Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012...

35
www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12

Transcript of Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012...

Page 1: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org1

New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation

2011–12

July 2012

PRESENTATIONas of 7/9/12

Page 2: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org2 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org2

Today’s Agenda

Background The What, Why, and How of Growth Models and

Measures Using Growth Measures for Educator Evaluation What Data Will Be Available and When?

Page 3: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org3

Background

Page 4: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org4 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org4

Evaluating Educator Effectiveness

Page 5: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org5

The What, Why, and How of Growth Models and Measures

Page 6: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org6 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org6

By the End of This Section…. You should be able to:

–Explain why the state is measuring student growth and not achievement

–Describe how the state is measuring growth compared to similar students

–Define a student growth percentile and mean growth percentile

Page 7: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org7 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org7

0

200

400

600

800

Student AStudent BStudent CStudent DStudent E

Ms. Smith

Prior Performance

0

200

400

600

800

Student AStudent BStudent CStudent DStudent E

Ms. Jones

Prior Performance

Prior Year Performance for Students in Two Teachers’ Classrooms

─ Proficiency

Page 8: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org8 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org8

0

200

400

600

800

Student AStudent BStudent CStudent DStudent E

Ms. Smith

Prior Performance Current Performance

0

200

400

600

800

Student AStudent BStudent CStudent DStudent E

Ms. Jones

Prior Performance Current Performance

Current Year Performance of Same Students

─ Proficiency

Page 9: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org9 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org9

Prior and Current Year Performance for Ms. Smith’s Students

Ms. Smith’s Class

Prior Score Current Score

Student A 450 510

Student B 470 500

Student C 480 525

Student D 500 550

Student E 600 650

Page 10: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org10 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org10

2011 2012

Student A

450

High SGPs

Low SGPs

Student A’s Current Year Performance Compared to “Similar” Students

If we compare student A’s current score to other students who had the same prior score (450), we can measure her growth

relative to other students. We

describe her growth as a “student

growth percentile” (SGP). Student A’s SGP is the result of a statistical model and in this example is 45,

meaning she performed better in

the current year than 45% of similar

students.

Page 11: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org11 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org11

Comparing Performance of “Similar” Students

Prior Year Score

Given any prior score, we see a range of

current year scores, which give us SGPs of 1 to 99.

Page 12: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org12 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org12

SGPs for Ms. Smith’s Students

Ms. Smith’s Class

Prior Score

Current Score

SGP

Student A 450 510 45

Student B 470 500 40

Student C 480 525 70

Student D 500 550 60

Student E 600 650 40

Page 13: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org13 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org13

Student Growth Percentiles: True or False?

1. A student with an SGP of 50 performed better than 50% of similar students.

2. A student with an SGP of 80 must be proficient.

3. A student with an SGP of 20 grew less than a student with an SGP of 60.

4. The highest SGP that a student can receive is 99.

5. A student with an SGP of 80 grew twice as much as a student with an SGP of 40.

Page 14: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org14 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org14

From Student Growth to Teachers and Principals

Ms. Smith’s Class

SGP

Student A

45

Student B

40

Student C

70

Student D

60

Student E

40

To measure teacher performance, we find the mean growth percentile (MGP) for his or her students. To find an educator’s mean growth percentile, take the average of SGPs in the classroom. In this case:

Step 1: 45+40+70+60+40=255

Step 2. 255/5=51

Ms. Smith’s mean growth percentile (MGP) is 51, meaning on average her students performed better than 51% of similar students.

A principal’s performance is measured by finding the mean growth percentile for all students in the school.

Page 15: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org15 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org15

Which Students Count in a Teacher’s or Principal’s MGP for 2011–12?

Student has valid test

scores for at least 2011–12 and 2010–11

Student has valid test

scores for at least 2011–12 and 2010–11

Student scores do not

count for 2011–12

Student scores do not

count for 2011–12

Yes

Student meets continuous enrollment

standard for 2011–12

Student meets continuous enrollment

standard for 2011–12

No

Student growth is

attributed to the teacher

and the school

Student growth is

attributed to the teacher

and the school

Yes

No

Expected for 2012–13: students weighted by

duration of instructional linkage

Expected for 2012–13: students weighted by

duration of instructional linkage

Page 16: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org16 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org16

From Student Growth to Teachers and Principals

In order for an educator to receive a growth score, he or she must have a minimum sample size of 16 student scores in ELA or mathematics across all grades taught.

Examples:

–A teacher has a self-contained classroom with 8 students who take the 4th grade ELA and math assessments; this teacher would then have 16 student scores contributing to his or her growth score.

–A teacher has a class with 12 students in varied grades (4th, 5th, 6th) who take the ELA and math assessments for their respective enrolled grade level; this teacher would then have 24 student scores contributing to his or her growth score.

If an educator does not have 16 student scores, he or she will not receive a growth score from the state and will not receive information in the reporting system.

–Educators likely to have fewer than 16 scores should use student learning objectives (SLOs).

Page 17: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org17 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org17

MGPs and Statistical Confidence

8787

Confidence Range

Upper

Limit

Lower

Limit

MGP

• NYSED will provide a 95% confidence range, meaning we can be 95% confident that an educator’s “true” MGP lies within that range. Upper and lower limits of MGPs will also be provided.

• An educator’s confidence range depends on a number of factors, including the number of student scores in their MGP and the variability of student performance in the classroom.

Page 18: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org18 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org18

Pause and Reflect: Mean Growth Percentiles

We talked about:–How to find a mean growth percentile (MGP)–How to interpret an MGP–What students are counted in an MGP–How many student scores are needed to provide an MGP–How a measure of statistical confidence (upper and lower

limits of a 95% confidence range) will be provided with MGPs and why

Page 19: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org19 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org19

Expanding the Definition of “Similar” Students

So far we have been talking about “similar” students as those with the same prior year assessment score

We will now add two additional features to the conversation:

Two additional years of prior assessment scores– Remember—a student MUST have current year and prior year

assessment score to be included

Student-level factors–Economic disadvantage (ED)–Students with disabilities (SWDs)–English language learners (ELLs)

Page 20: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org20 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org20

Adjustments for Three Student-Level Factors in Measuring Student Growth

Student

performance

Teacher

Instruction

Other factors(12–13) Economic

disadvantageLanguage

proficiency

Disability

Page 21: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org21 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org21

2011 2012

Student A

450

High SGPs

Low SGPs

Student A’s Current Year Performance Compared to “Similar” Students

If we compare student A’s current score to other students who had the same prior score (450), we can measure his or her growth relative to

other students. We describe that growth as a student growth percentile (SGP).

Student A’s SGP is the result of a statistical

model and in this example is 45,

meaning student A performed better in

the current year than 45% of similar

students.

Page 22: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org22 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org22

2011 2012

Student A

450

High SGPs

Low SGPs

Expanding the Definition of “Similar” Students to Include Economically Disadvantaged—An Example

Now if student A is economically

disadvantaged, we compare student A’s current score to other students who had the same prior score (450) AND who are also

economically disadvantaged. In

this new comparison group,

we see that student A now has

an SGP of 48.

Page 23: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org23 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org23

Further Information on Including Student Characteristics in the Growth Model

The following slides were developed using sample data from 2010–2011.

–The “combined” MGPs on the charts have been calculated at the educator level (combining all grades and subjects).

–Not all districts provided data linked to teachers for grades 4–8 ELA/Math in 2010–11.

Page 24: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org24 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org24

Teacher MGPs after Accounting for Economic Disadvantage

Taking student-level characteristics into account helps ensure educators with many students with those characteristics have a fair chance to achieve high or low MGPs. For example, note that for teachers with any percent of economically disadvantaged students, teacher MGPs range from 1 to 99.

NOTE: Beta results using available 2010–11 data.

Page 25: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org25 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org25

Teacher MGPs after Accounting for SWD

NOTE: Beta results using available 2010–2011 data.

Page 26: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org26 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org26

Teacher MGPs after Accounting for ELL

Percent of ELL Students in Class

NOTE: Beta results using available 2010–2011 data.

Page 27: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org27 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org27

“Similar” Students: A Summary

“Similar” Student Characteristics

Unadjusted Mean Growth Percentiles

Adjusted Mean Growth Percentiles

Up to Three Years of Prior Achievement

Up to Three Years of Prior Achievement

English Language Learner (ELL) Status

Students with Disabilities (SWD) Status

Economic Disadvantage

Reported to Educators Reported to Educators

Used for Evaluation

Page 28: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org28 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org28

One Last Feature of the Growth Model….

All tests contain measurement error,

with greater uncertainty for

highest and lowest achieving students

All tests contain measurement error,

with greater uncertainty for

highest and lowest achieving students

The New York growth model accounts for measurement error in computing student growth percentiles.

Page 29: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org29 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org29

State Growth Model Summary

Growth model for 2011–12 only for grades 4–8 ELA/Math for teachers and principals

Page 30: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org30 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org30

By the End of This Section…. You should be able to:

–Explain why the state is measuring student growth and not achievement

–Describe how the state is measuring growth compared to similar students

–Define a student growth percentile and mean growth percentile

Page 31: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org31 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org31

Additional Webinars…

Please stop the webinar recording when you reach this slide.

A NEW webinar has been recorded with up-to-date information on “Using Growth Measures for Educator Evaluation”

Posted on the Growth Resources page: http://engageny.org/resource/resources-about-state-growth-measures/

Revised slides and script also posted.

A NEW webinar on “How to Interpret Your Growth Report” will be available on the Growth Resources page soon!

Page 32: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org32 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org32

Definitions SGP (student growth percentile): the result of a

statistical model that calculates each student’s change in achievement between two or more points in time on a state assessment or other comparable measure and compares each student’s performance to that of similarly achieving students

Similar students: students with the same prior test scores, ELL, SWD, and economic disadvantage status

ELLs: English language learners SWD: students with disabilities Economic disadvantage: a student who participates in,

or whose family participates in, economic assistance programs such as the Free- or Reduced-price Lunch Programs (FRPL), Social Security Insurance (SSI), Food Stamps, Foster Care and others

Page 33: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org33 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org33

Definitions High-achieving, low-achieving: defined by the

performance of students based on prior year state assessment scores (i.e., Level 1 = low-achieving, Level 4 = high-achieving)

MGP (mean growth percentile): the average of the student growth percentiles attributed to a given educator

“Unadjusted” MGP: an MGP based on SGPs that have NOT accounted for ELL, SWD, and economic disadvantage status

“Adjusted” MGP: an MGP based on SGPs that HAVE accounted for ELL, SWD, and economic disadvantage status

Growth rating: HEDI rating based on growth Growth score: growth subcomponent points from 0–20

Page 34: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org34 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org34

Definitions Measurement error: uncertainty in test scores due to

sampling of content and other factors Standard error: a measure of the statistical uncertainty

surrounding a score Standard deviation: a measure that shows the spread

of scores around the mean Upper/lower limit: highest and lowest possible MGP

taking statistical confidence into account Confidence range: range of MGPs within which we

have a given level of statistical confidence that the true MGP falls (95% statistical confidence level used for state growth measure)

Page 35: Www.engageNY.org 1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.

www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org35 www.engageNY.orgwww.engageNY.org35