[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-584421-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-584421-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","growth-models-issues-and-advice-from-the-states-a-guide-of-the-statewide-longitudinal-data-systems-grant-program","GROWTH MODELS - Issues and Advice from the States - A Guide of the Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems Grant Program","","Growth Models presents issues and practical guidance drawn from multiple states’ participation in the SLDS Grant Program working group. It outlines how states review and select student growth model types—such as trajectory, projection, value table, value-added, and student growth percentile—and explains their core purposes, calculations, and intended uses for accountability and instructional decision-making. The guide also summarizes common development and implementation questions raised to the SLDS State Support Team, emphasizing longitudinal data system impacts and best practices gathered between July 2011 and February 2012.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/growth-models-issues-and-advice-from-the-states-a-guide-of-the-statewide-longitudinal-data-systems-grant-program/584421/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/growth-models-issues-and-advice-from-the-states-a-guide-of-the-statewide-longitudinal-data-systems-grant-program/584421.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"WPS_1786070896","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",9,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What student growth model types are covered in the guide?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"The guide discusses trajectory, projection, value table, value-added, and student growth percentile models, describing how they support accountability and related reporting needs.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How does a trajectory model typically work?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"A trajectory model compares a student’s prior test scores to proficiency at a later time, then creates a linear path to close the achievement gap over a defined period (often three to four years for NCLB compliance).",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Why did states participate in the SLDS working group?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"States joined to review current growth models and assess impacts on longitudinal data systems, while sharing strategies, best practices, and challenges during development, implementation, and use.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},584421,1792190988,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,115,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":112,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,30,"research-report",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":112,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},549768072016,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_155a257f0dc6eb9ab79c44ca47cae57d","GROWTH MODELS  \nIssues and Advice from the States  \nA Guide of the  \nStatewide Longitudinal Data Systems Grant Program  \nJuly 2012  \nThis product of the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems (SLDS) Grant Program was developed with the help of knowledgeable staff from state education agencies and partner organizations. The content of this guide was derived from ongoing work of a working group on growth models coordinated and facilitated by the SLDS Grant Program’s State Support Team. The views expressed do not necessarily represent those of the IES SLDS Grant Program.  \nWorking Group Members  \nWilliam Bonk  \nColorado Department of Education  \nJuan Copa  \nFlorida Department of Education  \nNeal Gibson  \nArkansas Department of Education  \nThomas Gillin  \nPennsylvania Department of Education  \nJohn Nau  \nPennsylvania Department of Education  \nAdrian L. Peoples  \nDelaware Department of Education  \nXiaoping Wang  \nIowa Department of Education  \nChristopher Woolard  \nOhio Department of Education  \nSupport Staff  \nJim Campbell  \nSLDS Program, State Support Team  \nRobin Taylor  \nSLDS Program, State Support Team  \nRosemary Collins SLDS Program  \nLindsey Huster  \nSLDS Program, Publications Team  \nFor more information on the IES SLDS Grant Program, additional publications and resources, or for support with SLDS development or use, please visit [http://nces.ed.gov/programs/SLDS](http://nces.ed.gov/programs/SLDS).  \n|  | Type of Growth Model |  |  |  |  |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |\n|  | Trajectory Projection Value table Value-added Colorado |  |  |  |  |\n| Used by | FL | AR, IA, OH, PA | AR, DE, IA | FL, OH, PA | CO, AR |\n| Purpose | Compares individual student performance to proficiency and creates trajectory\u003Cbr>for student to close achievement gap within 3-4 years | Estimates an\u003Cbr>individual student’s\u003Cbr>performance in the future based on actual scores from the past | Assigns points to an\u003Cbr>individual student based on year-toyear movement towards proficiency\u003Cbr>or maintenance of proficiency | Rates schools based on changes\u003Cbr>in student perfor\u003Cbr>mance that are bet\u003Cbr>ter than expected | Provides information about an individual student’s\u003Cbr>or a group of stu\u003Cbr>dents’ progress to\u003Cbr>parents, teachers,\u003Cbr>and administrators |\n| Calculates | Actual or projected growth | Actual or projected growth | Closing of the gap\u003Cbr>toward proficiency or maintenance of proficiency (if already proficient) | Growth that is bet\u003Cbr>ter than expected | How much relative\u003Cbr>growth a student or\u003Cbr>group of students made |\n| Intended use | Rewards growth that is on target with the trajectory | Rewards growth | Rewards growth | Rewards better\u003Cbr>than expected growth | Rewards growth |\n\nThe Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems (SLDS) Grant Program was asked by several states to review current growth models with the goal of determining the impact of different models on longitudinal data systems and capturing some best practices  \nthat states are using in the implementation process. From July 2011 through February 2012, representatives from Colorado, Arkansas, Ohio, Iowa, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Florida participated in a working group session andfollow-up discussions facilitated by members of the State Support Team (SST). 1 This working group allowed states to more easily discuss and share strategies, best practices, and challenges related to the use of growth models. Specifically, these states have provided the following information to the SST in response to questions about their specific growth model(s) related to:  \n• types andpurposes of growth model(s) used;  \n• description of model(s) used;  \n• data elements requiredfor each model; and  \n• issues and barriers experienced during development, implementation, or use.  \nTypes of Growth Models  \nAll of the participating states are using a type of student growth model for state or No Child Left Behind (NCLB) accountability such as trajectory, projection, value tabl","cbCaio5ze9BDXoXg","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaio5ze9BDXoXg","pdf",3684327,15,"English","# Working Group Overview\n## Support Staff and Member States\n# Types of Growth Models\n## Model Uses, Purposes, and Calculations\n# Trajectory Model\n## Proficiency Gaps and Time Horizons","[{\"question\":\"What student growth model types are covered in the guide?\",\"answer\":\"The guide discusses trajectory, projection, value table, value-added, and student growth percentile models, describing how they support accountability and related reporting needs.\"},{\"question\":\"How does a trajectory model typically work?\",\"answer\":\"A trajectory model compares a student’s prior test scores to proficiency at a later time, then creates a linear path to close the achievement gap over a defined period (often three to four years for NCLB compliance).\"},{\"question\":\"Why did states participate in the SLDS working group?\",\"answer\":\"States joined to review current growth models and assess impacts on longitudinal data systems, while sharing strategies, best practices, and challenges during development, implementation, and use.\"}]","GROWTH MODELS - Issues and Advice from the States - A Guide of the Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems Grant Program | PDF",1792050948,38]