Photos by Susie Fitzhugh

Use of Student Growth Percentiles in Public Schools Eric M. Anderson Research, Evaluation, & Assessment School Performance Framework

Levels defined by Level 4-5 Schools are SCHOOL LEVELS absolute performance near or above district- LEVEL 5 and growth on wide targets/goals metrics aligned to LEVEL 4 Strategic Plan LEVEL 3 Used to monitor Level 1-2 Schools remain LEVEL 2 school progress and far below district goals customize levels of and are not making LEVEL 1 support & autonomy significant annual growth/progress

2 Absolute Performance vs. Growth

100

Wedgwood ES 90 Lawton ES Whittier ES Hamilton MS Mercer MS SandPoint ES North Beach ES John Hay ES 80 Dearborn Park ES Loyal Heights ES Van Asselt ES ES MS Bryant ES The Center School HS John Rogers ES Roxhill ES Broadview-Thomson K8 70 Beacon Hill ES Lowell ES Pinehurst K8 Cleveland HS Maple ES Ballard HS West Woodland ES Olympic Hills ES Ingraham HS Alki ES Catharine Blaine K8 Denny MS Greenwood ES Laurelhurst ES Roosevelt HS View Ridge ES 60 B.F. Day ES Frantz Coe ES Leschi ES Jane Addams K8 Lafayette ES Northgate ES South Shore K8 Montlake ES Wing Luke ES Sacajawea ES Bailey Gatzert ES Orca K8 Queen Anne ES 50 Schmitz Park ES Dunlap ES Franklin HS Olympic View ES McGilvra ES West Seattle ES Daniel Bagley ES John Muir ES Pathfinder K8 Madison MS Hawthorne ES Thurgood Marshall ES Nova HS Thornton Creek ES Growth Score MS Nathan Hale HS 40 Gatewood ES McClure MS TOPS K8 Whitman MS West Seattle HSStevens ES Salmon Bay K8 Graham Hill ES McDonald ES Martin Luther King Jr ES Chief Sealth HS Eckstein MS Sanislo ES Garfield HS 30 Arbor Heights ES Kimball ES Adams ES

Rainier Beach HS Emerson ES 20 Highland Park ES Madrona K8

10 Concord ES

0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Absolute Score

3 Proficiency vs. Student Growth Percentiles (MSP Mathematics, Grades 3-8, 2012)

Mercer MS

Above Average Growth

Above Average Proficiency

4 Student Growth Measures for Teachers

LOW TYPICAL HIGH 64 Teachers 254 Teachers 50 Teachers 17.4% 69.0% 13.6%

• Student growth ratings based on two types of measures: student growth percentiles and value-added

• Low rating (score < 35) based on 2-year average initiates comprehensive evaluation and student growth inquiry process 5 Even with a Vertical Scale, Growth is Not Easy to Interpret

A child might grow four inches between ages 3 and 4.

Although four inches is a well understood quantity, the increase only becomes meaningful when compared to the growth of other 4-year olds.

6 Even with a Vertical Scale, Growth is Not Easy to Interpret

District-wide Mean Growth on MAP (Mathematics, Spring 2011 to Spring 2012)

Previous Spring Score Grade 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th Level Quintile Quintile Quintile Quintile Quintile 1st 25.6 23.1 23.0 22.0 19.4 2nd 18.3 15.4 15.7 13.8 10.6 3rd 16.4 12.4 11.0 10.6 9.2 4th 14.2 11.0 11.0 11.4 9.4 5th 10.9 10.4 10.4 10.3 9.9 6th 8.2 7.5 7.0 5.8 4.2 7th 8.7 8.1 7.4 6.3 6.6 8th 8.8 5.8 5.0 4.8 6.5

The MAP vertical scale is equal interval: Any two scores which differ by the same number of points are equally different. 7 Example Classroom Roster

3rd Grade 4th Grade First Name Score Score Last Year This Year Chris 364 375 (3rd Grade) (4th Grade) Alex 352 363 Emily 363 381 363 381 Serge 417 380 Below Alejandro 466 440 Well Below Standard Mark 544 458 Standard (Level 2) Lucas 466 472 (Level 1) Darby 478 494 Ricardo 376 375 Samatha 417 380 Erica 375 363 Billy 478 494 Obama 430 416 John 493 407 Carlos 375 380 Dwight 447 433 3rd Grade Score Distribution (2010)

363

All 3rd grade test takers in Washington State (2010)

9 4th Grade Score Distribution (2011)

381 4th Grade

Emily’s “Comparison Group” (Prior Score = 363)