Using the Colorado Growth Model in place of a value-added model depresses evaluation scores for teachers with more English language learner students¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr?·q2
Currency · newest study 2013 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2016: tool and model accuracy changes quickly
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? Replacing a value-added model with the Colorado Growth Model lowers the evaluation scores of teachers with more English language learner students. → Elias Walsh 2013
Evidence¶
Elias Walsh 2013¶
Elias Walsh, Eric Isenberg. (2013). How Does a Value-Added Model Compare to the Colorado Growth Model? Working Paper 22. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research. https://www.mathematica.org/publications/how-does-a-value-added-model-compare-to-the-colorado-growth-model
q2 · i? · associational · r?
The working paper's summary of its comparison of teacher evaluation scores from a typical value-added model with results from the Colorado Growth Model reports that CGM use "depresses the evaluation scores for teachers with more English language learner students". No effect size or test statistic is printed in the available text.
"finds that use of the CGM in place of a value-added model depresses the evaluation scores for teachers with more English language learner students"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Using the Colorado Growth Model in place of a value-added model increases evaluation scores for teachers of low-achieving students — related
- The paper tests two previously unevaluated VAM model variations: teacher-year level average peer characteristics and demographic variation in the lagged-achievement relationship — related
- Most differences in evaluation scores between the Colorado Growth Model and value added are not related to the characteristics of students' teachers — related
- Using Colorado Growth Model growth percentiles in place of value added would have altered evaluation consequences for 14% of DCPS teachers — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
cgm-substitution-depresses-scores-ell-student-teachers |
title |
Using the Colorado Growth Model in place of a value-added model depresses evaluation scores for teachers with more English language learner students |
description |
Using the Colorado Growth Model in place of a value-added model depresses evaluation scores for teachers with more English language learner students |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2013 |
recheck_by |
2016 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-08 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — elias-walsh-2013 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.