1 / 29

Nevada

Nevada. Transitioning from measuring status and reporting AYP, to measuring growth and reporting on School Performance. Status to Growth. 2003 – state reports student performance on state CRT program assessments, schools evaluated based on achievement of AYP for reading and math.

beyla
Download Presentation

Nevada

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Nevada Transitioning from measuring status and reporting AYP, to measuring growth and reporting on School Performance

  2. Status to Growth • 2003 – state reports student performance on state CRT program assessments, schools evaluated based on achievement of AYP for reading and math. • 2009 state legislature passed a bill requiring the NDE to develop a new model for evaluating schools that included students’ academic growth as part of the equation.

  3. Motivation for change • AYP model identified increasing number (%) of schools as in need of improvement. • 55% of schools did not make AYP in 2011 • Limited ability to identify schools making progress • Focus on “bubble students” instead of increasing proficiency of all students

  4. Annual Measurable Objectives (AMO) 2010-2014

  5. School AYP Profile

  6. AYP model reporting – HSPE math

  7. How the results are reported • AYP model • School achieved AYP  • School didn’t make AYP  (In need of improvement)

  8. Nevada’s Growth Model • In 2010, State panel recommended use of the Student Growth Percentile (SGP) model • Nevada model based on the work of D. Betebennerin Colorado. • Growth model adopted by State Board and included as part of the state’s RTTT proposal • Growth model was included as a core component of the Waiver Application and is basis for new school performance framework and educator evaluation system

  9. What values are used to compute school performance • AYP model • Percent of students at or above the cut score for meeting the standards • Other indicator (ADA) • School Performance model • Growth* • Status (% of students meeting proficiency targets) • Gap • Other indicator (ADA)

  10. Growth* • SGP – all students with two consecutive years of data (>90% of all students in grades 4-8) • MGP – school Median Growth Percentiles reported for all schools and subgroups • AGP – Adequate Growth Percentile, growth to a standard, target is proficiency within 3 years or by grade 8.

  11. Why SGP • Nevada assessments are vertically aligned but not vertically scaled • Relatively simple to explain • Graphical display easy to understand • Relatively easy to calculate • Affordable • Significant support from school districts

  12. How the results are reported for students • Student reports include growth relative to their academic peers, and also indications of whether they are growing at a rate to attain or maintain proficiency. • Growth score • Catching up • Keeping up

  13. Reporting student growth

  14. How the results are reported for schools • Nevada School Performance Framework (NSFP) model uses both status (proficiency) and growth (SGP, AGP and gap reduction) to calculate an index score for each school • School receives an STAR rating (1-5 Star) based on an NSPF index score

  15. NV growth model –bubble chart

  16. Using growth as part of school evaluation Table 2.A.4 Elementary/Middle School Index

  17. How index scores are computed

  18. Index score computation (contd)

  19. Index Scores and Star Ratings

  20. Growth as a measure of educator effectiveness • 2011 legislature required development of a new educator evaluation system for the state • New system must use student performance as at least 50% of the final rating • Student performance rating includes: • Growth (SGP) 35% • Proficiency (status) 15% • Gap Reduction 5%

  21. Cautionary note • Study of the stability of school level classifications using the SGP model • Looked at classification error in designation of schools relative to measures of status and growth. • Need to use multiple years of data to be relatively confident in classifications. • Take away message: “You can use SGP to classify schools, but proceed with caution.”

  22. Richard N. Vineyard • Supervisor of Assessment Programs • Nevada Department of Education • rvineyard@doe.nv.gov

More Related