This Methodological Brief gives an overview of statistical methods used to gauge academic growth and discusses issues surrounding the measurement of growth in gifted populations. To illustrate some of these issues, we describe a growth model that examines differences in summer lag between gifted and nongifted students. We also provide recommendations for educators and researchers who are interested in documenting the academic growth of gifted students.
AlexanderK. L.EntwisleD. R.OlsonL. S. (2001). Schools, achievement, and inequality: A seasonal perspective. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23, 171-191. doi:10.3102/01623737023002171
2.
BetebennerD. (2009). Norm- and criterion-referenced student growth. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 28(4), 42-51.
3.
BlankR. K. (2010, June). State growth models for school accountability: Progress on developing and reporting measures of student growth. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
4.
BongersI. L.KootH. M.ven der EndeJ.VerhulstF. C. (2003). The normative development of child and adolescent problem behavior. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112, 179-192.
5.
BollenK. A.CurranP. J. (2006). Latent curve models: A structural equation perspective. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
6.
BrykA. S.RaudenbushS. W. (1987). Applications of hierarchical linear models to assessing change. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 147-158.
7.
CronbachL. J.FurbyL. (1970). How we should measure “change”: Or should we?Psychological Bulletin, 74, 68-80.
8.
CTB/McGraw-Hill. (2008). Terra Nova (3rd ed.). Monterey, CA: Author.
9.
DoranH. C. (2003). Adding value to accountability. Educational Leadership, 61(3), 55-59.
10.
DowneyD. B.von HippelP. T.BrohB. A. (2004). Are schools the great equalizer? Cognitive inequality during the summer months and the school year. American Sociological Review, 69, 613-635. doi:10.1177/000312240406900501
11.
DowneyD. B.von HippelP. T.HughesM. (2008). Are “failing” schools really failing? Removing the influence of nonschool factors from measures of school quality. Sociology of Education, 81, 242-270.
12.
DuncanT. E.DuncanS. E.StrykerL. A. (2006). An introduction to latent variable growth curve modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
13.
EntwisleD. R.AlexanderK. L. (1992). Summer setback: Race, poverty, school composition, and mathematics achievement in the first two years of school. American Sociological Review, 57, 72-84. doi:10.2307/2096145
14.
GoldschmidtP.RoschewskiP.ChoiK.AutyW.HebblerS.BlankR.WilliamsA. (2005). Policymakers guide to growth models for school accountability: How do accountability models differ? (Technical Report). Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
15.
Harcourt Educational Measurement. (2000). Metropolitan achievement test (8th ed.). San Antonio, TX: Author.
16.
Harcourt Educational Measurement. (2004). Stanford achievement test (10th ed.). San Antonio, TX: Author.
17.
KlineR. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
18.
LeaheyE.GuoG. (2001). Gender differences in mathematical trajectories. Social Forces, 80, 713-732.
19.
LinnR. L. (2008). Educational accountability systems. In RyanK. E.ShepardL. A. (Eds.), The future of test-based educational accountability (pp. 3-24). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
20.
LohmanD. F.KorbK. A. (2006). Gifted today but not tomorrow? Longitudinal changes in ability and achievement during elementary school. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 29, 451-484.
21.
McCoachD. B. (2010a). Dealing with dependence (Part II): A gentle introduction to hierarchical linear modeling. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54, 252-256.
22.
McCoachD. B. (2010b). Hierarchical linear modeling. In HancockG. R.MuellerR. O. (Eds.), Quantitative methods in the social and behavioral sciences: A guide for researchers and reviewers (pp. 123-140). New York, NY: Routledge.
23.
McCoachD. B.AdelsonJ. (2010). Dealing with dependence: Understanding the effects of clustered data. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54, 152-155.
24.
McCoachD. B.KaniskanB. (2010). Using time varying covariates in multilevel growth models. Frontiers in Quantitative Psychology and Measurement. Advance online publication. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00017
25.
McCoachD. B.MaduraJ.RamboK.O’ConnellA. A.WelshM. (in press). Longitudinal data analysis. In TeoT. (Ed.), Handbook of quantitative methods for educational research. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.
26.
McCoachD. B.O’ConnellA. A.ReisS. M.LevittH. (2006). Growing readers: A hierarchical linear model of children’s reading growth over the first two years of school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 14-28.
27.
McCoachD. B.RamboK.WelshM. (2012). Issues in the analysis of change. In SecolskyC. (Ed.), Handbook of measurement, assessment, and evaluation in higher education (pp. 216-228). New York, NY: Routledge.
28.
MehtaP. D.NealeM. C. (2005). People are variables too: Multilevel structural equations modeling. Psychological Methods, 10, 259-284. doi:10.1037/1082-989x.10.3.259
29.
National Association for Gifted Children. (2012). Growth in achievement of advanced students. Retrieved from http://nagc.org
30.
Northwest Evaluation Association. (2011). Measures of academic progress and measures of academic progress for primary grades technical manual. Portland, OR: Author.
31.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
32.
NyeB.KonstantopoulosS.HedgesL. V. (2004). How large are teacher effects?Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26, 237-257.
33.
PophamW. J. (1999). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
34.
RamboK. E.McCoachD. B. (2012). Using summer growth patterns to assess the impact of schools on high achieving and gifted students. Manuscript submitted for publication.
35.
RaudenbushS. W. (2001). Toward a coherent framework for comparing trajectories of individual change. In SayerA. G. (Ed.), New methods for the analysis of change (pp. 35-64). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
RaudenbushS. W.BrykA.CheongY. F.CongdonR. (2004). HLM 6. Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.
38.
RogosaD.BrandtD.ZimowskiM. (1982). A growth curve approach to the measurement of change. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 726-748.
39.
SingerJ. D.WillettJ. B. (2003). Applied longitudinal data analysis: Modeling change and event occurrence. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
40.
StoelR. D.GarreF. G. (2011). Growth curve analysis using multilevel regression and structural equation modeling. In HoxJ. J.RobertsJ. K. (Eds.), Handbook of advanced multilevel analysis (pp. 97-112). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
41.
SubotnikR. F.Olszewski-KubiliusP.WorrellF. C. (2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12(1), 3-54. doi:10.1177/1529100611418056
42.
University of Iowa Test Programs. (2005). Iowa Tests of Basic Skills. Chicago, IL: Riverside.
