1. Growth Models Oklahoma
Maridyth McBee, Ph.D.
Assistant Superintendent for Accountability and Assessment
Oklahoma State Department of Education

2. School and district report cards Teacher and leader evaluation
Measuring Growth
School and district report cards
Change Scores
Teacher and leader evaluation
Value Add Scores

4. Student Growth Section
Growth is divided into two sub-categories;
All students in a school worth seventeen percent (17%) of the final grade
Bottom twenty-five percent of students in a school worth seventeen percent (17%) of the final grade

5. Student Growth Section
Reading and Math exams only (Grades 3-8 Reading and Mathematics, Algebra I End-of-Instruction, English II End-of-Instruction).
Scores of Full Academic Year students paired with previous test score to evaluate growth.
Scores paired with similar versions of the exam. For example, a modified exam to modified exam

6. Student Growth Calculation Previous Proficiency Level
Student Growth Calculation
Number of Points Awarded Based on Change of Proficiency Level
Previous Proficiency Level
Current Proficiency Level
Increase OPI > State Avg.
Unsatisfactory
Limited Knowledge
Proficient
Advanced 1 2 3

7. Calculation of Points for Mathematics
Number of Students
Point Value
Calculation
Points
Number Remaining Proficient or Advanced
150 1
150 x 1
Number of Unsatisfactory Improving to Limited Knowledge 10
10 x 1
Number of Unsatisfactory Improving to Satisfactory or Proficient 6 2
6 x 2 12
Number of Unsatisfactory Improving to Advanced 3
0 x 3
Number of Limited Knowledge Improving to Satisfactory 20
20 x 1
Number of Limited Knowledge Improving to Advanced 4
4 x 2 8
Number with OPI Growth greater than State Average
8 x 1
Total Math Points
208
Total Number of Students
240

8. Calculation of Overall Growth Index
Number of Students
Number of Points
Calculation Points ÷ Students = GI
Letter Grade
Mathematics
240
208
208 ÷ 240 = .866
87 = B
Reading
224
224 ÷ 240 = .933
93 =A
Total
480
432
432 ÷ 480 = .90
90 = A

9. Growth Index: Bottom 25%
Only students with a pre-score proficiency level of “Unsatisfactory” or “Limited Knowledge” are included.
The bottom twenty-five percent growth index will be calculated the same way as the overall growth index.

10. Challenges to Change Scores
Do not yet have a vertical scale: growth is not consistent from grade to grade.
Multiple tests: Regular, modified and portfolio.
Scores from each type of test reported on a different scale.
Changing to Common Core State Standards Assessments in

11. Teacher/Leader Evaluation: Statutory Requirements
Qualitative 50%
Quantitative: Student Academic Growth 35%
Quantitative: Other Academic Measurements 15%

12. Value-Added Model
Committee of legislators, educator leaders and community/business representatives recommending teacher/leader evaluation system.

13. Value-Added Model
Value Added Model selected to measure student academic growth for teachers and leaders in grades and subjects for which multiple years of standardized test data exist.

14. Value-Added Model
Components of model to be determined during the next school year.
Variables and Business Rules for Data Processing discussed by the Committee
Simulated results will assist the Committee to select a model to pilot

15. Challenges to Value-Added Model
Attributing scores to the correct teacher or teachers.
Measuring content areas when assessments are not given in consecutive grades.
Changing assessments in

16. Future Goal
Measure growth validly and consistently in report cards and for teacher evaluations.

17. Further Information
Contact the Office of Assessment and Accountability