Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

. This video is the fifth in a series of five videos created to support the understanding of SLOs. The Teacher Expectations/Elective Rating video addresses.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: ". This video is the fifth in a series of five videos created to support the understanding of SLOs. The Teacher Expectations/Elective Rating video addresses."— Presentation transcript:

1

2 This video is the fifth in a series of five videos created to support the understanding of SLOs. The Teacher Expectations/Elective Rating video addresses Section 5 of the SLO template and will outline the following… Establishing Levels of Projected Teacher Performance Factors to Consider/Helpful Hints Determining the Elective Rating The documents that support this video are located on the WPAIUCC SLO Moodle (http://bit.ly/slopa)http://bit.ly/slopa 2

3 3

4 The SLO Process allows for a great deal of flexibility and control. The four Teacher Expectation levels are established by educators prior to the evaluation period. Each performance level is populated with a percentage ranging from 0% to 100% distributed among all four levels. The principal and teacher need to have a conversation about how the ranges were established. 4

5 How do you define proficiency? Are you satisfied with the % of students meeting proficiency? What data and decisions did you consider in determining your levels of scores? Regardless, it is a local decision! Helpful Hints: Use historical data, if available, in determining the percentage ranges. Start with the range for the Proficient level. 5

6 This element is not completed until after performance data is collected, reviewed and evaluated against each indicator, and in the aggregate, against 5a criteria. The evaluator then uses the summary of the actual performance data and the percentages specified in 5a to determine the teacher’s resulting performance level. 5b Notes/Explanation Element provides an opportunity for teachers to offer information. 6

7 1.Teacher Expectations 5a. Level Failing 0% to 59% of students will meet the PI targets. Needs Improvement 60% to 79% of students will meet the PI targets. Proficient 80% to 89% of students will meet the PI targets. Distinguished 90% to 100% of students will meet the PI targets. IndicatorsPI #1 Jumping PI #2 Hopping PI #3 Sprinting Number of Students who Meet Expectations (i.e., meet the Performance Indicator in 3a) Total Number of Students Assessed100 Individual Performance Indicators: How well did the students do?: SLO is based on 100 students in each indicator. Indicator #1: 75 of your 100 students met the expectation Indicator #2: 80 of your 100 students met the expectation Indicator #3: 85 of your 100 students met the expectation =240 students met the expectations240 divided by 300 (total number of students) =.80 or 80% 80%PROFICIENT 7

8 1.Teacher Expectations 5a. Level Failing 0% to 70% of students will meet the PI targets. Needs Improvement 71% to 79% of students will meet the PI targets. Proficient 80% to 91% of students will meet the PI targets. Distinguished 92% to 100% of students will meet the PI targets. IndicatorsPI #1 : 80%/+ on “5 th Grade Common Social Studies Assessment - 3 rd Quarter” PI #2: 3/+ on “Social Studies Research Project Rubric” PI #3: 80%/+ on “Final Exam” Post-test or at least 30% growth from Pre- to Post-test Number of Students who Meet Expectations (i.e., meet the Performance Indicator in 3a) 1518 Total Number of Students Assessed20 Individual Performance Indicators: How well did the students do?: SLO is based on 20 students in each indicator. Indicator #1: 15 of your 20 students met the expectation Indicator #2: 18 of your 20 students met the expectation Indicator #3: 18 of your 20 students met the expectation = 51 students met the expectations 51 divided by 60 (total number of students) =.85 or 85% 85%PROFICIENT 8

9 If you need more information regarding SLOs, please contact your IU representative listed below. IU 1: JoBeth McKee IU 3: Paul Cindric IU 4: Cathleen Cubelic, Anthony Conti IU 5: Kirk Shimshock, Linda Lorei, and Jim Gallagher IU 7: Natalie Smith IU 27: Lori Ceremuga, Marsha Hughes and Cristine Wagner-Deitch IU 28: Lynne Snyder 9


Download ppt ". This video is the fifth in a series of five videos created to support the understanding of SLOs. The Teacher Expectations/Elective Rating video addresses."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google