NWEA Growth and Teacher evaluation VA 9-13

Andy Hegedus, Ed. D.
Kingsbury Center at NWEA
September 2013
Measuring student
growth accurately – It
makes a difference in
your world!

• Goal is to improve student achievement
through improving work force performance
over time
– Just like any profession there is variability in the
performance
• Belief system driving policy
– Rigorous performance evaluation process, and the
rewards, support, or removal of teachers that
comes with it, is a major lever
Overview/Setting the stage

Evaluator Rating
Ineffective
Developing
Effective
Highly Effective
What is happening just can’t be
right!
5800 teachers evaluated between January and May 2012, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution January 7, 2013
“Statistically, this flies in the face of our academic achievement levels. These
numbers just doesn’t jibe with reality,” Millar said. “If the Georgia evaluation
system is going to be based on these type of statistics, I wouldn’t see us going
forward with it because, just statistically, it can’t be valid.

Focus should likely be
elsewhere (on the 99%)
Executive Brief: Tracking Trends in Employee Turnover, Retrieved March
11, 2013, http://www.shrm.org/research/benchmarks/documents/trends%20in%20turnover_final.pdf
Remaining Workforce:
• Effectiveness of surrounding system
• Powerful Professional Development
• Performance management system
explicitly designed to improve
performance
Voluntary Turnover:
• Working conditions
• Induction and support
Involuntary Turnover:
• Financial stability
• Keep the best
Remaining
85%
Voluntary
9%
Involuntary
6%
2011 Percentage

• Increase your understanding about various
urgent assessment related topics
– Ask better questions
– Useful for making all types of decisions with data
• Follow along and ask questions at any time
– Slideshare.net
• Will pause during transitions for you to discuss
“Ah-Ha’s” with a neighbor
My Purpose

1. Selection of an appropriate test:
• Used for the purpose for which it was designed
(proficiency vs. growth)
• Can accurately measure the test performance of all
students
2. Alignment between the content assessed and
the content to be taught
3. Adjust for context/control for factors outside a
teacher’s direct control (value-added)
Three primary conditions for using
tests for teacher evaluation

1. Evaluation process that focuses on helping
teachers improve
2. The principal or designated evaluator should
control the evaluation
3. Tests should inform the process, not dictate
or decide it
4. Multiple measures should be used over time
What NWEA supports

1. Use of tests as part of a
dialogue to help teachers
set improvement goals
2. Use of tests as a “yellow
light” to identify teachers
who may be in need of
additional support or
assistance
Two approaches we like

• What we’ve known to be true is now being
shown to be true
– Using data thoughtfully improves student
achievement
– 12% mathematics, 13% reading
• There are dangers present however
– Unintended Consequences
Go forth thoughtfully
with care
Slotnik, W. J. , Smith, M. D., It’s more than money, February 2013, retrieved from
http://www.ctacusa.com/PDFs/MoreThanMoney-report.pdf

“What gets measured (and attended to),
gets done”
Remember the old adage?

• NCLB
–Cast light on inequities
–Improved performance of “Bubble Kids”
–Narrowed taught curriculum
An infamous example

It’s what we do that counts
A patient’s health
doesn’t change
because we know
their blood pressure
It’s our response that
makes all the
difference

1. Shifting towards tighter state level
control – a shift of decision-making
away from local control
2. Our nation moved from a model of
education reform that focused on fixing
schools to a model that is focused on
fixing the teaching profession
Policy shifts make today’s
conversation inevitable

Be considerate of the continuum of
stakes involved
Support
Compensate
Terminate
Increasing levels of required rigor
Increasingrisk

The use of value-added data for high stakes
personnel decisions does not yet have a
strong, coherent, body of case law.
Expect litigation if value-added results are the
lynchpin evidence for a teacher-dismissal case
until a body of case law is established.
• Due Process
• Disparate impact doctrine
Potential Litigation Issues

Baker B., Oluwole, J., Green, P. (2013). The legal
consequences of mandating high stakes
decisions based on low quality information:
Teacher evaluation in the Race to the Top Era.
Education Policy Analysis Archives. Vol 21. No
5.
Suggested reading

Is the progress produced
by this teacher
dramatically different
than teaching peers who
deliver instruction to
comparable students in
comparable situations?
What question is being answered in support of
using data in evaluating teachers?

Marcus Normal Growth Needed Growth
Marcus’ growth
College readiness standard

The Test
The Growth Metric
The Evaluation
The Rating
There are four key steps required to
answer this question
Top-Down Model

Assessment 1
Goal Setting
Assessment(s)
Results and Analysis
Evaluation (Rating)
How does the other popular process
work?
Bottom-Up Model
(Student Learning Objectives)
Understanding
all four of the
top-down
elements are
needed here

The Test
The Growth Metric
The Evaluation
The Rating
Let’s begin at the beginning

3rd Grade
ELA
Standards
3rd Grade
ELA
Teacher?
3rd Grade
Social
Studies
Teacher?
Elem. Art
Teacher?
What is measured should be
aligned to what is to be taught
1. Answer questions to demonstrate
understanding of text….
2. Determine the main idea of a
text….
3. Determine the meaning of general
academic and domain specific
words…
Would you use MAP in the
evaluation of a….
~30% of teachers teach in tested subjects and grades
The Other 69 Percent: Fairly Rewarding the Performance of Teachers of Nontested Subjects and
Grades, http://www.cecr.ed.gov/guides/other69Percent.pdf

• Assessments should align with the
teacher’s instructional responsibility
– Specific advanced content
• HS teachers teaching discipline specific content
– Especially 11th and 12th grade
• MS teachers teaching HS content to advanced students
– Non-tested subjects
• School-wide results are more likely “professional
responsibility” rather than reflecting competence
– HS teachers providing remedial services
What is measured should be
aligned to what is to be taught

• Many assessments are
not designed to
measure growth
• Others do not measure
growth equally well for
all students
The purpose and design of the
instrument is significant

Both status and growth are
important but growth leads
Beginning Literacy
Adult
Reading
5th Grade
x
x
Time 1 Time 2
Status
Two assumptions:
1. Measurement
accuracy, and
2. Vertical scale

Accurately measuring growth
depends on accurately measuring
achievement

How about measuring
height?
What if the pencil isn’t
very level?
What if we marked with
sidewalk chalk?

Measurement Accuracy
A test for you
Beginning Literacy
Adult
Reading
5th Grade
x
x
Time 1 Time 2
Pop Quiz:
What’s bigger?
1. Time 1 Error or Time 2 Error alone
2. Time 2 minus Time 1 Error (Growth)

Questions surrounding the
student’s achievement level
The more questions the merrier
What does it take to accurately
measure achievement?

Teachers encounter a distribution
of student performance
Beginning Literacy
Adult
Reading
5th
Grade
x x x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Grade Level
Performance

Adaptive testing works differently
Item bank can
span full
range of
achievement

Items available need to match student
ability
California STAR NWEA MAP

5th Grade
Level Items
These differences impact
measurement error
.00
.02
.04
.06
.08
.10
.12
Information
170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240
Scale Score
Pass/
Proficient
Fully
Adaptive Test
Significantly
Different Error
26th
Fail/Basic Pass/Advanced
77th
160
Constrained
Adaptive or
Paper/Pencil
Test

To determine growth, achievement
measurements must be related
through a scale

If I was measured as:
5’ 9”
And a year later I was:
1.82m
Did I grow?
Yes. ~ 2.5”
How do you know?
Let’s measure height again

Traditional assessment uses items
reflecting the grade level standards
Beginning Literacy
Adult
Reading
4th Grade
5th Grade
6th Grade
Grade Level Standards
Traditional
Assessment Item Bank

Traditional assessment uses items
reflecting the grade level standards
Beginning Literacy
Adult
Reading
4th Grade
5th Grade
6th Grade
Overlap allows
linking and scale
construction

• Study on impact of assessment
selection on VAM results
–Defined a misidentified teacher as one
who appeared to have growth which
was incorrect by more than one-half a
year1
• Less than .5 years or more than 1.5 years
Error can change your life!!!
1Woodworth, J.L., Does Assessment Selection Matter When Computing Teacher Value-Added
Measures?, http://www.kingsburycenter.org/sites/default/files/James%20Woodworth%20Data%20Award%20Research%20Brief.pdf

• “. . . in the 25 student (single class)
simulations. At the 25 student level, the VAM
based on the TAKS misidentifies 35% of all
teachers, whereas, the VAM based on the
MAP misidentifies only 1% of teachers.”
Initial measurement error is a significant issue in
AYP and Teacher Evaluation work
Error can change your life!!!

Black, P. and Wiliam, D.(2007) 'Large-scale assessment systems: Design principles
drawn from international comparisons', Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research &
Perspective, 5: 1, 1 — 53
• …when science is defined in terms of
knowledge of facts that are taught in
school…(then) those students who have been
taught the facts will know them, and those
who have not will…not. A test that assesses
these skills is likely to be highly sensitive to
instruction.
The instrument must be able to
detect instruction

Black, P. and Wiliam, D.(2007) 'Large-scale assessment systems: Design principles
drawn from international comparisons', Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research &
Perspective, 5: 1, 1 — 53
• When ability in science is defined in terms of
scientific reasoning…achievement will be less
closely tied to age and exposure, and more
closely related to general intelligence. In
other words, science reasoning tasks are
relatively insensitive to instruction.
The more complex, the harder to
detect and attribute to one teacher

• Tests specifically designed to inform classroom
instruction and school improvement in
formative ways
No incentive in the system for
inaccurate data
Using tests in high stakes ways
creates new dynamic

-6.00
-4.00
-2.00
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71
Students taking 10+ minutes longer spring than fall All other students
New phenomenon when used as part of
a compensation program
Mean value-added growth by school

Cheating
Atlanta Public Schools
Crescendo Charter Schools
Philadelphia Public Schools
Washington DC Public Schools
Houston Independent School
District
Michigan Public Schools

When teachers are evaluated
on growth using a once per
year assessment, one teacher
who cheats disadvantages the
next teacher
Other consequence

Other issues
Proctoring
Proctoring both with and without the
classroom teacher raises possible
problems
Documentation that test
administration procedures were
properly followed is important
Monitoring testing conditions assists
with reliability

Testing is complete . . .
What is useful to answer our question?
The Test
The Growth Metric
The Evaluation
The Rating

The problem with spring-spring
testing
3/11 4/11 5/11 6/11 7/11 8/11 9/11 10/11 11/11 12/11 1/12 2/12 3/12
Teacher 1 Summer Teacher 2

• When possible use a spring – fall – spring
approach
• Measure summer loss and incentivize schools
and teachers to minimize it
• Measure teacher performance fall to
spring, giving as much instructional time as
possible between assessments
• Monitor testing conditions to minimize
gaming of fall spring results
A better approach

Without context what is
“Good”?
Beginning
Reading
Adult
Literacy
RIT
National
Percentile
NWEA Norms
Study
NWEA
Scale
CollegeReadiness
Benchmarks
ACT
PerformanceLevels
State Test
“Meets”
Proficiency
PerformanceLevels
Common
Core
Proficient

0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Reading
Math
The metric matters -
Let’s go underneath “Proficiency”
Difficulty of Virginia SOL Pass/Proficient Cut Score
NationalPercentile
College
Readiness
A study of the alignment of the NWEA RIT scale with the Virginia Standards of Learning (SOL), December 2012

Difficulty of ACT college readiness
standards

The metric matters -
Let’s go underneath “Proficiency”
Dahlin, M. and Durant, S., The State of Proficiency, Kingsbury Center at NWEA, July 2011

NumberofStudents
Fall RIT
Mathematics
No Change
Down
Up
What gets measured and attended to
really does matter
Proficiency College Readiness
One district’s change in 5th grade mathematics performance
relative to the KY proficiency cut scores

NumberofStudents
Student’s score in fall
Mathematics
Below projected
growth
Met or above
projected growth
Number of 5th grade students meeting projected
mathematics growth in the same district
Changing from Proficiency to Growth
means all kids matter

How can we make it fair?
The Test
The Growth Metric
The Evaluation
The Rating

Context – 2011 NWEA Student
Norms
Starting
Score:
200
Fall RIT
Score
Subject:
Reading
Grade: 4th
7
RIT
FRL vs. non-FRL?
IEP vs. non-IEP?
ESL vs. non-ESL?
Outside of a teacher’s direct control

A Visual Representation of
Value Added
Spring 4th Grade
MAP Test
Student A
Spring RIT Score 209
RIT Score 207
(Average Spring Score for Similar
Students)
Value Added
(+2 RIT Score)
Student A
Fall RIT Score 200
Fall 4th Grade
MAP Test

• What if I skip this step?
– Comparison is likely against normative data so the
comparison is to “typical kids in typical settings”
• How fair is it to disregard context?
– Good teacher – bad school
– Good teacher – challenging kids
Does your personal goal setting consider
context?
Consider . . .

• Lack of a historical context
– What has this teacher and these students done in
the past?
• Lack of comparison groups
– What have other teachers done in the past?
• What is the objective?
– Is the objective to meet a standard of
performance or demonstrate improvement?
• Do you set safe goals or stretch goals?
Challenges with goal setting

• Value added models control for a variety of
classroom, school level, and other conditions
– Proven statistical methods
– All attempt to minimize error
– Variables outside controls are assumed as random
Value-added is science

• Control for measurement
error
– All models attempt to address
this issue
• Population size
• Multiple data points
– Error is compounded with
combining two test events
– Nevertheless, many teachers’
value-added scores will fall
within the range of statistical
error
A variety of errors means more
stability only at the extremes

-12.00
-11.00
-10.00
-9.00
-8.00
-7.00
-6.00
-5.00
-4.00
-3.00
-2.00
-1.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
11.00
12.00
AverageGrowthIndexScoreandRange
Mathematics Growth Index Distribution by Teacher - Validity Filtered
Q5
Q4
Q3
Q2
Q1
Each line in this display represents a single teacher. The graphic
shows the average growth index score for each teacher (green
line), plus or minus the standard error of the growth index estimate
(black line). We removed students who had tests of questionable
validity and teachers with fewer than 20 students.
Range of teacher value-added
estimates

With one teacher,
error means a lot

• Value-added models assume that variation is
caused by randomness if not controlled for
explicitly
– Young teachers are assigned disproportionate
numbers of students with poor discipline records
– Parent requests for the “best” teachers are
honored
• Sound educational reasons for placement are
likely to be defensible
Assumption of randomness can
have risk implications

“The findings indicate that these modeling
choices can significantly influence outcomes for
individual teachers, particularly those in the tails
of the performance distribution who are most
likely to be targeted by high-stakes policies.”
Ballou, D., Mokher, C. and Cavalluzzo, L. (2012) Using Value-Added Assessment for Personnel
Decisions: How Omitted Variables and Model Specification Influence Teachers’ Outcomes.
Instability at the tails of the
distribution
LA Times Teacher #1
LA Times Teacher #2

How tests are used to evaluate
teachers
The Test
The Growth Metric
The Evaluation
The Rating

• How would you
translate a rank order
to a rating?
• Data can be provided
• Value judgment
ultimately the basis
for setting cut scores
for points or rating
Translation into ratings can be
difficult to inform with data

• What is far below a
district’s expectation is
subjective
• What about
• Obligation to help
teachers improve?
• Quality of replacement
teachers?
Decisions are value based,
not empirical

• System for combining elements and
producing a rating is also a value based
decision
–Multiple measures and principal judgment
must be included
–Evaluate the extremes to make sure it
makes sense
Even multiple measures need to
be used well

Evaluator Rating
Ineffective
Developing
Effective
Highly Effective
Remember this?
5800 teachers evaluated between January and May 2012, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution January 7, 2013

Leadership Courage Is A Key
0
1
2
3
4
5
Teacher 1 Teacher 2 Teacher 3
Ratings can be driven by the assessment
Observation Assessment
Real
or
Noise?

If evaluators do not differentiate
their ratings,
then all differentiation comes from
the test
Big Message

1. Selection of an appropriate test:
• Used for the purpose for which it was designed
(proficiency vs. growth)
• Can accurately measure the test performance of all
students
2. Alignment between the content assessed and
the content to be taught
3. Need for context for growth/control for factors
outside a teacher’s direct control (value-added)
Please be thoughtful about . . .

• Presentations and other recommended
resources are available at:
– www.nwea.org
– www.kingsburycenter.org
– Slideshare.net
• Contacting us:
NWEA Main Number
503-624-1951
E-mail: andy.hegedus@nwea.org
More information

NWEA Growth and Teacher evaluation VA 9-13

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie NWEA Growth and Teacher evaluation VA 9-13

Ähnlich wie NWEA Growth and Teacher evaluation VA 9-13 (20)

Mehr von NWEA

Mehr von NWEA (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

NWEA Growth and Teacher evaluation VA 9-13

Hinweis der Redaktion