Using Assessment Data for Educator and Student Growth

Andy Hegedus, Ed.D.
Kingsbury Center at NWEA
June 2014
Using Assessment Data
for Educator and
Student Growth

• Increase your understanding about
various urgent assessment related topics
–Ask better questions
–Useful for making all types of decisions with
data
My Purpose

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

1. Assessment results used
wisely as part of a
dialogue to help teachers
set and meet challenging
goals
2. Use of tests as a “yellow
light” to identify teachers
who may be in need of
additional support or are
ready for more
Two approaches we like

• What we’ve known to be true is now being
shown to be true
– Using data thoughtfully improves student
achievement and growth rates
– 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
The same dynamic happens
inside your schools
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

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

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 a general
reading assessment 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

Let’s ensure we have similar
meaning
Beginning Literacy
Adult
Reading
5th Grade
x
x
Time 1 Time 2
Status
Two assumptions:
1. Measurement accuracy,
and
2. Vertical interval scale

Accurately measuring
growth
depends on
accurately measuring
achievement

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

How about accurately
measuring height?
What if the yardstick
stopped in the middle of
his back?

Items available need to match student
ability
California STAR NWEA MAP

How about accurately
measuring height?
What if we could only
mark within a pre-
defined six inch range?

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
Fully
Adaptive Test
Significantly
Different Error
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

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

• Both a proctor and the teacher should be
presenting during testing
– Teacher can best guide students and ensure effort
– Proctor protects integrity of results and can
support defense of teacher if results are
challenged
• Have all student test each term
– Need two terms to determine growth
– More student aggregated the more you know
Proctoring

• Important for reliable test data particularly when
determining growth
• Use Testing Condition Indicators as KPIs
– Accuracy, duration, changes in duration
– Formative conversations to improve over time
• Short test durations are worth considering follow-
up
– Apply criteria each test event
• Be concerned more with consistency in test
duration than duration itself
Consistent Testing Conditions

• Pause or terminate before completion
– Preferred option – Address when problems are
identified
– Not subject to challenge that student retested
simply because the score wasn’t good enough
• Monitor students as testing is going on
– Ensure effort
– Support students as they struggle – G&T
• Show that accurate data is important
Early Intervention

• Define “Significant” decline between test
events
– Apply significant decline criteria each test term
• Simply missing cut score is not an acceptable
reason to retest
Retesting

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

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 New York Cut Score Between Level 2 and 3
NationalPercentile
College
Readiness
A study of the alignment of the NWEA RIT scale with the New York State (NYS) Testing Program, November 2013

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

• What did you just learn?
• How will you change what you typically
do?
Guiding Questions

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

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

Normative data for growth is a
bit different
Fall
Score
Subject:
Reading
Grade: 4th
7
points
FRL vs. non-FRL?
IEP vs. non-IEP?
ESL vs. non-ESL?
Outside of a teacher’s direct control
Starting
Achievement
Instructional
Weeks
Basic
Factors
Typical growth

60%20%
20%
APPR
Observations State Test Growth EA Value-Added
How did we address requirements
in New York?
State Tested Grades / Subjects
(4-8 Math and Reading)
Other Grades / Subjects for which
there is an available non-state test
60%20%
20%
APPR
Observations Local Measure 2 EA Value-Added
Value-
Added
Value-
Added
Local
Measure 2
(SLO)
State
Test
Growth
Partnered with Education Analytics on VAM

The Oak Tree Analogy* – a conceptual introduction
to the metric
*Developed at the Value-Added Research Center
An Introduction to Value-Added

Gardener A Gardener B
Explaining Value-Added by Evaluating
Gardener Performance
• For the past year, these gardeners have been tending to their oak trees
trying to maximize the height of the trees.

This method is analogous to using an Achievement Model.
61 in.
72 in.
Method 1: Measure the Height of the Trees
Today (One Year After the Gardeners Began)
• Using this method, Gardener B is the more effective gardener.

61 in.
72 in.Gardener A Gardener B
Oak A
Age 4
(Today)
Oak B
Age 4
(Today)
Oak A
Age 3
(1 year ago)
Oak B
Age 3
(1 year ago)
47 in.
52 in.
This Achievement Result is not the
Whole Story
• We need to find the starting height for each tree in order to more fairly
evaluate each gardener’s performance during the past year.

This is analogous to a Simple Growth Model, also called Gain.
61 in.
Oak A
Age 4
(Today)
Oak B
Age 4
(Today)
Oak A
Age 3
(1 year ago)
Oak B
Age 3
(1 year ago)
47 in.
52 in.
Method 2: Compare Starting Height to
Ending Height
• Oak B had more growth this year, so Gardener B is the more effective gardener.

What About Factors Outside the
Gardener’s Influence?
• This is an “apples to oranges” comparison.
• For our oak tree example, three environmental factors we will examine are:
Rainfall, Soil Richness, and Temperature.

External condition Oak Tree A Oak Tree B
Rainfall amount
Soil richness
Temperature
High Low
Low High
High Low

How Much Did These External Factors
Affect Growth?
• We need to analyze real data from the region to predict growth for these trees.
• We compare the actual height of the trees to their predicted heights to determine
if the gardener’s effect was above or below average.

In order to find the impact of rainfall, soil richness, and temperature, we will plot the
growth of each individual oak in the region compared to its environmental conditions.

Rainfall Low Medium High
Growth in inches
relative to the
average
-5 -2 +3
Soil Richness Low Medium High
Growth in inches
relative to the
average
-3 -1 +2
Temperature Low Medium High
Growth in inches
relative to the
average
+5 -3 -8
Calculating Our Prediction
Adjustments Based on Real Data

Oak A
Age 3
(1 year ago)
Oak B
Age 3
(1 year ago)
67 in.
Oak A
Prediction
Oak B
Prediction
47 in.
52 in.
+20 Average+20 Average
Make Initial Prediction for the Trees
Based on Starting Height
• Next, we will refine out prediction based on the growing conditions for each tree. When we
are done, we will have an “apples to apples” comparison of the gardeners’ effect.

70 in. 67 in.Gardener A Gardener B
47 in.
52 in.
+ 3 for Rainfall - 5 for Rainfall
Based on Real Data, Customize
Predictions based on Rainfall
• For having high rainfall, Oak A’s prediction is adjusted by +3 to compensate.
• Similarly, for having low rainfall, Oak B’s prediction is adjusted by -5 to compensate.

67 in.
47 in.
52 in.
+ 3 for Rainfall
- 3 for Soil + 2 for Soil
- 5 for Rainfall
Adjusting for Soil Richness
• For having poor soil, Oak A’s prediction is adjusted by -3.
• For having rich soil, Oak B’s prediction is adjusted by +2.

59 in.
74 in.
47 in.
52 in.
+ 3 for Rainfall
- 8 for Temp + 5 for Temp
- 5 for Rainfall
Adjusting for Temperature
• For having high temperature, Oak A’s prediction is adjusted by -8.
• For having low temperature, Oak B’s prediction is adjusted by +5.

+ 3 for Rainfall
- 8 for Temp + 5 for Temp
_________
+12 inches
During the year
_________
+22 inches
During the year
59 in.
74 in.
47 in.
52 in.
- 5 for Rainfall
Our Gardeners are Now on a Level
Playing Field
• The predicted height for trees in Oak A’s conditions is 59
inches.
• The predicted height for trees in Oak B’s conditions is 74
inches.

Predicted
Oak A
Predicted
Oak B
Actual
Oak A
Actual
Oak B
59 in.
74 in.
61 in.
72 in.
+2
-2
Compare the Predicted Height to the
Actual Height
• Oak A’s actual height is 2 inches more than predicted. We attribute this to the effect of Gardener A.
• Oak B’s actual height is 2 inches less than predicted. We attribute this to the effect of Gardener B.

This is analogous to a Value-Added measure.
Above
Average
Value-Added
Below
Average
Value-Added
Predicted
Oak A
Predicted
Oak B
Actual
Oak A
Actual
Oak B
59 in.
74 in.
61 in.
72 in.
+2
-2
Method 3: Compare the Predicted
Height to the Actual Height
• By accounting for last year’s height and environmental conditions of the trees during this year, we found
the “value” each gardener “added” to the growth of the trees.

Gardener A
Value-Added is a Group Measure
• To statistically isolate a gardener’s effect, we need data from many trees under
that gardener’s care.
Gardener B

Oak Tree Analogy Value-Added in Education
What are we
evaluating?
• Gardeners • Districts
• Schools
• Grades
• Classrooms
• Programs and Interventions
How does this analogy relate to value added in the education context?
What are we using to
measure success?
• Relative height
improvement in inches
• Relative improvement on
standardized test scores
Sample • Single oak tree • Groups of students
Control factors • Tree’s prior height
• Other factors beyond
the gardener’s control:
• Rainfall
• Soil richness
• Temperature
• Students’ prior test performance
(usually most significant predictor)
• Other demographic characteristics
such as:
• Grade level
• Gender
• Race / Ethnicity
• Low-Income Status
• ELL Status
• Disability Status
• Section 504 Status

• 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
Consider . . .

• Control for measurement
error
– All models attempt to address
this issue
• Population size
• Multiple data points
– Error is compounded with
combining two test events
– 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

Because we want students
to learn more!
• Research view
–Setting goals improves performance
Why should we care about goal
setting in education?

What does research say on goal
setting?
Locke, E. A. & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American psychologist. American
Psychological Association.
Goals
Moderators
Mechanisms
Performance
Satisfaction
with
Performance
and Rewards
Willingness to
commit
Essential Elements of Goal-Setting Theory
and the High-Performance Cycle

• Specificity
• Difficulty
– Performance and
learning goals
– Proximal goals
Goals
Goals Explanation
• Specific goals are typically
stronger than “Do your best”
goals
• Moderately challenging is better
than too easy or too hard
– If complex and new knowledge or
skills needed, set learning goals
• Master five new ways to assess each
student’s learning in the moment
– If complex, set short term goals to
gauge progress and feel rewarded

• 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 challenging goals?
Challenges with goal setting

• Goals and targets themselves
–Appropriately balance moderately
challenging goals with consequences
• Only use “Stretch” goals for the organization to
stimulate creativity and create unconventional
solutions
Suggestions
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2013). New developments in goal setting and task performance.

• Goals and targets themselves (cont.)
–Set additional learning goals if complex and
new
–Set interim benchmarks for progress
monitoring
–Carefully consider what will not happen to
attain the goal
• Can you live with the consequences?
• How will you look for other unintended ones?
Suggestions
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2013). New developments in goal setting and task performance.

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

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. Alignment between the content assessed and
the content to be taught
2. Selection of an appropriate assessment
• Used for the purpose for which it was designed
(proficiency vs. growth)
• Can accurately measure the knowledge of all
students
• Adequate sensitivity to growth
3. Adjust for context/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
– www.slideshare.net
• Contacting us:
NWEA Main Number
503-624-1951
E-mail: andy.hegedus@nwea.org
More information

Using Assessment Data for Educator and Student Growth

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (8)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (20)

Ähnlich wie Using Assessment Data for Educator and Student Growth

Ähnlich wie Using Assessment Data for Educator and Student Growth (20)

Mehr von NWEA

Mehr von NWEA (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Using Assessment Data for Educator and Student Growth

Hinweis der Redaktion