Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

No Child Left Behind Act Meeting Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) Analyzing students’ grade level scores (from entirely different students) from one year.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "No Child Left Behind Act Meeting Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) Analyzing students’ grade level scores (from entirely different students) from one year."— Presentation transcript:

1

2 No Child Left Behind Act Meeting Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) Analyzing students’ grade level scores (from entirely different students) from one year to the next doesn’t offer clues about student progress or achievement AYP calculation formulas do not take into consideration the high percentage of disadvantaged students, nor the high incidence of student mobility for which a school is judged

3 Value-Added Assessment Model Diagnostic tool to make data driven decisions Measures individual progress of same cohort of students as they move grades Students that make great strides in closing achievement gap are recognized even if they show low overall scores

4 Strengths of Value-Added Assessment Models School/teacher performance data Predicts student performance using student as own control Regroup students in instruction Teacher training/T3 Teacher best practice research Modify instructional practices Evaluate what is working and what is not – effective practices Enrichment programs Resource allotment Interventions

5 Value-Added Assessment Model Measurement flaws – statistical methodology Outcome only as good as data used Test questions change – moving target Missing student data – 3 consecutive years Student mobility/background Easier for larger school systems Weaknesses Overall scores: 30/90 or 90/30 – average still 60 Gains may not reflect a standard met Time involved in studying data/drawing conclusions Using the information beneficially – trained administrators and teachers

6 Warning: Don’t put all your apples in one basket! Value-added assessment models should not be sole means to determine teacher quality or quality of instructional program. Warning: Don’t put all your apples in one basket! Value-added assessment models should not be sole means to determine teacher quality or quality of instructional program. For more information: ols.aspx/q/page=cmp

7 HOLLOWAY, J. H. (2000). A VALUE-ADDED VIEW OF PUPIL PERFORMANCE. EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP, 57(5), 84. RETRIEVED FROM EBSCOHOST. PICKERING, J. W., & BOWERS, J. C. (1990). ASSESSING VALUE-ADDED OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT. MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION IN COUNSELING AND DEVELOPMENT, 22(4), RETRIEVED FROM EBSCOHOST. SCHAEFFER, B. (2004). DISTRICTS PILOT VALUE-ADDED ASSESSMENT: LEADERS IN OHIO AND PENNSYLVANIA ARE MAKING BETTER SENSE OF THEIR SCHOOL DATA. SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR, 61(11), 20. RETRIEVED FROM EBSCOHOST. STOVER, D. (2005). VALUE-ADD-ON'S FINE-TUNE TEACHING TO THE NCLB. EDUCATION DIGEST, 70(7), RETRIEVED FROM EBSCOHOST. References

8 Template Provided By 500,000 Downloadable PowerPoint Templates, Animated Clip Art, Backgrounds and Videos


Download ppt "No Child Left Behind Act Meeting Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) Analyzing students’ grade level scores (from entirely different students) from one year."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google