Alternative Measures of Growth to Portfolios

Background

 The TEAM evaluation system generates a level of overall effectiveness (LOE) score for all teachers by combining quantitative and qualitative data. The qualitative measure, teacher observation, constitutes 50% of the LOE, and the quantitative portion is comprised of 15% for student academic achievement and 35% for student academic growth. For teachers in state-tested courses, student academic growth is reflected through the Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System (TVAAS).

 

Measures of student academic growth for select non-state-tested teachers, such as student growth portfolios or alternative measures of growth, allow teachers in non-state-tested courses to represent their individual impact on academic growth. Before alternative measures of student academic growth were developed, the growth portion of the LOE for teachers in non-state-tested courses was based on metrics that were often out of their immediate locus of control. Alternative measures of growth allow non-tested teachers to demonstrate student academic growth that occurs in their own classroom with their own students.

In February 2018, the state legislature amended  T.C.A. §  49-1-302 to ensure that every district and charter organization utilizes at least one approved growth measure for non-tested teachers. Additionally, pursuant to T.C.A. § 49-6-105 and state board policy 5.201, districts and charters that receive pre-kindergarten program approval under T.C.A. §§ 49-6-103 – 49-6-110 (VPK funding) must utilize the pre-K/kindergarten growth portfolio model, or a comparable approved alternative measure of student growth.Based on T.C.A. §  49-1-302, a 2018 report released by the comptroller’s office, recommendations made by the portfolio review committee in 2019, and stakeholder feedback, the department solicited recommendations for alternative measures of student academic growth to portfolios from across the state. These measures were reviewed by the department and recommended to the state board for implementation for the 2020-21 school year.

The guidance provided below reflects the law and state board of education rules and policies as of Oct. 2020. 

Measure Approval and Selection

 

 According to state board evaluation policy 5.201, in order for a measure of student academic growth to be considered for conditional approval, the measure must:

  • be nationally normed,
  • be evidence-based,
  • be available in both mathematics and/or English language arts,
  • have the ability to evaluate all students in the grade band,
  • produce results that represent student growth, not student achievement, and
  • produce results that can be scaled to differentiate performance into five (5) effectiveness groups.

In addition, each proposed student growth measure shall be evaluated by the department for purpose or intended use, alignment to the Tennessee academic standards, frequency of administration during a school year, and modality.

Districts and charter organizations select which measures of student growth they will implement through the annual evaluation flexibility options survey completed by the director of schools. Current options include:

 

All measures outside of student growth portfolios are approved for a one year pilot and do not necessarily constitute a product endorsement by the department. District or charter directors that wish to submit an additional measure for state board approval may do so by completing this form by Nov. 30.

Implementation
  • All costs associated with non-student growth portfolio model implementation are the responsibility of the district or charter.
  • Model selections must be implemented by each teacher within the selected grade band in the district or charter.
  • For ESGI, the same assessment and standard selection within the platform must be implemented per grade band district or charter wide.
  • Both math and ELA must be assessed.
  • Assessment windows are to be determined by the district or charter, but all data collection must be submitted to the department by May 1.
  • Assessments must be administered two times throughout the school year to each student in the course, once at the determined beginning of learning and once at the end. Students that are not enrolled in the course at both points in time should not be included in data collection.
  • Districts and charters are responsible for data collection, growth score generation, and TNCompass upload.
    • Implementation data designed to support the pilot for permanency and state board recommendation must be submitted to the department via this form by May 1.
    • Final growth scores should be upload to TNCompass by May 1 in order to ensure LOE generation. Instructions for TNCompass data import can be found on the TEAM website. Failure to collect and report growth scores for relevant teachers will prevent LOE generation and could be grounds for a grievance.
  • Following the one year pilot, the commissioner may recommend to the state board that the growth measure be approved for continued use.

 

Scaling

 In order to ensure reliability, the following scales must be utilized for calculating student growth.Pre-Kindergarten:

  • Star Early Literacy (SEL)1
Growth Category Star Early Literacy Assessment Scale Score Growth
Level 5 165+
Level 4 131-164
Level 3 96-130
Level 2 61-95
Level 1 60 or Below
  • ESGI2
Growth Category Student Growth Indicator
Level 5 4.20-5.00
Level 4 3.40-4.19
Level 3 2.60-3.39
Level 2 1.80-2.59
Level 1 1.00-1.79
  • SECI- Scholastic Early Childhood Inventory3
Growth Category Scholastic Early Childhood Inventory
Level 5 169-204
Level 4 133-168
Level 3 97-132
Level 2 61-96
Level 1 0-60

Kindergarten:

  • Star Early Literacy (SEL)1
Growth Category Star Early Literacy Assessment Scale Score Growth
Level 5 165+
Level 4 131-164
Level 3 96-130
Level 2 61-95
Level 1 60 or Below
  • ESGI2
Growth Category Student Growth Indicator
Level 5 4.20-5.00
Level 4 3.40-4.19
Level 3 2.60-3.39
Level 2 1.80-2.59
Level 1 1.00-1.79
  • iReady4
Growth Category Median Growth
Level 5 115 and above
Level 2 105-114
Level 3 91-104
Level 4 81-90
Level 1 80 or below

1 Scaling developed collaboratively by Wilson County Schools, Franklin Special School District, and McMinn County Schools.

2 Scaling developed collaboratively by Rutherford County Schools, Franklin Special School District, and Marshall County Schools.

3 Scalingdeveloped by Marshall County Schools.

4 Scaling developed collaboratively by Clinton City Schools, Franklin Special School District, and Maryville City Schools.

Contact

 With questions or for more information, please contact Portfolio.Questions@tn.gov.