FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2000979191> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2000979191 endingPage "146" @default.
• W2000979191 startingPage "119" @default.
• W2000979191 abstract "Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of EducationVolume 104, Issue 2 p. 119-146 Exploring Models of School Performance: From Theory to Practice† Kilchan Choi, Kilchan Choi UCLA National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).Search for more papers by this authorPete Goldschmidt, Pete Goldschmidt UCLA National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).Search for more papers by this authorKyo Yamashiro, Kyo Yamashiro UCLA National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).Search for more papers by this author Kilchan Choi, Kilchan Choi UCLA National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).Search for more papers by this authorPete Goldschmidt, Pete Goldschmidt UCLA National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).Search for more papers by this authorKyo Yamashiro, Kyo Yamashiro UCLA National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).Search for more papers by this author First published: 07 June 2005 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7984.2005.00028.x † The work reported herein was supported under the Educational Research and Development Centers Program, PR/Award Number R305B960002, as administered by the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), and the U.S. Department of Education. The findings and opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions or policies of the National Center for Education Research, the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), or the U.S. Department of Education. AboutPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat References Aitkin, M., & Longford, N. (1986). Statistical modeling issues in school effectiveness studies. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 149(1), 1–43. Alliance for Fair and Effective Accountability. (2004, October 21). Joint Organizational Statement on No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act. Message posted to http://www.childrensdefense.org/education/NCLB_joint_statement.pdf Ballou, D., Sanders, W., & Wright, P. (2004). Controlling for student background in value-added assessment of teachers. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 29(1), 37–65. Bryk, A.S., & Weisberg, H. I. (1976). Value-added analysis: A dynamic approach to the estimation of treatment effects. Journal of Educational Statistics, 1, 127–155. Bryk, A.S., Thum, Y.M., Easton, J.Q., & Luppescu, S. (1998). Assessing school academic productivity: The case of Chicago school reform. Social Psychology of Education, 2, 103–142. Campbell, D.T., & Stanley, J.C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally. Choi, K., & Seltzer, M. (2004). Modeling heterogeneity in relationships between initial status and rates of change: Treating latent variable regression coefficients as random coefficients in a three-level hierarchical model. Manuscript submitted for publication. Choi, K., Seltzer, M., Herman, J., & Yamashiro, K. (2004). Children left behind in AYP and non-AYP schools: Using student progress and the distribution of student gains to validate AYP. CSE Technical Report. Los Angeles: Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, University of California Los Angeles. Choi, K., Yamashiro, K., Seltzer, M., & Herman, J. (2004, September). Comparing like with like: The role of student and school characteristics in value-added models. Paper presented at the Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST) Annual Conference, Los Angeles, CA. Council of Chief State School Officers. (2004, November). Brain trust on value added growth models. Washington, DC, Author. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000, January). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1). Retrieved October 10, 2004, from http://olam.ed.asu.edu/epaa/v8n1/ Elmore, R.F., Abelmann, C.H., & Fuhrman, S.H. (1996). The new accountability in state education reform: From process to performance. In H.F. Ladd (Ed.), Holding schools accountable: Performance-based reform in education (pp. 65–98). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution. Fuhrman, S.H., & Elmore, R.F. (Eds.) (2004). Redesigning accontability systems for education. New York: Teacher's College Press. Goals 2000: Educate America Act of 1994, Pub. L. 103-227, 108 Stat. 125 (1994). Goldschmidt, P., Choi, K., & Martinez-Fernandez, F. (2003). Using hierarchical growth models to monitor school performance over time: Comparing NCE to scale score results. CSE Technical Report. Los Angeles: Center for the Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, University of California Los Angeles. Goldstein, H., & Spiegelhalter, D. J. (1996). League tables and their limitations: Statistical issues in comparisons of institutional performance. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, 159, 384–443. Good, T.L., Biddle, B.J., & Brody, J.E. (1975). Teachers make a difference. Lanham, MD: University Press of America. Griliches, Z., & Mason, W. (1972). Education, income, and ability. Journal of Political Economy, 80(3), Part 2 (May–June), S74–S103. Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1987). Item response theory: Principles and applications. Boston: Kluwer. Hanushek, E.A. (1979). Conceptual and empirical issues in the estimation of education production functions. Journal of Human Resources, 14(3), 351–388. Improving America's Schools Act of 1994 (IASA), Pub. L. No. 103-382, 108 Stat. 4056 (1994). Izumi, L., & Doran, H. (2004). Putting education to the test: A value-added model for California. San Francisco: Pacific Research Institute. Koretz, D. (1996). Using student assessments for educational accountability. In E.A. Hanushek & D.W. Jorgenson (Eds.), Improving America's schools: The role of incentives (pp. 171–195). Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Linn, R.L. (2000). Assessments and accountability. Educational Researcher, 29(2). Linn, R.L., & Slinde, J.A. (1977). The determination of the significance of change between pre- and post-periods. Review of Educational Research, 47, 121–150. Lockwood, J.R., Lewis, T.A., McCaffrey, D. (2002). Uncertainty in rank estimation: Implications for value-added modeling accountability systems. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 27, 255–270. McCaffrey, D., Lockwood, J.R., Koretz, D., Louis, T., & Hamilton, L. (2004). Models for value-added modeling of teacher effects. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 29(1), 67–101. McNeil, L.M. (2000). Contradictions of school reform: Educational costs of standardized testing. New York: Routledge. Meyer, R.H. (1996). Value-added indicators of school performance. In E.A. Hanushek & D.W. Jorgenson (Eds.), Improving America's schools: The role of incentives (pp. 197–223). Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Muthen, B., & Curran, P. (1997). General longitudinal modeling of individual differences in experimental designs: A latent variable framework for analysis and power. Psychological Methods, 2, 371–402. National Conference of State Legislatures. (2004). NCLB Task Force Meeting, Portland, Oregon, October 10–11. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002). Novak, J., & Fuller, B. (2003). Penalizing diverse schools? Similar test scores, but different students, bring federal sanction. PACE policy brief. Berkeley: Policy Analysis for California Education. Oakes, J. (1989, Summer). What educational indicators? The case for assessing the school context. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(2), 181–199. O'Day, J., & Smith, M. (1993). Systemic reform and educational opportunity. In S. Fuhrman (Ed.), Designing coherent education policy: Improving the system (pp. 250–312). New York: Jossey-Bass. Porter, A. (1988, March). Indicators: Objective data or political tool? Phi Delta Kappan, 69(7), 503–508. Raudenbush, S.W. (2004a). What are value-added models estimating and what does this imply for statistical practice? Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 29(1), 121–129. Raudenbush, S.W. (2004b). School, statistics, and poverty: Can we measure school improvement? Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, Policy Evaluation and Research Center. Raudenbush, S.W., & Bryk, A.S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods ( 2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Press. Raudenbush, S., Bryk, A., Cheong, Y., & Congdon, R. (2004). HLM6: Hierarchical linear and non-linear modeling. Homewood, IL: Scientific Software International. Raudenbush, S.W., & Wilms, J.D. (1995). The estimation of school effects. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 20, 307–335. Rogosa, D.R. (1995). Myths and methods: Myths about longitudinal research, plus supplemental questions. In J.M. Gottman (Ed.), The analysis of change (pp. 3–65). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Rogosa, D.R., Brandt, D., & Zimowski, M. (1982). A growth curve approach to the measurement of change. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 726–774. Rubin, D., Stuart, E., & Zanutto, E. (2004). A potential outcomes view of value-added assessment in education. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 29(1), 103–116. Rumberger, R.W., & Palardy, G.J. (2004). Multilevel models for school effectiveness research. In D. Kaplan (Ed.), Handbook of quantitative methodology for the social sciences (pp. 235–258). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Russell, M. (2000). Summarizing change in test scores: Shortcomings of three common methods. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(5). Available at http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=7&n=1 Sanders, W.L., Saxton, A.M., & Horn, S.P. (1997). The Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System: A quantitative, outcomes-based approach to educational assessment. In J. Millman (Ed.), Grading teachers, grading schools. Is student achievement a valid evaluation measure? (pp. 137–162). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Seltzer, M., Choi, K., & Thum, Y.M. (2003). Examining relationships between where students start and how rapidly they progress: Implications for conducting analyses that help illuminate the distribution of achievement within schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(3), 263–286. Shavelson, R.J., & Towne, L. (2004). What drives scientific research in education? American Psychological Society, 17(4), 27–30. Thum, Y.M. (2003a). Measuring progress toward a goal: Estimating teacher productivity using a multivariate multilevel model for value-added analysis. Sociological Methods and Research, 32(2), 153–207. Thum, Y.M. (2003b). No Child Left Behind: Methodological challenges and recommendations for measuring adequate yearly progress. CSE Technical Report. Los Angeles: Center for the Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, University of California Los Angeles. Wilms, J.D., & Raudenbush, S.W. (1989). A longitudinal hierarchical linear model for estimating school effects and their stability. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26(3), 209–232. Yen, W.M. (1986). The choice of scale for educational measurement: An IRT perspective. Journal of Educational Measurement, 23(4), 299–325. Volume104, Issue2June 2005Pages 119-146 ReferencesRelatedInformation" @default.
• W2000979191 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2000979191 creator A5039495425 @default.
• W2000979191 creator A5062119897 @default.
• W2000979191 creator A5087021781 @default.
• W2000979191 date "2005-06-01" @default.
• W2000979191 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W2000979191 title "Exploring Models of School Performance: From Theory to Practice" @default.
• W2000979191 cites W1557937891 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W1984289258 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W1989634301 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W2019919534 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W2038106030 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W2054028789 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W2057178796 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W2061732127 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W2073522897 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W2085137220 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W2089164723 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W2114886857 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W2140134152 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W2142705498 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W2149624594 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W2162040858 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W2163684370 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W2912875885 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W4206289136 @default.
• W2000979191 cites W4254907137 @default.
• W2000979191 doi "https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7984.2005.00028.x" @default.
• W2000979191 hasPublicationYear "2005" @default.
• W2000979191 type Work @default.
• W2000979191 sameAs 2000979191 @default.
• W2000979191 citedByCount "11" @default.
• W2000979191 countsByYear W20009791912012 @default.
• W2000979191 countsByYear W20009791912013 @default.
• W2000979191 countsByYear W20009791912021 @default.
• W2000979191 countsByYear W20009791912022 @default.
• W2000979191 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2000979191 hasAuthorship W2000979191A5039495425 @default.
• W2000979191 hasAuthorship W2000979191A5062119897 @default.
• W2000979191 hasAuthorship W2000979191A5087021781 @default.
• W2000979191 hasBestOaLocation W20009791911 @default.
• W2000979191 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2000979191 hasConcept C145420912 @default.
• W2000979191 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2000979191 hasConcept C19417346 @default.
• W2000979191 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2000979191 hasConceptScore W2000979191C144024400 @default.
• W2000979191 hasConceptScore W2000979191C145420912 @default.
• W2000979191 hasConceptScore W2000979191C15744967 @default.
• W2000979191 hasConceptScore W2000979191C19417346 @default.
• W2000979191 hasConceptScore W2000979191C41008148 @default.
• W2000979191 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W2000979191 hasLocation W20009791911 @default.
• W2000979191 hasOpenAccess W2000979191 @default.
• W2000979191 hasPrimaryLocation W20009791911 @default.
• W2000979191 hasRelatedWork W1914638676 @default.
• W2000979191 hasRelatedWork W1964312559 @default.
• W2000979191 hasRelatedWork W2011371269 @default.
• W2000979191 hasRelatedWork W2026167933 @default.
• W2000979191 hasRelatedWork W2050583908 @default.
• W2000979191 hasRelatedWork W2094798833 @default.
• W2000979191 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W2000979191 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W2000979191 hasRelatedWork W4302863593 @default.
• W2000979191 hasRelatedWork W4306399208 @default.
• W2000979191 hasVolume "104" @default.
• W2000979191 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2000979191 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2000979191 magId "2000979191" @default.
• W2000979191 workType "article" @default.