Comparing the Accuracy of Student Growth Measures

2019 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine E. Castellano ◽  
Daniel F. McCaffrey
Keyword(s):  
Student Growth ◽  
Student Growth Measures

scholarly journals Educator Evaluation Policy that Incorporates EVAAS Value-Added Measures: Undermined Intentions and Exacerbated Inequities

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. 76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimberly Kappler Hewitt
Keyword(s):  
Effective Teachers ◽  
Value Added ◽  
The United States ◽  
Teacher Evaluations ◽  
Student Growth ◽  
Unintended Effects ◽  
Educator Evaluation ◽  
Perceived Effects ◽  
Negative Perceptions ◽  
Student Growth Measures

In the United States, policies in forty states and D.C. incorporate student growth measures – estimates of student progress attributed to educators – into educator evaluation. The federal government positions such policies as levers for ensuring that more students are taught by effective teachers and that effective educators are more equitably distributed amongst schools. Because these policies are new, little is known about how educators respond to them. Mixed methods survey data from a large, diverse district in North Carolina, a state that incorporates value-added data into teacher evaluations, indicate that substantive, unintended effects may undermine the purposes for which these policies were developed. Results indicate that educators evaluated by value-added are generally opposed to its use. Those who have previously been evaluated by value-added have significantly more negative perceptions about the fairness and accuracy of value-added, are more opposed to its use in educator evaluation, and are more likely to perceive that it will not result in more equitable distribution of good educators across schools and that educators will avoid working with certain students because of value-added. Respondents perceived effects of the use of value-added for teacher accountability that fall within five themes: 1) Educators increasingly game the system and teach to the test, 2) Teachers increasingly leave the field, 3) Some educators seek to avoid working with certain students and at certain schools, 4) Educators feel an increase in stress, pressure, and anxiety, 5) Educator collaboration is decreasing, and competition is increasing. Based on findings, the author recommends five mid-course policy corrections.

scholarly journals Examining the Relationship Between Teacher Performance Ratings and District Under the Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 41
Author(s):  
Nicholas P. Elam ◽  
W. Holmes Finch
Keyword(s):  
Teacher Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation System ◽  
Teacher Performance ◽  
Student Growth ◽  
Performance Ratings ◽  
Ohio Teacher Evaluation System ◽  
Log Linear ◽  
Evaluation Rubrics ◽  
Student Growth Measures ◽  
The Relationship

The soundness of the Ohio Teacher Evaluation System (OTES) depends heavily on evaluators’ uniform interpretation of the qualitative Teacher Performance rubric. This study investigates the relationship between teachers’ district of employment, and the Teacher Performance ratings they receive under OTES. For Ohio districts that implemented OTES in 2012-2013, 2013-2014, and 2014-2015, the proportion of various Teacher Performance ratings and Student Growth Measures ratings are examined and compared to statewide proportions, using descriptive data and a log-linear model. Findings speak to the importance of a continued or renewed emphasis on fostering uniform interpretation and implementation of teacher evaluation rubrics and systems.

Student growth measures: What we’ve been missing

2019 ◽  
Vol 101 (4) ◽  
pp. 52-56
Author(s):  
Michael Watson
Keyword(s):  
Grade Level ◽  
Student Growth ◽  
Accountability Systems ◽  
Grade Levels ◽  
State Accountability ◽  
Student Growth Measures ◽  
Below Grade Level ◽  
Incomplete Picture

The move toward assessments that measure student growth, rather than just proficiency, has been perceived as an improvement in state accountability systems. However, Michael Watson explains that, for many students, these measures present an incomplete picture. Because they are based on grade-level assessments, any growth achieved by students who are above or below grade level is lost. He recommends the use of adaptive assessments that incorporate material from multiple grade levels.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document