• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Student Growth Measures: A Review of State Evaluation Practices
 

Student Growth Measures: A Review of State Evaluation Practices

on

  • 303 views

OERC researchers provided a brief review of other state practices regarding student growth measures (including sample SLOs) and teacher /principal evaluation. Also included was a discussion of ...

OERC researchers provided a brief review of other state practices regarding student growth measures (including sample SLOs) and teacher /principal evaluation. Also included was a discussion of preliminary findings from Ohio Education Research Center (OERC) research regarding using Student Growth Measures for OTES and OPES within a sample of LEAs in Ohio.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
303
Views on SlideShare
303
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Student Growth Measures: A Review of State Evaluation Practices Student Growth Measures: A Review of State Evaluation Practices Presentation Transcript

    • STUDENT GROWTH MEASURES: A REVIEW OF STATE EVALUATION PRACTICES Weights and Local MeasuresJill LindseyOERC Research LeadProfessor and Chair, College of Education & Human ServicesWright State UniversityBetsy ChaddDirector of Curriculum & Professional DevelopmentBellbrook-Sugarcreek School DistrictNational Network for Educational Renewal Partners Making Research Work for Education connect@oerc.osu.edu www.oerc.osu.edu
    • Changes in Teacher Evaluation Policies since 2009 36 states + DC changed teacher evaluation policies 43 states require annual evaluation of teachers 26 incorporated differentiated levels of teacher performance 32 states incorporated Student Achievement Measures (SGM) 26 states use Student Growth Percentiles (SGP) to measure & communicate SGM 39 included classroom observations 22 included multiple observations each year SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 2
    • Research by Jerald and Hook 2011 graph by Hull, Center for Public Education 2011 SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 3
    • States with 50%-50% Ohio Colorado Pennsylvania Florida South Dakota Idaho SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 4
    • New Jersey 2013-14Tested Grades and Subjects (20% of teachers) 50 - 50 including 35 percent student growth and 15 percent LEA measure In future years, 5 percent school-wide and cohort comparison measures in LEA measuresNon-Tested Grades and Subjects (80% of teachers) 85 percent teacher practice and 15 percent student achievement In future years, 50-50 with 5 percent school-wide and cohort comparison measures and 45 percent "student growth objectives” SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 5
    • Connecticut Minimum of 40% for announced and unannounced observation (a least 3 observations) 45% student growth using multiple indicators including goals/objectives with indicators and evidence and at least 22.5% based on state tests 5% student feedback 10% parent or peer feedback/survey SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 6
    • Indiana 20-50% SLOs + teacher performance including observations SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 7
    • Arkansas Multiple measure Including observations Including student academic growth and achievement SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 8
    • New York 60% observations and performance with majority based on observations by administrator and the rest on independent trained evaluators, peer classroom observations, student and parent feedback from evaluators, and evidence of performance through student portfolios + 40% SGM with 20% based on state tests and 20% on other vendor or locally developed tests SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 9
    • Tennessee 50% Observation + 35% student growth + 15% state-approved student achievement Teachers with <3yrs experience are observed 6 times a year. Experienced teachers are observed 4 times a year SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 10
    • Delaware & Rhode Island No designated weights Delaware has 5 components and requires one must be student improvement/growth weighted as high as the highest other component Rhode Island requires annual student growth and achievement be included but classroom observations are optional SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 11
    • 9 of the 14 States Use Danielson’sReviewed Today Framework for Teaching as the evaluation model SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 12
    • Four Levels of Performance RatingsOHIO INDIANA Accomplished  Highly effective Proficient  Effective Developing  Improvement necessary Ineffective  IneffectiveCONNECTICUT SOUTH DAKOTA Exemplary  Distinguished Proficient  Proficient Developing  Basic Below standard  Unsatisfactory SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 13
    • More Levels of Performance RatingsWASHINGTON & IDAHO NEW YORK Distinguished  Highly Effective Proficient  Effective Basic  Developing Unsatisfactory  Ineffective ILLINOISARKANSAS  Excellent Feedback No Ratings  Proficient  Needs improvement  Unsatisfactory SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 14
    • District Decisions About SGMWeights, SLOs andShared Attribution SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 15
    • Partnership SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 16
    • BASELINE DATA SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 17
    • PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 18
    • COLLABORATION SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 19
    • SETTING GROWTH TARGETS SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 20
    • SLO DEVELOPMENT Grade Level Teacher Level Building Level SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 21
    • MID-YEAR REFLECTION“We do not learn from experience…. We learn from reflecting on experience.” -John Dewey SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 22
    • LESSONS LEARNED  Staff Development  Impact on Culture  Growth Target Rigor SGM @ Connecting the Dots Conference 3/22/2013 23
    • QUESTIONS? Making Research Work for Education connect@oerc.osu.edu www.oerc.osu.edu