Urban Institute analysis of longitudinal data in education research
A program of research by the Urban Institute with Duke University, Stanford University, University of Florida, University of Missouri-Columbia, University of Texas at Dallas, and University of WashingtonUrban Institute



 
 
 
 

Welcome to CALDER

 

Spotlight


Value Added Measures:  Implications for Policy and Practice

Register today!

Friday May 23, 2008
8:00am - Noon
The Urban Institute

Speakers include: Doug Harris (University of Wisconsin), Tony Bryk (Stanford University and the Carnegie Foundation), Dan McCaffrey (RAND), Robert Gordon (Center for American Progress), Leo Casey (UFT), and Ross Wiener (Education Trust).  Link to a full schedule of the day's events here.

4/02/08 -- CALDER releases new working papers!

Presentations from 2007 Conference now available online!

Eric Hanushek

Plain Talk with Eric Hanushek

"The federal government needs to provide clearer guidance about FERPA and clarify what is permissible. And it's a matter of some urgency that this happens soon."



 


Recently Released Working Papers

Working Paper 17

Making a Difference?:  The Effects of Teach for America in High School
by Zeyu Xu, Jane Hannaway, and Colin Taylor

Teach for America (TFA) selects and places graduates from the most competitive colleges as teachers in the lowest-performing schools in the country. This paper is the first study that examines TFA effects in high school. We use rich longitudinal data from North Carolina and estimate TFA effects through cross-subject student and school fixedeffects models. We find that TFA teachers tend to have a positive effect on high school student test scores relative to non-TFA teachers, including those who are certified infield. Such effects exceed the impact of additional years of experience and are particularly strong in math and science.

Working Paper 16

School Segregation under Color-Blind Jurisprudence:  The Case of North Carolina
by Charles T. Clotfelter, Helen F. Ladd, and Jacob L. Vigdor

This paper uses administrative data for the public K-12 schools of North Carolina to measure racial segregation in the public schools of North Carolina. Using data for the 2005/06 school year, the authors update previous calculations that measure segregation in terms of unevenness in racial enrollment patterns both between schools and within schools. They find that classroom segregation generally increased between 2000/01 and 2005/06, continuing, albeit at a slightly slower rate, the trend observed over the preceding six years. Segregation increased sharply in Charlotte-Mecklenburg, which introduced a new choice plan in 2002. Over the same period, racial and economic disparities in teacher quality widened in that district.

Working Paper 15 -- coming soon!

Working Paper 14

Public School Choice and Integration:  Evidence from Durham, North Carolina
by Robert Bifulco, Helen F. Ladd, and Stephen Ross

This paper uses evidence from Durham, North Carolina to examine the impact of school choice on racial and class-based segregation across schools. The findings suggest that school choice increases segregation. Furthermore, the effects of choice on segregation by class are larger than the effects on segregation by race. These results are consistent with the theoretical argument—developed in sociology and economics literature—that the segregating choices of students from advantaged backgrounds are likely to outweigh any integrating choices by disadvantaged students.

Policy Brief 1

Value-Added Analysis and Education Policy
by Steven Rivkin

This brief describes estimation and measurement issues relevant to estimating the quality of instruction in the context of a cumulative model of learning. The discussion highlights the importance of accounting for student differences and the advantages of focusing on student achievement gains as opposed to differences in test scores.


Note: The research reported here was supported in part by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R305A060018 to the Urban Institute. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the Institute of Education Sciences, the U.S. Department of Education, or the Urban Institute.

 


CALDER's work is made possible by a grant from: Institute of Education Sciences