GROWTH-TO-STANDARD USING GEORGIA MILESTONES
AN OVERVIEW
Damian W Betebenner
National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment
Dover, New Hampshire February 16th, 2017
BACKGROUND
• Since their development, SGP analyses have supported both norm- and
criterion-referenced student growth analyses.
• Norm-referenced results are more prominent used than the
criterion-referenced analyses, particularly with respect to
accountability.
• Criterion-referenced SGP analyses were submitted and approved as
part of the Growth Model Pilot Program under Secretary Spellings
during the Bush Administration.
• There is renewed interest in looking at growth-to standard with ESSA
for state summative and ELP assessment.
BACKGROUND
• The norm- and criterion-referenced component of SGP analyses are
the SGP (student growth percentile) and the AGP (adequate growth
percentile).
• AGP calculation requires establishing an ending achievement target
and a time frame to reach the target.
• The most common achievement goal is proficiency/career & college
readiness.
• The most common time frame is 3 years.
BACKGROUND
• AGPs are calculated using student growth projections that are
calculated using coefficient matrices derived from SGP analyses.
• SGP analyses produce coefficient matrices for each of 100 quantile
values.
• The coefficient matrices allow for the calculation of 100 percentile
growth trajectories for a student.
• AGPs are determined by examining the trajectories and finding the
minimal trajectory that allows the student to reach the desired
destination in the given time-frame.
• AGP are like scale-score trajectories but they smooth “difficulty”.
Georgia: 2016 ELA
Norm & Criterion Referenced Growth & Achievement
Percentile Growth Trajectory
2016 Achievement Percentile
SGP
SGP trajectories
trajectories for
for aa 3rd
3rd grade
grade student
student starting
starting from
from the
the Level
Level 1/Level
1/Level 22 cut.
cut.
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 EOCT
ELA ELA ELA ELA ELA ELA Grade 9 Lit
BACKGROUND
• Two types of projections are calculated: Lagged and Current
projections.
• Lagged projections provide the AGP targets used for growth-to-
standard.
• Current projections are used to provide forward looking targets.
• When baseline analyses are used, lagged targets and current targets
don’t change. Annual re-norming can cause some discrepancies
between current and lagged targets.
BACKGROUND
• Times frames used for growth-to-standard can either be fixed in time
or fixed in duration (“rolled forward”).
• Fixed time frames mandate the student reach proficiency at a
particular time/grade.
• Fixed in duration time frames (e.g., 3 years) are usually extended each
year to yield new targets.
• AGP calculations can support either approach to setting a time-frame.
• Fixed in time approaches usually yield a “balloon payment” for students
who have failed to make intermediate targets. This causes problems for
accountability systems.
SGP/AGP Illustration: 2009-2010
Advanced
Reading
Achievement
Proficient ●
DEMO Reading
Scale Score
● Catch Up
Target Growth
Part Proficient Level Percentiles
Very High 81st − 99th
High 61st − 80th
Unsatisfactory Typical 40th − 60th
Low 20th − 39th
Very Low 1st − 19th
Grade 3 Grade 4
Scale Score 449
Achievement Level
Achievement Target
Unsatisfactory
Proficient (529)
Achievement
Growth Percentile
Growth Level
Growth Target Catch Up (64)
Growth
SGP/AGP Illustration 2010-2011
Advanced Reading
Achievement
DEMO Reading
● Scale Score
Proficient
● Catch Up
Growth
Target
Catch Up ●
● Level Percentiles
Target ●
Very High 81st − 99th
Part Proficient High 61st − 80th
● Typical 40th − 60th
Low 20th − 39th
Unsatisfactory
Very Low 1st − 19th
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5
Scale Score 449 533
Achievement Level
Achievement Target
Unsatisfactory Part Proficient
Proficient (538) Proficient (562)
Achievement
Growth Percentile 69
Growth Level
Growth Target
High
Catch Up (75) Catch Up (76)
Growth
SGP/AGP Illustration 2011-2012
Advanced
Reading
Achievement
Proficient ● ●
● Catch Up
DEMO Reading
Catch Up ●
Target
● Target Scale Score
Growth
Part Proficient Level Percentiles
Very High 81st − 99th
High 61st − 80th
Typical 40th − 60th
Unsatisfactory
Low 20th − 39th
Very Low 1st − 19th
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6
Scale Score 449 533 579
Achievement Level
Achievement Target
Unsatisfactory Part Proficient Part Proficient
Proficient (567) Proficient (586)
Achievement
Growth Percentile 69 85
Growth Level
Growth Target
High Very High
Catch Up (74) Catch Up (71)
Growth
SGP/AGP Illustration 2012-2013
About this copy
Growth-To-Standard Using Georgia Milestones — Georgia Department of Education, February 2017.
This is an image-based copy of the original Keynote slides; builds and animations are flattened.