Teacher preparation programmes (TPPs) find many ways to shape the development of their teacher candidates while bridging the research to practice gap in university and school partnerships. Recently, accountability models built on high-stakes standardised student assessments (Value-Added Models [VAM]) have been mandated as a way to evaluate the effectiveness of teacher and teacher preparation efforts. Adopting a metric with known validity and reliability flaws has unintended consequences that affect teachers, TPPs, and K-12 students. This article examines the current climate surrounding teacher and TPP evaluation, and presents the unintended consequences of using a flawed metric for VAM efforts. The article provides a rationale for an alternative, curriculum-based VAM for TPPs, and summarises a series of four investigations that explored this model and serve as a rationale for further implementation by other TPPs.