1. Student Learning and Growth Goals Foundations 1

2. Outcomes Understand purpose and requirements of Student Learning and Growth (SLG) goals Review achievement vs. growth Practice with sample goals

3. Purpose of SLG Goals ESEA Waiver and SB 290 Accountability not the only reason Reflective practice is essential for growth as an educator Data collected and analyzed supports informed classroom and building decisions

4. Required Evaluation and Support System Components (1)(2)(3)(4)(5) Standards of Professional Practice Differentiated Performance Levels: 4 Levels Multiple Measures Evaluation and Professional Growth Cycle Aligned Professional Learning Student Learning and Growth Goals are one of three categories of evidence

5. What are SLG Goals? Detailed, measurable goals for student learning and growth Aligned to standards and clearly describe specific learning targets students are expected to meet Based on student learning needs identified by a review of baseline data Goals are rigorous, yet attainable

6. Achievement Goals vs. Growth Goals Achievement GoalStudent Learning Growth Goal Does not consider baseline data Student goals are a “one- size-fits-all” and do not include ALL students Students are expected to cross the same finish line regardless of where they start. Start with baseline data Includes ALL students regardless of ability level Students can show various levels of growth –students may have individualized finish lines.

7. Achievement GoalStudent Learning Growth Goal 80% of 3 rd Grade students will be proficient on the district’s Common Formative Assessment for multiplication and division. 100% of the 3rd Grade students will improve and make the following growth on the district’s Common Formative Assessment for multiplication and division: Pre score of 0%- 25% will improve to 60% or higher Pre score of 33% will improve to 66% or higher Pre score of 42% will improve to 73% or higher Pre score of 58% will improve to 82% or higher

8. Activity: Goal Sorting Sort the slips into two groups by Achievement Goals and Student Learning and Growth Goals Discuss reasoning of their group selection

9. SLG Requirements for 2015-16 REQUIRED 8 components including Rationale Minimum of 2 SLG goals each year Category 1 SLG goals for teachers and principals using SGPs in grades 4-8 in ELA and math Oregon Matrix used for summative evaluation RECOMMENDED Content is focused, not everything you teach Context can help ascertain instructional needs Tier goals/targets where appropriate Include the support YOU need

10. Required Components of SLG Goals Content (Standards) Assessment Context Baseline Data Student Growth Goals (Targets) Rationale Strategies Professional Learning & Support www.ode.state.or.us/wma/teachlearn/educatoref fectiveness/slgg-guidance.doc

11. Tiered Goals Students enter the classroom with a range of knowledge and skills Tiered goals help ensure that each student is appropriately challenged Tiers typically set for groups of students with similar performance Tiered goals allow for more realistic expectations for goal attainment

12. Quality Review Checklist Takes place during the goal setting phase of the professional growth cycle For an SLG goal to be approved, all criteria must be met Version with guiding questions available in SLG section of toolkit www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=3836

13. Scoring SLG Goals All teachers and administrators set and score 2 goals each year Category 2 goals are scored using state SLG Scoring Rubric Category 1 goals are scored using Student Growth Percentiles (SGPs)

14. Requirements for Assessments Teachers Tested Grades/Subjects Goal 1: Category 1 Goal 2: Category 1 or 2 Non-tested Grades/Subjects Goal 1: Category 1 or 2 Goal 2: Category 1 or 2 Administrators Principals/VPs Goal 1: Category 1 Goal 2: Category 1 or 2 Other Administrators Goal 1: Category 1 or 2 Goal 2: Category 1 or 2

15. Role of SLG Goals in Evaluation Districts required to use the Oregon Matrix in determining summative scores Y axis represents combined performance on Professional Practice (PP) and Professional Responsibility (PR) X axis represents combined performance on 2 SLG goals Informs plan for professional growth Matrix 101 PowerPoint on website www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=3637

16. Activity: Sample Goal Review Work with a partner to look at the sample goals provided Which goals do you think are strong? Which need more work? In what areas? Share out

17. ESEA Waiver Update Oregon’s waiver approved for 3 years with conditions removed For evaluation purposes statewide assessments will only be used as a measure of SLG goal attainment for those grades that have baseline data Tested grades and subjects are now ELA and Math 4-8

18. Y-Axis = PP/PR Rating Add up all component scores for total points possible; Divide by number of components in your rubric; Get a rating between 1 and 4; Use Y-Axis threshold to determine PP/PR level: 3.6 - 4.0 = 4 2.81-3.59 =3 1.99 – 2.8 = 2 * < 1.99 = 1 *PP/PR Scoring Rule: If the educator scores two 1’s in any PP/PR component and his/her average score falls between 1.99- 2.499, the educator’s performance level cannot be rated above a 1. Example District rubric with 20 components Component ratings: 17 components were rated 3; and 3 were rated 2 = 57 points possible 57/20=2.85  2.85 = Level 3 PP/PR Rating

19. X-Axis = SLG Rating SLG performance level based on two goals Two-year cycle select two of four goals Score SLG goals Get a rating between 1 and 4; Use X-Axis thresholds to determine SLG level: 4 = both goals 4s 3 = both goals 3s; one goal 3 & one goal 4; one goal 2 & one 4 2 = both goals 2s; one goal 2 & one 3; one goal 1 & one 3; one goal 4 & one 1 1= both goals 1s; one goal 1 & one 2 Example First SLG was rated 2 A second SLG was rated 4  X-Axis Rating = Level 3 SLG Rating

20. *Inquiry Process Example: Y-axis = 3 & X-axis = 3

21. Resources Toolkit www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=3759 Guidance Documents FAQs, SLG Guidance, Oregon Matrix, Assessment Guidance, Who is Evaluated under SB 290 Sample SLG Goals Resources from Districts Additional technical assistance from ODE

22. Questions?

23. Contacts Educator Effectiveness Team: Tanya Frisendahl tanya.frisendahl@state.or.us tanya.frisendahl@state.or.us Sarah Martin sarah.martin@state.or.us sarah.martin@state.or.us Sarah Phillips sarah.phillips@state.or.us sarah.phillips@state.or.us Brian Putnam brian.putnam@state.or.us brian.putnam@state.or.us