Inge de Wolf

Conceptual and empirical differences among various value-added models for accountability

Accountability systems in education generally include indicators of student performance. However, these indicators often differ considerably among the various systems. More and more countries try to include value-added measures, mainly because they do not want to hold schools accountable for differences in their initial intake of students. This study presents a conceptual framework of these value-added measures, resulting in an overview of 5 different types. Using data from Dutch secondary schools, we empirically provide estimates of these different measures. Our analyses show that the correlation between the different types of school effects estimated is rather high, but that the different models implicate different results for individual schools. Based on theoretical considerations, arguments are given to use the following indicators in the value-added accountability models: prior achievement, student-level background characteristics, and compositional characteristics of the student population.

Value added as an indicator of educational effectiveness in Dutch senior secondary vocational education

This study investigates the possibilities of estimating value added as a performance indicator in senior secondary vocational education. Value added is interesting in this context because it is considered as a reliable tool for comparing the effectiveness of educational institutions. Although value added indicators have been developed since the 1980s for both primary and secondary educations, the research on school effectiveness has largely neglected vocational education because of its complexity. For estimating value added in this study, data concerning almost 90,000 students in Dutch senior secondary vocational education are used. Factors such as ethnicity, living in problematic neighbourhoods and students’ prior educational attainment appear to be significant predictors of student outcomes. The results indicate considerable differences in the effectiveness among clusters of training programmes, whereas there are hardly any differences between the educational institutions. Of the total variance among the student outcomes, 14% is related to the training programme clusters.

Inclusive education in the Netherlands: how funding arrangements and demographic trends relate to dropout and participation rates

ABSTRACT There is a global trend towards including children with special needs in mainstream schools instead of placing them in special schools. However, the numbers of students in special schools varies greatly among regions due to variations in educational systems, funding arrangements – and the incentives that are associated with these arrangements – and demographic trends. In the Netherlands, a new policy aimed at inclusive education was introduced in 2014, together with financial measures to equalise funding for students with special needs across the country. The present study explored the effects of this equalisation policy, as well as the demographic trend of population decline, on dropout rates and participation rates in special education (namely, special schools for mainstream education and schools for special education). The data were retrieved from nation-wide registration systems. The results showed that population decline did not affect participation rates in special education, whereas decreases in funding did result in greater declines in participation rates in special education. Moreover, decreases in funding also resulted in higher dropout rates in areas with growing student populations. Although the reform of funding arrangements resulted in lower participation in special education, higher dropout rates might be a cost of this shift towards inclusive education.