Reply to How meaningful are student growth metrics really?

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "How meaningful are student growth metrics really?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The growth score can tell you a lot about the quality of teaching. It's not that hard to keep an on-grade-level kid on grade. Much harder to have below-grade kids catch up, because they have to make more than a year's growth in a year's time. So if you look at two schools with the same proficiency stats but one has better growth, obviously the latter is more impressive. [/quote]

But what if one school has a kind of normal distribution of proficiency and the other has one that's more bimodal due to demographics?[/quote]

Again, it’s a year to year match for individual kids. Yes, a different skill is necessary to appropriate grow high performers vs mid performers vs low performers, so an overall growth measure doesn’t tell you everything, but the actual measure is derived from looking at how each individual kid did in Y1 v Y2 not some overall average mishmash.[/quote]

The metrics do ultimately rely on medians and averages. I can appreciate that it's better that that's happening toward the end of the calculations, but I'm still not sure if it's generating anything that's stand-alone meaningful without the additional context of subscores by proficiency level, grade, demographics.

Since they're calculating the median growth percentiles for each level of proficiency in year 1, why don't they present them at that level of granularity? Seems like it could be somewhat more insightful.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics