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.
Reformers, Batting Averages, and Malpractice: The Case for Caution in Value-Added UseFaculty Publications & Research
Citation InformationGleason, 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.