Fusion 2012 - Assessment Literacy in a Teacher Evaluation Frame
•Transferir como PPTX, PDF•
1 gostou•992 visualizações
www.earnperhit.com/essay => Professional academic writing www.Lucky-Bet.site => Bet on Sports - 50% Deposit Bonus www.Lucky-Bet.site/casino => Online Casino - 5000$ Welcome Bonus www.Lucky-Bet.site/lotto247 => Lotto247 - Win Big, Live Free www.Lucky-Bet.site/eurobet => Best European Bookmaker Dr. Andy Hegedus, Senior Manager, Professional Development Data Analytics, NWEA Fusion 2012, the NWEA summer conference in Portland, Oregon At times, gaps in educators understanding of assessment data limits the depth of dialogue about the implications of all kinds of uses for data. More and more often people are considering including assessment data as a piece of a formal teacher evaluation process. This is a new and complicated area in which educators are beginning to tread. Using a framework for using data in teacher evaluations, we will reinforce some of what you know about assessment data; answer some questions you may have; and deepen your understanding of the strengths and limitations of assessment data. Learning Outcome: - Deepen your understanding of assessment data - Provide a context when considering using assessment results in teacher evaluation programs Audience: - New data user - Experienced data user - District leadership - Curriculum and Instruction
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais de NWEA
Mais de NWEA (20)
Último
Último (20)
Fusion 2012 - Assessment Literacy in a Teacher Evaluation Frame
- 1. Assessment Literacy in a Teacher Evaluation Frame Andy Hegedus, Ed.D. June 2012
- 2. Trying to gauge my audience and adjust my speed . . . • How many of you think your literacy with assessments in general is “Good” or better? • How many of you are currently figuring out how to use assessment data thoughtfully in a Teacher Evaluation process?
- 3. Go forth thoughtfully with care • What we’ve known to be true is now being shown to be true – Using data thoughtfully improves student achievement • There are dangers present however – Unintended Consequences
- 4. Remember the old adage? “What gets measured (and attended to), gets done”
- 5. An infamous example • NCLB – Cast light on inequities – Improved performance of “Bubble Kids” – Narrowed taught curriculum
- 6. A patient’s health doesn’t change because we know their blood pressure It’s our response that makes all the difference It’s what we do that counts
- 7. Data Use in Teacher Evaluation is our construct for today Our nation has moved from a model of education reform that focused on fixing schools to a model that is focused on fixing the teaching profession
- 8. Be considerate of the continuum of stakes involved Terminate Increasing risk Compensate Support Increasing levels of required rigor
- 9. Let’s get clear on terms • Growth • Depiction of progress over time along a cross- grade scale • Value-Added – A determination of whether growth is greater for a particular student or group of students than would be expected
- 10. Marcus’ growth College readiness standard Marcus Normal Growth Needed Growth
- 11. What question is being answered in support of using data in evaluating teachers? Is the progress produced by this teacher dramatically different than teaching peers who deliver instruction to comparable students in comparable situations?
- 12. There are four key steps required to answer this question The Test The Growth Metric The Evaluation The Rating
- 13. The purpose and design of the instrument is significant • Many assessments are not designed to measure growth • Others do not measure growth equally well for all students
- 14. Both Status and Growth are important Adult Reading Value Added = Teacher Contribution to Growth x 5th Grade Status x Time 1 Time 2 Beginning Literacy
- 15. Teachers encounter a distribution of student performance Adult Reading x x x Norm = 5th x xxxx xxx x Grade Level ―Typical‖ for Performance a reference Grade xx population x Beginning Literacy
- 16. Traditional assessment uses items reflecting the grade level standards Adult Reading 6th Grade 5th Grade 4th Grade Grade Level Standards Traditional Assessment Item Beginning Literacy Bank
- 17. Traditional assessment uses items reflecting the grade level standards Adult Reading 6th Grade Grade Level Standards Overlap allows 5th Grade Grade Level Standards linking and scale construction 4th Grade Grade Level Standards Beginning Literacy
- 18. Adaptive testing works differently Item bank can span full range of achievement
- 19. Available item pool depth is crucial Est. RIT Correct Incorrect
- 20. Tests are not equally accurate for all students California STAR NWEA MAP
- 21. These differences impact measurement error Academic Warning Below Meets Exceeds .12 Adaptive .10 Test Significantly Different .08 5th Grade Error Information Level .06 Items .04 .02 Traditional Test .00 165 175 185 195 205 215 225 235 245 1st 86th Scale Score
- 22. Error can change your life! • Think of a high stakes test – State Summative – Designed to identify if a student is proficient or not • Do they do that well? • 93% correct on Proficiency determination • Does it go off design well? • 75% correct on Performance Levels determination *Testing: Not an Exact Science, Education Policy Brief, Delaware Education Research & Development Center, May 2004, http://dspace.udel.edu:8080/dspace/handle/19716/244
- 23. What is measured must be aligned to what is being taught • Assessments must align with the teacher’s instructional responsibility – Validity • Is it assessing what you think it’s assessing? – Reliability • If we gave it again, would the results be consistent?
- 24. The instrument must be able to detect instruction • …when science is defined in terms of knowledge of facts that are taught in school…(then) those students who have been taught the facts will know them, and those who have not will…not. A test that assesses these skills is likely to be highly sensitive to instruction. Black, P. and Wiliam, D.(2007) 'Large-scale assessment systems: Design principles drawn from international comparisons', Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research & Perspective, 5: 1, 1 — 53
- 25. The more complex, the harder to detect and attribute to one teacher • When ability in science is defined in terms of scientific reasoning…achievement will be less closely tied to age and exposure, and more closely related to general intelligence. In other words, science reasoning tasks are relatively insensitive to instruction. Black, P. and Wiliam, D.(2007) 'Large-scale assessment systems: Design principles drawn from international comparisons', Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research & Perspective, 5: 1, 1 — 53
- 26. Other issues • Security and Cheating • Proctoring • Procedures
- 27. Mean spring and fall test duration in minutes by school 90.00 80.00 70.00 60.00 Duration (Min) 50.00 40.00 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00 Spring term Fall term
- 28. Ten minutes makes a difference ~ one RIT 8.00 6.00 4.00 Growth Index (RIT) 2.00 0.00 -2.00 -4.00 -6.00 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 Students taking 10+ minutes longer spring than fall All other students
- 29. Testing is complete . . . What is useful to answer our question? The Test The Growth Metric The Evaluation The Rating
- 30. The metric matters - Let’s go underneath ―Proficiency‖ Difficulty of New York ―Meets‖ Level 100 90 80 70 College National Percentile Readiness 60 50 Typical 40 30 Math Reading 20 10 0 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
- 31. What gets measured and attended to really does matter Mathematics Proficiency College Readiness No Change Down Number of Students Up Fall RIT One district’s change in 5th grade mathematics performance relative to the KY proficiency cut scores
- 32. Changing from Proficiency to Growth means all kids matter Mathematics Below projected growth Met or above Number of Students projected growth Student’s score in fall Number of 5th grade students meeting projected mathematics growth in the same district
- 33. How can we make it fair? The Test The Growth Metric The Evaluation The Rating
- 34. Consider . . . • What if I skip this step? – Comparison is likely against normative data so the comparison is to “typical kids in typical settings” • How fair is it to disregard context? – Good teacher – bad school – Good teacher – challenging kids How does your performance evaluation consider context?
- 35. Nothing is perfect • Value added models control for a variety of classroom, school level, and other conditions – Over one hundred different value added models – All attempt to minimize error – Variables outside controls are assumed as random • Results are not stable – The use of multiple-years of data is highly recommended – Results are more likely to be stable at the extremes
- 36. Multiple years of data is necessary for some stability Teachers with growth scores in lowest and highest quintile over two years using NWEA’s MAP (493 teachers) 120 100 Vote – Year 2 above Number of teachers 80 or below 60 Year 1 40 Year 2 20 0 Lowest Highest Typical r values for measures of teaching effectiveness range between .30 and .60 (Brown Center on Education Policy, 2010)
- 37. A variety of errors mean more stability only at the extremes • Control for statistical error – All models attempt to address this issue • Error is compounded with combining two test events – Nevertheless, many teachers’ value-added scores will fall within the range of statistical error
- 38. Range of teacher value-added estimates 12.00 11.00 Mathematics Growth Index Distribution by Teacher - Validity Filtered 10.00 9.00 Each line in this display represents a single teacher. The graphic shows the average growth index score for each teacher (green 8.00 line), plus or minus the standard error of the growth index estimate 7.00 (black line). We removed students who had tests of questionable validity and teachers with fewer than 20 students. 6.00 5.00 Average Growth Index Score and Range 4.00 Q5 3.00 2.00 Q4 1.00 0.00 Q3 -1.00 -2.00 Q2 -3.00 -4.00 Q1 -5.00 -6.00 -7.00 -8.00 -9.00 -10.00 -11.00 -12.00
- 39. With one teacher, error means a lot
- 40. Assumption of randomness can have risk implications • Value-added models assume that variation is caused by randomness if not controlled for explicitly – Young teachers are assigned disproportionate numbers of students with poor discipline records – Parent requests for the “best” teachers are honored – Sound educational reasons for placement are likely to be defensible
- 41. Lower numbers can significantly impact a teacher level analysis • Idiosyncratic cases – In self-contained classrooms, one or two idiosyncratic cases can have a large effect on results
- 42. How tests are used to evaluate teachers The Test The Growth Metric The Evaluation The Rating
- 43. Translation into ratings can be difficult to inform with data • How would you translate a rank order to a rating? • Data can be provided • Value judgment ultimately used to set cut scores for points or rating
- 44. • What is far below a district’s expectation is subjective • What about • Obligation to help teachers improve? • Quality of replacement teachers? Decisions are value based, not empirical
- 45. • System for combining elements and producing a rating is also a value based decision – Multiple measures and principal judgment must be included – Evaluate the extremes to make sure it makes sense Even multiple measures need to be used well
- 46. • Principal evaluation, state test, and local assessment scores are combined – Rating and points generated separately for each category – Principal has 60% of the evaluation • What happens at the extremes – Low end of Developing (not Ineffective) with test scores requires 98% rating by principal to not fall to Ineffective • Effective needs 95% – A highly effective teacher based on test scores needs 50% or higher on Principal evaluation to maintain rating NY use of multiple measures provides an example
- 47. Recommendations • Be thoughtful • Involve variety of stakeholders • Use multiple years of student achievement data • Begin with pilots to understand the accuracy and unintended consequences • Embrace the formative advantages of growth measurement as well as the summative
- 48. • Presentations and other recommended resources are available at: – www.nwea.org – www.kingsburycenter.org • Contacting us: NWEA Main Number 503-624-1951 E-mail: andy.hegedus@nwea.org More information
Notas do Editor
- Concept – If we fix schools we fix education. Schools actually did improve during this period.Race to the Top, Gates Foundation, Teach for America…Signaled in a number of waysNCLB about fixing schools – 100% Proficient by 2014Punishments for AYP – SES, Choice, RestructuringObama switch – Race to the TopFixing or improving teaching and the teaching professionRecruiting teachers from alternative careersMove from holding schools accountable to holding teachers accountable. Wrong no. Different Yes.David Brooks – Aug 2010 – Atlantic Monthly – Teachers are fair game – Teachers under scrutiny – Somewhat unfairlyBOE are asking about test based accountabilityCharleston SC – Any teacher without 50% of students on growth norm – Yr 1 on report, Yr 2 only rehired by approval by BOE50% Yr 1, 25% year 2 to be rehiredOur goal – Make sure you are prepared. Understand the risk. Proper ways to implement including legal issues. Clarify some of the implications – Very complex – Prepare you and a prudent course
- Teacher evaluations and the use of data in them can take many forms. You can use them for supporting teachers and their improvement. You can use the evaluations to compensate teachers or groups of teachers differently or you can use them in their highest stakes way to terminate teachers. The higher the stakes put on the evaluation, the more risk there is to you and your organization from a political, legal, and equity perspective. Most people naturally respond with increasing the levels of rigor put into designing the process as a way to ameliorate the risk. One fact is that the risk can’t be eliminated. Our goal – Make sure you are prepared. Understand the risk. Proper ways to implement including legal issues. Clarify some of the implications – Very complex – Prepare you and a prudent course
- Contrast with what value added communicatesPlot normal growth for Marcus vs anticipated growth – value added. If you ask whether the teachers provided value added, the answer is Yes.Other line is what is needed for college readinessBlue line is what is used to evaluate the teacher. Is he on the line the parents want him to be on? Probably not.Don’t focus on one at the expense of the otherNCLB – AYP vs what the parent really wants for goal settingCan be come so focused on measuring teachers that we lose sight of what parents valueWe are better off moving towards the kids aspirationsAs a parent I didn’t care if the school made AYP. I cared if my kids got the courses that helped them go where they want to go.
- This is the value added metricNot easy to make nuanced decisions. Can learn about the ends.
- Steps are quite important. People tend to skip some of these.Kids take a test – important that the test is aligned to instruction being givenMetric – look at growth vs growth norm and calculate a growth index. Two benefits – Very transparent/Simple.People tend to use our growth norms – if you hit 60% for a grade level within a school you are dong well.Norms – growth of a kid or group of kids compared to a nationally representative sample of studentsWhy isn’t this value added?Not all teachers can be compared to a nationally representative sample because they don’t teach kids that are just like the national sampleThe third step controls for variables unique to the teacher’s classroom or environmentFourth step – rating – how much below average before the district takes action or how much above before someone gets performance pay. Particular challenge in NY state right now. Law requires it.
- State assessment designed to measure proficiency – many items in the middle not at the endsMust use multiple points of data over time to measure this. We also believe that a principal should be more in control of the evaluation than the test – Principal and Teacher leaders are what changes schools
- 5th grade IL math cut scores shown
- Common core – very ambitious things they want to measure – tackle things on an AP test. Write and show their work.A CC assessment to evaluate teachers can be a problem.Raise your hand if you know what the capital of Chile is. Stantiago. Repeat after me. We will review in a couple of minutes. Facts can be relatively easily acquired and are instructionally sensitive. If you expose kids to facts in a meaningful and engaging ways, it is sensitive to instruction.
- Problem – insensitive to instructionPrereq skills – writing skills. Given events on N. Africa today, Q requires a lot of pre-req knowledge. Need to know the story. Put it into writing. Reasoning skills to put it together with events today. And I need to know what is going on today as well. One doesn’t develop this entire set of skills in the 9 months of instruction.Common core is what we want. Just not for teacher evaluation.These questions are not that sensitive to instruction. Problematic when we hold teachers accountable for instruction or growth.
- Problem – insensitive to instructionPrereq skills – writing skills. Given events on N. Africa today, Q requires a lot of pre-req knowledge. Need to know the story. Put it into writing. Reasoning skills to put it together with events today. And I need to know what is going on today as well. One doesn’t develop this entire set of skills in the 9 months of instruction.Common core is what we want. Just not for teacher evaluation.These questions are not that sensitive to instruction. Problematic when we hold teachers accountable for instruction or growth.
- Teacher who cheats advantages herself and disadvantages the teacher who follows. Both legal and moral consequences.Security for paper and pencil. Controls for materials, exposure, practice assessments.Newspapers would love to write about the cheating scandal in your town.Have written policies and make sure they are being followed
- Steps are quite important. People tend to skip some of these.Kids take a test – important that the test is aligned to instruction being givenMetric – look at growth vs growth norm and calculate a growth index. Two benefits – Very transparent/Simple.People tend to use our growth norms – if you hit 60% for a grade level within a school you are dong well.Norms – growth of a kid or group of kids compared to a nationally representative sample of studentsWhy isn’t this value added?Not all teachers can be compared to a nationally representative sample because they don’t teach kids that are just like the national sampleThe third step controls for variables unique to the teacher’s classroom or environmentFourth step – rating – how much below average before the district takes action or how much above before someone gets performance pay. Particular challenge in NY state right now. Law requires it.
- NCLB required everyone to get above proficient – message focus on kids at or near proficientSchool systems respondedMS standards are harder than the elem standards – MS problemNo effort to calibrate them – no effort to project elem to ms standardsStart easy and ramp up.Proficient in elem and not in MS with normal growth. When you control for the difficulty in the standards Elem and MS performance are the same
- Dramatic differences between standards based vs growthKY 5th grade mathematicsSample of students from a large school systemX-axis Fall score, Y number of kidsBlue are the kids who did not change status between the fall and the spring on the state testRed are the kids who declined in performance over spring – DecenderGreen are kids who moved above it in performance over the spring – Ascender – Bubble kidsAbout 10% based on the total number of kidsAccountability plans are made typically based on these red and green kids
- Same district as beforeYellow – did not meet target growth – spread over the entire range of kidsGreen – did meet growth targets60% vs 40% is doing well – This is a high performing district with high growthMust attend to all kids – this is a good thing – ones in the middle and at both extremesOld one was discriminatory – focus on some in lieu of othersTeachers who teach really hard at the standard for years – Teachers need to be able to reach them allThis does a lot to move the accountability system to parents and our desires.
- Steps are quite important. People tend to skip some of these.Kids take a test – important that the test is aligned to instruction being givenMetric – look at growth vs growth norm and calculate a growth index. Two benefits – Very transparent/Simple.People tend to use our growth norms – if you hit 60% for a grade level within a school you are dong well.Norms – growth of a kid or group of kids compared to a nationally representative sample of studentsWhy isn’t this value added?Not all teachers can be compared to a nationally representative sample because they don’t teach kids that are just like the national sampleThe third step controls for variables unique to the teacher’s classroom or environmentFourth step – rating – how much below average before the district takes action or how much above before someone gets performance pay. Particular challenge in NY state right now. Law requires it.
- There are wonderful teachers who teach in very challenging, dysfunctional settings. The setting can impact the growth. HLM embeds the student in a classroom, the classroom in the school, and controls for the school parameters. Is it perfect. No. Is it better? Yes.Opposite is true and learning can be magnified as well.What if kids are a challenge, ESL or attendance for instance. It can deflate scores especially with a low number of kids in the sample being analyzed. Also need to make sure you have a large enough ‘n’ to make this possible especially true in small districts.Our position is that a test can inform the decision, but the principal/administrator should collect the bulk of the data that is used in the performance evaluation process.
- Experts recommend multiple years of data to do the evaluation. Invalid to just use two points and will testify to it.Principals never fire anyone – NY rubber room – mythIf they do, it’s not fast enough. – Need to speed up the processThis won’t make the process faster – Principals doing intense evaluations will
- The question we asked: Are teachers who are rated poorly or well in one year likely to stay there in the second year? Important if high stakes where there is a belief that someone won’t improve.We did VA assessment in year one and again in year two – 493 teachers40% of people in the bottom quintile moved out.Yr 1 and yr 2 correlations – these results are more highly correlated than most other studies. Our is best case scenario.One class can impact results so need multiple years of data to get stable results
- Measurement error is compounded in test 1 and test 2
- Green line is their VA estimate and bar is the error of measureBoth on top and bottom people can be in other quartilesPeople in the middle can cross quintiles – just based on SEMCross country – winners spread out. End of the race spread. Middle you get a pack. Middle moving up makes a big difference in the overall race.Instability and narrowness of ranges means evaluating teachers in the middle of the test mean slight changes in performance can be a large change in performance ranking
- Non –random assignments Models control for various things – FRL, ethnicity, school effectiveness overall. Beyond this point assignment is random.1st year teachers get more discipline problems than teachers who have been 30 years. Pick the kids they get. If the model doesn’t control for disciplinary record – none do have that data – scores are inflated. Makes model invalid.Principals do need to do non-random assignment – sound educational reasons for the placement – match adults for kids
- One or two kids can impact a classroom and not a grade and schoolsWhy? A large n helps reduce the standard error
- Steps are quite important. People tend to skip some of these.Kids take a test – important that the test is aligned to instruction being givenMetric – look at growth vs growth norm and calculate a growth index. Two benefits – Very transparent/Simple.People tend to use our growth norms – if you hit 60% for a grade level within a school you are dong well.Norms – growth of a kid or group of kids compared to a nationally representative sample of studentsWhy isn’t this value added?Not all teachers can be compared to a nationally representative sample because they don’t teach kids that are just like the national sampleThe third step controls for variables unique to the teacher’s classroom or environmentFourth step – rating – how much below average before the district takes action or how much above before someone gets performance pay. Particular challenge in NY state right now. Law requires it.
- Use NY point system as the example
- Assessment is ultimately to serve kids. Be thoughtful. Get help.Involve stakeholders in the creation of a comprehensive evaluation systems with multiple measures of teacher effectiveness (Rand, 2010)Select the measures and VA models carefullyBring as much data to bear as possible to create a body of evidenceStart small and learnWe wouldn’t be who we are if I didn’t stress using the data for formative purposes. That’s what we really value.