How Does Value Added Compare to Student Growth Percentiles?

11Citations
Citations of this article
25Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

We compare teacher evaluation scores from a typical value-added model to results from the Colorado Growth Model (CGM), which 16 states currently use or plan to use as a component of their teacher performance evaluations. The CGM assigns a growth percentile to each student by comparing each student's achievement to that of other students with similar past test scores. The median (or average) growth percentile of a teacher's students provides the measure of teacher effectiveness. The CGM does not account for other student background characteristics and excludes other features included in many value-added models used by states and school districts. Using data from the District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS), we examine changes in evaluation scores across the two methods for all teachers and for teacher subgroups. We find that use of growth percentiles in place of value added would have altered evaluation consequences for 14% of DCPS teachers. Most differences in evaluation scores based on the two methods are not related to the characteristics of students’ teachers.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Walsh, E., & Isenberg, E. (2015). How Does Value Added Compare to Student Growth Percentiles? Statistics and Public Policy, 2(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/2330443X.2015.1034390

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free