, 2005;Jackson et al, 2020;Ladd and Loeb, 2013;Leckie and Goldstein, 2017;Marland et al, 2020;Munoz-Chereau et al, 2020;Ray, 2006;Rivkin, 2007;Gilboa, 2010). This method calculates the degree of improvement in achievements by measuring at least two scores over a period of time.…”

“…This study analyses school effectiveness of schools in Israel as expressed in improved academic achievements (Canaan et al, 2019;Chetty et al, 2011;Darling-Hammond et al, 2011;Goldschmidt et al, 2005;Jackson et al, 2020;Ladd and Loeb, 2013;Leckie and Goldstein, 2017;Marland et al, 2020;Munoz-Chereau et al, 2020;Ray, 2006;Rivkin, 2007;Gilboa, 2010). In addition, it aims to identify the variables that are related to school effectiveness.…”

“…, 2005; Jackson et al. , 2020; Ladd and Loeb, 2013; Leckie and Goldstein, 2017; Marland et al. , 2020; Munoz-Chereau et al.…”