Using Colorado Growth Model growth percentiles in place of value added would have altered evaluation consequences for 14% of DCPS teachers¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr?·q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
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 value-added teacher scores with Colorado Growth Model median growth percentiles would have changed evaluation consequences for 14% of DCPS teachers. → Elias Walsh 2015
Evidence¶
Elias Walsh 2015¶
Elias Walsh, Eric Isenberg. (2015). How Does Value Added Compare to Student Growth Percentiles? Statistics and Public Policy, vol. 2, issue 1. https://www.mathematica.org/publications/how-does-value-added-compare-to-student-growth-percentiles doi:10.1080/2330443x.2015.1034390
q2 · i? · associational · r?
Observational analysis of DCPS teacher evaluation data comparing a typical value-added model with the Colorado Growth Model. The study reports that "use of growth percentiles in place of value added would have altered evaluation consequences for 14% of DCPS teachers."
"Using data from the District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS), we examine changes in evaluation scores across the two methods for all teachers and for teacher subgroups. We find that use of growth percentiles in place of value added would have altered evaluation consequences for 14% of DCPS teachers."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Most differences in evaluation scores between the Colorado Growth Model and value added are not related to the characteristics of students' teachers — related
- Using the Colorado Growth Model in place of a value-added model increases evaluation scores for teachers of low-achieving students — related
- Using the Colorado Growth Model in place of a value-added model depresses evaluation scores for teachers with more English language learner students — related
- Federal policy requirements drove growth modeling and teacher value-added evaluation under NCLB and RTTP — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
cgm-versus-value-added-changed-evaluation-14-percent-dcps |
title |
Using Colorado Growth Model growth percentiles in place of value added would have altered evaluation consequences for 14% of DCPS teachers |
description |
Using Colorado Growth Model growth percentiles in place of value added would have altered evaluation consequences for 14% of DCPS teachers |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2015 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-08 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — elias-walsh-2015 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.