Abstract
This paper compares two functionally different approaches to analyzing standardized test data: least-squares based value-added analysis, geared principally to supporting teacher and school accountability; and Betebenner’s (2009) student growth percentiles, which focuses primarily on tracking individual student progress in a normative context and projecting probable trajectories of future performance. Applying the two methods to Australian standardized numeracy and reading test scores (NAPLAN) in grades 3 to 5 and 7 to 9, we find that although they are used differently, the two methods share key structural elements, and produce similar quantitative indicators of both individual student progress and estimated school effects.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
