Several states have recently adopted or are pursuing policies that deny or revoke tenure from teachers who receive poor evaluation ratings over time based in part on quantitative measures of performance. Using data from the state of Florida, we estimate such value-added measures to consider the future effectiveness and number of teachers who would have been dismissed under different versions of these policies. Students assigned to teachers who would have been dismissed according to a value-added policy made considerably smaller academic improvements than did students assigned to teachers who would have avoided dismissal. Critically, however, we show that specific policy design determines the extent of the potential for value-added to improve the overall quality of the teaching workforce.
BoydD.GrossmanP.LankfordH.LoebS.WyckoffJ. (2008). Who leaves? Teacher attrition and student achievement. NBER Working Paper no. 14022.
2.
BoydD.LankfordH.LoebS.RonfeldtM.WyckoffJ. (2011). The role of teacher quality in retention and hiring: Using applications to transfer to uncover preferences of teachers and schools. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 30(1), 88–110.
3.
CowenJ. M.WintersM. A. (2013). Do charters retain teachers differently than traditional public schools? Evidence from elementary schools in Florida. Education Finance and Policy, 8(1), 14–42.
4.
Education Commission of the States. (2013). State Policy Database. Retrieved January22, 2013, from www.ecs.org
5.
FengL.SassT. (2011). Teacher quality and teacher mobility (National CALDER Working Paper 57). Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute.
6.
GoldhaberD.GrossB.PlayerD. (2011). Teacher career paths, teacher quality and persistence in the classroom: Are public schools keeping their best?Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 30(1), 57–87.
7.
GoldhaberD.HansenM. (2010). Using performance on the job to inform teacher tenure decisions. American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings, 100, 250–255.
8.
HanushekE. A.KainJ. F.RivkinS. G. (2004). Why public schools lose teachers. Journal of Human Resources, 39(2), 326–354.
9.
JacobB. A. (2011). Do principals fire the worst teachers?Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(4), 403–434.
10.
JacobB. A.LefgrenL. (2008). Can principals identify effective teachers? Evidence on subjective performance evaluation in education. Journal of Labor Economics, 2, 101–136.
11.
KriegJ. M. (2006). Teacher quality and attrition. Economics of Education Review, 25(1), 13–27.
12.
McCaffreyD. F.SassT. R.LockwoodJ. R.MihalyK. (2009). The intertemporal variability of teacher effect estimates. Education Finance and Policy, 4(4), 572–606.
National Council on Teacher Quality. (2012). State of the states 2012: Teacher effectiveness policies. Retrieved January22, 2013, from
15.
RothsteinJ. (2009). Student sorting and bias in value-added estimation: Selection on observables and unobservables. Education Finance and Policy, 4(4), 537–571.
16.
RothsteinJ. (2010). Teacher quality in educational production: Tracking, decay, and student achievement. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125(1), 175–214.
StaigerD. O.RockoffJ. E. (2010). Searching for effective teachers with imperfect information. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(3), 97–117.
19.
WestM. R.ChingosM. M. (2009). Teacher effectiveness, mobility and attrition in Florida. In SpringerM. G. (Ed.), Performance incentives: Their growing impact on American K-12 education. Washington, DC: Brookings.
20.
WintersM. A.CowenJ. M. (2013). Would a value-added system of retention improve the distribution of teacher quality? A simulation of alternative policies. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management32, 634–654.
