OAGC has long supported value-added assessement as a fairer system of education accountability that would be more appropriate for those students who are already performing above the proficiency bar. Though the computations behind it are complex, the concept of value-added assessment is quite simple: for every year a student attends school he or she should make at least one year's worth of growth. We have long suspected that for high achieving students this is usually not the case. As Ohio moves to incorporate a value-added growth measure into its accountability system in the 2007/2008 school year, it is useful to look at the many aspects of value-added assessment from the original concept conceived by Dr. William Sanders to the pilot growth models submitted to the US Department of Education to modify the current AYP models. Below are a number of links to documents for those of you who are interested in value-added assessment. It is, by no means, an exhaustive look at value added assessment, but it should provide food for thought. This overview contains:
- Proposed New Ohio Value-Added Rules -- January, 2011
- Link to new University of Chicago study showing NCLB has Hurt Low and High Achieving Students
- Draft of the State Board Value-Added Rules (PDF)
- Links to general information about value added assessment
- Links to information about how the US Department of Education might incorporate growth into the AYP measure included in the NCLB.
- Links to information about value-added in Ohio including the OAGC value-added powerpoint presented at the NAGC affiliate conference in Spring, 2006.
- What is Value-Added Assessment? -- Link to an Overview
- Summary of VAA from gifted perspective -- Link to Portland TAG org.
- Value-Added Assessment - Links to Research Papers from SAS along with a very interesting summary of a longitudinal study on achievement data and an article on various state experiences with value added assessment.
- Miscellaneous Value-Added Assessment - News and Journal Articles
- Hershberg, Ted, Simon, Virginia Adams, and Lea-Kruger, Barbara. "The Revelations of Value Added," The School Administrator. Dec. 2004.
- Hershberg, Ted, Simon, Virginia Adams, and Lea-Kruger, Barbara. "Measuring What Matters," The American School Board Journal. Feb. 2004.
- Willard, Dennis and Oplinger, Dennis. "Index measures 'Johnny,'" Beacon Journal. May 2003.
- Drury, Darrel and Doran, Harold "The Value of Value-Added Analysis," Policy Research Brief for National School Board Association. Vol. 3(1) Jan. 2003.
- Doran, Harold. "Adding Value to Accountability," Educational Leadership. Nov.2003. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
- Archer, Jeff. "Sanders 101," Education Week. Vol.18(34) May 1999.
- Editorial "Putting 'Value Added' Data to Good Use," Education Week. Vol.18 (34) May 1999.
- Value Added Assessment of Liberal Education Peer Review Winter/Spring 2002 Volume 4, Number 2/3
- Wisconsin Education Association Research Brief on Value-Added Assessment 2004
Links to information about how the US Department of Education might incorporated growth into the AYP measure included in the NCLB.
In November of 2005, US Secretary of Education, Margaret Spellings, announced a new pilot for states who wished to use a growth measure in the AYP calculation under NCLB (No Child Left Behind). The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) which includes NCLB is up for reauthorization in 2007.
- Link to the USDOE May 17, 2006 press release selecting Tennessee and North Carolina as the two growth model projects.
- USDOE document with links to state applications from Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Oregon, and Tennessee. With the exception of Oregon, the proposals are highly disappointing with regard to the growth expectations for students who are beyond proficient levels. Oregon is the only state that requires districts to continue a growth projectory for those students beyond proficiency. A few states, including Ohio, account for students above proficient who appear to be sliding back under the proficiciency bar. Gifted advocates may wish to read these applications -- especially the application from Oregon.
- USDOE fact sheet on the pilot program. Twenty states submitted applications to be inluded in this pilot. Ohio's application was rejected as expected due to the lack of sufficient number of years of data.
- Link to the non-partisan commission on NCLB on the Aspen Institute website. This website invites the public to share comments on NCLB. Gifted advocates may wish to share their disappointment aside from the Oregon proposal, high achieving students will not fare any better under the pilot growth systems. The site also has a list of the commissioners and a list of hearing dates and locations. The only scheduled hearing, so far, on the growth mechanism is to be held in Atlanta, Georgia on May 22nd.
- Ohio Accountability Task Force Documents from August 28, 2006 meeting
- Ohio Accountability Task Force Documents from May 10, 2006 meeting
- Value Added in Ohio powerpoint presented at the NAGC conference
- Battelle for Kids Value Added Gifted FAQ (technical)
- Battelle for Kids Value Added General FAQ
- OAGC/OMSA Powerpoints from Dec. 9th conference, "Where's Your 5th Quintile?"
- Joel Giffin's presentation handout
- Westerville powerpoint
- Joel Giffin's "Instead of No Child Behind article"
- Ohio Department of Education growth proposal to the USDOE
- Link to the Ohio Accountability Task Force Committee -- Next meeting May 10, 2006
