Summary of "Using Student Growth to Evaluate Educators of Students with Disabilities: Issues, Challenges, and Next Steps": A Forum of State Special Education and Teacher Effectiveness Experts and Researchers. Forum Summary (original) (raw)
Related papers
Evaluating Students with Disabilities and Their Teachers: Use of Student Learning Objectives
Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education, 2016
Over the past decade, there has been a movement toward increased accountability, focusing on teacher performance, in U.S. education. The purpose of this article is to discuss student learning objectives (SLOs) as one component of high-stakes teacher evaluation systems, within the context of learners with special needs. We describe SLOs and their origin, reviewing how the current Race to the Top states (i.e., states awarded competitive funds) are using SLOs in inclusive classes where general education teachers teach both students with and without disabilities. We found substantial variation in how SLOs from different regions were designed to incorporate the progress of students’ teachers’ evaluation ratings. These variations were particularly evident in three areas where decisions must be made: the population to be targeted, the goals to be targeted, and the weight of the SLOs in teachers’ evaluations. Potential exists for these decisions to negate the positive effects of SLOs; howev...
ETS Research Report Series, 2010
Recently growth-based approaches to accountability have received considerable attention because they have the potential to reward schools and teachers for improving student performance over time by measuring the progress of students at all levels of the performance spectrum (including those who have not yet reached proficiency on state accountability assessments). While the use of growth in accountability holds promise for students with disabilities, measuring changes over time in their academic performance is complex. This paper summarizes models and approaches that use individual student test scores from multiple years for 3 different purposes: determination of adequate yearly progress under the federal accountability system, research on individual growth trajectories, and evaluation of the contribution of teachers and schools to student learning. Practical challenges in measuring and modeling growth for students with disabilities are then discussed. Finally, 3 areas in need of research on the measurement of growth from large-scale annual accountability assessments are identified and described: testing accommodations, test difficulty, and understanding the longitudinal characteristics of the population of students with disabilities.
Regional Educational Laboratory Mid Atlantic, 2013
States and school districts are exploring alternatives to state tests for measuring teachers' contributions to student learning. One approach applies statistical value-added methods to alternative student assessments such as commercially available tests and end-ofcourse tests. The evidence suggests that these methods can reliably distinguish among teachers. A second approach requires teachers to develop student learning objectives at the beginning of the school year; these can be used in instructional planning as well as evaluation.
Many states and districts have begun to evaluate teacher performance and reward teachers based on their students' growth on state assessments, as measured by statistical techniques known as value-a dded models or student growth models. However, the state assessments necessary to evaluate most teachers are typically administered only in grades 3-8 and only in math and reading. To measure student achievement growth for teachers in all grades and subjects, a growing number of states and school districts are developing alternative student growth measures that do not depend on the state assessments that are typically used for school accountability under the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). These alternative growth measures come in two forms: alternative assessmentbased value-added models (VAMs) that use the results of end-of-course assessments or commercially available tests in statistical growth models, and student learning objectives (SLOs), which are determined by individual teachers, approved by principals, and used in evaluations that do not involve sophisticated statistical modeling.
Regional Educational Laboratory Mid Atlantic, 2014
Many states and districts have begun to evaluate teacher performance and reward teachers based on their students' growth on state assessments, as measured by statistical techniques known as value-a dded models or student growth models. However, the state assessments necessary to evaluate most teachers are typically administered only in grades 3-8 and only in math and reading. To measure student achievement growth for teachers in all grades and subjects, a growing number of states and school districts are developing alternative student growth measures that do not depend on the state assessments that are typically used for school accountability under the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). These alternative growth measures come in two forms: alternative assessmentbased value-added models (VAMs) that use the results of end-of-course assessments or commercially available tests in statistical growth models, and student learning objectives (SLOs), which are determined by individual teachers, approved by principals, and used in evaluations that do not involve sophisticated statistical modeling.
Many states and districts have begun to evaluate teacher performance and reward teachers based on their students' growth on state assessments, as measured by statistical techniques known as value-a dded models or student growth models. However, the state assessments necessary to evaluate most teachers are typically administered only in grades 3-8 and only in math and reading. To measure student achievement growth for teachers in all grades and subjects, a growing number of states and school districts are developing alternative student growth measures that do not depend on the state assessments that are typically used for school accountability under the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). These alternative growth measures come in two forms: alternative assessmentbased value-added models (VAMs) that use the results of end-of-course assessments or commercially available tests in statistical growth models, and student learning objectives (SLOs), which are determined by individual teachers, approved by principals, and used in evaluations that do not involve sophisticated statistical modeling.