About 46% of the lowest 5% achieving schools show the same growth as the highest 5% achieving schools¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2023: baselines and conditions change

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Comparing growth distributions of the top and bottom 5% of schools selected on Spring 2016 achievement, about 46% of schools at the lowest end of the achievement distribution have the same growth as schools at the highest end. → Andy Hegedus 2018

Evidence¶

Andy Hegedus 2018¶

Andy Hegedus, Ed.D. (2018). Evaluating the Relationships between Poverty and School Performance. NWEA Research Report. https://www.nwea.org/research-data-galleries/poverty-and-school-performance

q2 · i? · associational · r2

Observational comparison of the top 5% versus bottom 5% achieving schools (selected on Spring 2016 MAP Growth achievement) and their growth distributions (Figures 2.5–2.6). The article reports "about 46% of schools at the lowest end of the spring achievement distribution have the same growth as schools at the highest end," while noting the top 5% achieving schools tend to grow students more than the bottom 5%.

"The growth distributions reveal that about 46% of schools at the lowest end of the spring achievement distribution have the same growth as schools at the highest end."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Growth of schools selected by fall achievement differs by subject: bottom 5% math schools tended to grow worse, while reading showed similar average growth — related
• Four high-poverty case study schools sustained rising achievement for all subgroups for 5 to 10 years while pursuing personalization — related
• 77% of the lowest 5% achieving schools (spring reading) grow their typical student better than the 30th percentile — related