The data and analysis on this page is from 2019. View and download the most recent policy data and analysis on Measures of Student Growth in Ohio from the State of the States 2022: Teacher and Principal Evaluation Policies report.
The state should require instructional effectiveness to be the determinative criterion of any teacher evaluation. The bar for this goal was raised in 2017.
Impact of Student Growth: Ohio requires that between 50 percent (under its original framework) and 35 percent (under its alternative framework) of a teacher's overall evaluation rating be comprised of student growth measures.
For teachers who exclusively instruct subjects for which value-added measures are available, the teacher-level value-added measure comprises the full 50 percent of a teacher's overall evaluation rating. For teachers who instruct value-added courses but not exclusively, the teacher-level value-added measure is included in a teacher's overall evaluation rating at a level that is proportionate to the teacher's schedule (10-50 percent), with district measures proportionately added as well (0-40 percent). For teachers with approved vendor-assessment teacher-level data available, the vendor assessment (10-50 percent) is combined with district measures (0-40 percent) for a total of 50 percent. For teachers with no teacher-level value-added or approved vendor assessment data available, district measures such as student learning objectives count for 50 percent of a teacher's overall evaluation rating.
However, districts may also choose an alternative teacher evaluation framework, which only requires the student growth measure to comprise 35 percent of a teacher's overall rating.
Districts will not use value-added results for evaluation until results from the state tests administered in the 2016-2017 school year are incorporated into the evaluation ratings in the spring of 2018. In the meantime, districts have three options: 1) enter into a memorandum of understanding to allow continued use of value-added results, 2) use student growth measures other than value-added results, or 3) rely on teacher-performance measures to determine the overall rating.
Ohio does not require that teachers meet student growth goals or be rated at least effective for the student growth portion to be rated overall effective. In either framework, teachers can earn the lowest score (least effective) with zero points for student growth and still earn an overall rating of skilled, provided that they earn a rating of accomplished for teacher performance.
State's Role in Evaluation System: Ohio districts develop evaluation systems that are consistent with the state's framework.
Ohio Revised Code 3319.112, -.114 2016-17 Information: http://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Teaching/Educator-Evaluation-System/Ohio-s-Teacher-Evaluation-System/10Tips_Evaluation2016-2017.pdf.aspx Summative Rating Information: http://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Teaching/Educator-Evaluation-System/Ohio-s-Teacher-Evaluation-System/Overview-of-Formula-041516-2.pdf.aspx
Require instructional effectiveness to be a determinative criterion of any teacher evaluation.
Although Ohio requires that objective evidence of student growth be included in a substantial way in a teacher's evaluation rating, it does not play a profound role in a teacher's overall evaluation rating. Ohio should ensure that a teacher is not able to earn an overall rating of effective if he or she is rated less-than-effective at increasing student growth.
Ohio recognized the factual accuracy of this analysis.
7A: Measures of Student Growth
Many factors should be considered in formally evaluating a teacher; however, nothing is more important than effectiveness in the classroom. Value-added models are an important tool for measuring student achievement and school effectiveness. These models have the ability to measure individual students' learning gains, controlling for students' previous knowledge and background characteristics. While some research suggests value-added models are subject to bias and statistical limitations, rich data and strong controls can eliminate error and bias. In the area of teacher quality, examining student growth offers a fairer and potentially more meaningful way to evaluate a teacher's effectiveness than other methods schools use.
Unfortunately, districts have used many evaluation instruments, including some mandated by states, which are structured so that teachers can earn a satisfactory rating without any evidence that they are sufficiently advancing student learning in the classroom. Teacher evaluation instruments should include factors that combine both human judgment and objective measures of student learning.