1. How to Interpret Student Growth Plots
The smarter balanced transition and individual student growth reports

2. 2014 Report
For students who took the MSP* in the school year, student reports were similar to the following:
*Students who took the Smarter Balanced
field test did not have scores or SGPs
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

3. 2014 Report
Scale scores were represented by the white dots, with the score displayed at the bottom of the report.
For example, in , this student scored 497 on the Math MSP.
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

4. 2014 Report
Achievement level was also indicated both in the chart and at the bottom of the report.
In , this student was in the L4: Advanced Achievement Level.
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

5. 2014 Report
SGPs were indicated by colored arrows between years, with the SGP itself displayed below.
In , this student received an SGP of 88.
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

6. 2014 Report
Reports also displayed the growth level (low, typical, or high) with the arrow color and text at the bottom of the report.
In , this student had high growth.
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

7. Summary of Changes to the 2015 Report
With the transition to Smarter Balanced, there are changes to the school year reports.
There are still four achievement levels, but the MSP and SBA have different scales and thus the lines showing achievement levels shift for the school year.
The reports display two proficiency levels, one aligned with the MSP and the other with the SBA.
Color “fans” for potential achievement levels based on high, typical, or low growth will be shown for students in grades 4-7
Field test students do not have SGPs for and school years.
SGPs for the school year are omitted from the individual student reports since they represent baseline-referenced SGPs that have a different interpretation.
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

8. 2015 Report
For students who tested in the school year, districts received reports similar to the following.
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

9. 2015 Report Changes
The change to the SBA vertical scale results in a shift in the scales and the lines designating achievement levels.
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

10. 2015 Report Changes
MSP achievement (scores through ) correspond to the four achievement levels on the left.
SBA achievement ( scores) correspond to the levels on the right.
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

11. 2015 Report Changes
Reports for students in grades 4-7 will include a “fan” showing a potential range of scores for the next year based on observed growth of students with similar scores.
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

12. 2015 Report Changes
Students who participated in the SBA field test in did not receive scores for that year.
SGPs require two years of valid scores.
Field test students therefore do not have SGPs from the and school years.
After the assessment, OSPI will be able to calculate SGPs for these students.
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

13. 2015 Report Changes
Students who participated in the SBA field test will not have SGP data for or
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

14. 2015 Report Changes
This year, the individual student reports won’t display the SGPs.
SGPs for the school year used a different methodology (“baseline” SGPs) and thus are not strictly comparable to earlier years and the school year (“cohort” SGPs).
In the school year, roughly 30% of Washington students took the SBA field test and did not receive scores. The MSP subset of students might not have been representative of all students, so SGPs that year compared them to Washington students of previous years. That is called the baseline method.
In the school year, due to the change in tests, the only potential comparison was to academic peers using the Smarter Balanced test. Thus the cohort method for SGPs was used, comparing students to the current cohort of testers with scores in two consecutive years.
Since the interpretations of cohort and baseline SGPS are slightly different, baseline SGPs were excluded from the reports to avoid confusion.
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

15. 2015 Report Changes
SGPs for the school year will not be displayed.
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

16. Similarities of the 2015 Reports
Despite the numerous changes, student growth plots will still display the same information as past years:
Scale Score
Achievement Level
SGP
Growth Level
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

17. 2015 Report Similarities
Scale scores are still represented by white dots and displayed at the bottom of the report.
This student received a 2784 on the SBA Math in
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

18. 2015 Report Similarities Achievement levels are still displayed.
This student was in the Level 4 Achievement Level for SBA Math.
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

19. 2015 Report Similarities
SGPs are still represented by arrows, with the SGP listed at the bottom.
This student received an SGP of 93 for the school year.
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

20. 2015 Report Similarities
Reports still demonstrate high, typical or low growth by the color of the arrow and the growth level is included at the bottom of the report.
This student experienced high growth in the school year.
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018

21. For more information
Please visit the OSPI website for answers to frequently asked questions, webinars, and other materials.
Or contact:
Ashley Colburn
Nick Hassell
Deb Came
Data Analyst
Director, Student Information
(360)
(360)
(360)
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
12/6/2018