New York State Education
Department
Using Growth Measures for
Educator Evaluation
August 2012
1
www.engageNY.org
By the End of This Presentation….
 You should be able to:
– Explain how growth ratings (HEDI) and scores will be obtained
from educator overall MGPs and confidence ranges based on
2011-12 State-provided growth measures
2
www.engageNY.org
Evaluating Educator Effectiveness 2011-12
Growth
20%
Locally Selected
Measures
20%
Other Measures
60%
3
• Student growth on state assessments (stateprovided)
• Student learning objectives
• Student growth or achievement
• Options selected through collective
bargaining
• Rubrics
• Sources of evidence: observations, visits,
surveys, etc.
www.engageNY.org
Key Points about NYS Growth Measures
– We are measuring student growth and not
achievement
 Allow teachers to achieve high ratings regardless of incoming levels
of achievement of their students
– We are measuring growth compared to similar
students
 Similar students: Up to three years of the same prior achievement,
three student-level characteristics (economic disadvantage, SWD, and
ELL status)
Every educator has a fair chance to demonstrate
effectiveness on these measures regardless of the
composition of his/her class or school.
4
www.engageNY.org
Review of Terms
 SGP (student growth percentile):
– the result of a statistical model that calculates each student’s change in
achievement between two or more points in time on a State assessment
or other comparable measure and compares each student’s
performance to that of similarly achieving students
 Similar students:
– students with the similar prior test scores,(up to three years), and ELL,
SWD, and economic disadvantage status
 Unadjusted and adjusted MGP (mean growth
percentile):
– the average of the student growth percentiles attributed to a given
educator
– For evaluation purposes, the overall adjusted MGP is used. This is the
MGP that includes all a teacher or principal’s students and takes into
account student demographics.
5
www.engageNY.org
MGPs and Statistical Confidence
MGP
Lower
Limit
87
Upper
Limit
Confidence Range
• NYSED will provide a 95% confidence range, meaning we can be 95% confident that
an educator’s “true” MGP lies within that range. Upper and lower limits of MGPs will
also be provided.
• An educator’s confidence range depends on a number of factors, including the
number of student scores included in his or her MGP and the variability of student
performance in the classroom.
6
www.engageNY.org
Growth Ratings and Score Ranges 2011-12
Growth Rating
Description
Growth Score
Range
(2011–12)
Highly
Effective
Well above state
average for similar
students
18–20
Effective
Results meet state
average for similar
students
9–17
Developing
Below state average
for similar students
3–8
Ineffective
Well below state
average for similar
students
0–2
The growth scores and ratings are based on an
educator’s combined MGP.
7
www.engageNY.org
HEDI Classification Approach:
Teachers and Principals
 Highly Effective (Well Above Average) requires:
– An educator’s MGP is greater than 1.5 standard deviations above the State mean.
– For 2011-12 this means MGP’s greater than or equal to 69 for teachers.
 Effective (Average) requires:
– An educator’s MGP is between 1 standard deviation below the State mean and 1.5
standard deviations above the State mean.
– For 2011-12, MGPs of 42 through 68 for teachers.
 Developing (Below Average) requires:
– An educator’s MGP is between 1 and 1.5 standard deviations below the State mean.
– For 2011-12, MGPs of 36 through 41 for teachers.
 Ineffective (Well Below Average) requires:
– An educator’s MGP is more than 1.5 standard deviations below the State mean.
– For 2011-12 this means MGPs less than or equal to 35 for teachers.
8
www.engageNY.org
From MGPs to Growth Ratings: Teachers
Rules on last slide result in these HEDI criteria for 2011-12
Mean Growth Percentile
Is your
MGP ≥ 69?
Yes
Confidence Range
Is your Lower
Limit > Mean
of 52?
HEDI Rating
Yes
No
Is your
MGP 42-68?
Yes
Any
Confidence
Range
Yes
Highly Effective:
Results are well
above state average
for similar students
Effective:
Results equal state
average for similar
students
No
Is your
MGP 36-41?
Yes
Is your Upper
Limit < Mean
of 52?
Yes
Developing:
Results are below
state average for
similar students
Yes
Ineffective:
Results are well
below state average
for similar students
No
Is your
MGP ≤ 35?
9
Yes
Is your Upper
Limit < 44?
www.engageNY.org
From MGPs to Growth Ratings: Principals
For principals the rules lead to these HEDI criteria for 2011-12
Mean Growth Percentile
Is your MGP
≥ 61?
Yes
Confidence Range
HEDI Rating
Is your Lower
Limit > Mean
of 51?
Highly Effective:
Results are well
above state average
for similar students
Yes
No
Is your MGP
45-60?
Yes
Any
Confidence
Range
Yes
Effective:
Results equal state
average for similar
students
No
Is your MGP
41.5-44?
Yes
Is your Upper
Limit < Mean
of 51?
Yes
Developing:
Results are below
state average for
similar students
Yes
Ineffective:
Results are well
below state average
for similar students
No
Is your MGP
≤ 41?
10
Yes
Is your Upper
Limit < 46?
www.engageNY.org
Illustrating Teacher Growth Ratings: (Another Way)
(2011-12 cut scores)
MGP 1
Well
Below
Average
(35)
Below
Average
(41)
Well
Above
Average
(69)
Average
(52)
MGP
MGP
MGP
MGP
MGP
MGP
Upper limit
CR for
Ineffective
(44)
11
www.engageNY.org
MGP
MGP 99
Illustrating Teacher Growth Ratings:
(2011-12 cut scores)
MGP 1
Well
Below
Average
(35)
Below
Average
(41)
Average
(52)
Well
Above
Average
(69)
MGP 99
MGP
MGP
Ineffective
Highly Effective
Upper limit
CR for
Ineffective
(44)
12
www.engageNY.org
Illustrating Teacher Growth Ratings
(2011-12 cut scores)
Well
Below
Average
(35)
MGP 1
Below
Average
(41)
Well
Above
Average
(69)
Average
(52)
MGP 99
MGP
MGP
Ineffective
Highly Effective
MGP
Developing
MGP
Effective
MGP
Effective
MGP
Developing
13
Upper CI
for
Ineffective
(44)
www.engageNY.org
MGP
Effective
NYS Growth Subcomponent Results for
2011-12: Teachers
Rating &
Points (2011–12 )
Highly Effective
18–20
2206
7%
25,578
77%
Developing
3–8
3341
10%
Ineffective
0–2
2004
6%
Effective
9–17
Total
14
Number of
Percent of
Teacher MGPs Teacher MGPs
33,129
www.engageNY.org
NYS results for 2011-12: Principals
Rating &
Points (2011–12 )
15
Number of
Percent of
Principal MGPs Principal MGPs
Highly Effective
18–20
223
6%
Effective
9–17
2821
79%
Developing
3–8
269
8%
Ineffective
0–2
243
7%
Total
3556
www.engageNY.org
Assignment of Points with HEDI Category
16
HEDI
Points
Min
MGP
Max
N of
MGP Teachers
HEDI
Points
Min
MGP
0
3
28
660
0
16
36.5
71
1
29
32
651
1
37
39
75
2
33
35
693
2
39.5
41
97
3
29
35
241
3
34.5
41
22
4
36
37
826
4
41.5
42
65
5
38
38
495
5
42.5
42.5
40
6
39
39
535
6
43
43
37
7
40
40
561
7
43.5
43.5
41
8
41
41
683
8
44
44
64
9
36
44
2661
9
41.5
46
270
10
45
46
2001
10
46.5
48
350
11
47
49
3376
11
48.5
49
209
12
50
51
2432
12
49.5
50.5
328
13
52
54
3648
13
51
52
313
14
55
56
2415
14
52.5
53.5
324
15
57
59
3144
15
54
55
316
16
60
62
2624
16
55.5
57
353
17
63
68
3277
17
57.5
63.5
358
18
69
70
662
18
61
61.5
65
19
71
73
666
19
62
63
70
20
74
96
878
20
63.5
74
88
Teachers
Principals
Point value of 3 includes
educators with MGPs in the
Ineffective category but CRs
above 44 (for teachers) and
above 46 (for principals)
Point value of 9 includes
educators with MGPs in the
Developing category but CRs
above state average
Point value of 17 Includes
educators with MGPs in the
Highly Effective category but
CRs below state average
www.engageNY.org
Max
N of
MGP Schools
17
www.engageNY.org