![](https://d3ilqtpdwi981i.cloudfront.net/WBwvu6StR7mZd_seHuHD5W3VVEM=/425x550/smart/https://bepress-attached-resources.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/65/56/1b/65561bfc-3118-4fa2-a7fe-9ddd9463a109/thumbnail_68dc8436-00cc-4aca-be7d-c79ccfc30cd1.jpg)
Article
Reformers, Batting Averages, and Malpractice: The Case for Caution in Value-Added Use
Faculty Publications & Research
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
1-1-2014
Keywords
- education reform,
- legal precedent,
- statistical analysis,
- value-added modeling
Disciplines
Abstract
The essay considers two analogies that help to reveal the limitations of value-added modeling: the first, a comparison with batting averages, shows that the model’s reliability is quite limited even though year-to-year correlation figures may seem impressive; the second, a comparison between medical malpractice and so-called educational malpractice, suggests that strict accountability measures within education are out of line with legal precedent.
Citation Information
Gleason, Daniel. "Reformers, Batting Averages, and Malpractice: The Case for Caution in Value-Added Use.” The Educational Fourm, vol. 78, no. 2, 2014, pp. 128-41. DigitalCommons@IMSA, doi:10.1080/00131725.2013.878427.
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2013.878427