Student Learning and Growth Goals Foundations 1. Outcomes Understand purpose and requirements of Student Learning and Growth (SLG) goals Review achievement.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Educator Effectiveness: Making Connections & Rubric Analysis Presented by the Oregon Department of Education August 2013.
Advertisements

SLG Goals, Summative Evaluations, and Assessment Guidance Training LCSD#7 10/10/14.
Gwinnett Teacher Effectiveness System Training
Math Content Network Update The Power of Mistakes Student Engagement Culture of Learning Growth Mindset Congruent Tasks.
Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and Support Systems Alignment of State and Federal Requirements SB 290 ESEA Waiver Oregon Framework.
Student Learning Targets (SLT) You Can Do This! Getting Ready for the School Year.
NOTE: To change the image on this slide, select the picture and delete it. Then click the Pictures icon in the placeholde r to insert your own image. CONNECTING.
Student Learning and Growth Goals 101: Requirements and Recommendations Spring 2015 Webinar.
Welcome SESC ISLN January. Domain 1: Planning & Preparation Domain 2: Classroom Environment Domain 3: Instruction Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities.
Connections to the TPGES Framework for Teaching Domains Student Growth Peer Observation Professional Growth Planning Reflection.
Student Growth Developing Quality Growth Goals II
APS Teacher Evaluation A SMART Process for Student and Teacher Growth.
August 2014 The Oregon Matrix Model was submitted to USED on May 1, 2014 and is pending approval* as of 8/8/14 *Please note content may change Oregon’s.
PROPOSED MULTIPLE MEASURES FOR TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS
Artifacts 101: The Role of Artifacts in Educator Support and Evaluation Spring 2015 Webinar.
Matrix 101: The Oregon Matrix and Summative Evaluations Spring 2015 Technical Assistance Webinar.
Introduction to Student Learning Objectives (SLOs)
REGIONAL PEER REVIEW PANELS (PRP) August Peer Review Panel: Background  As a requirement of the ESEA waiver, ODE must establish a process to ensure.
Putting the Pieces Together…. Understanding SLOs.
Student Learning Objectives 1 Phase 3 Regional Training April 2013.
Student Learning targets
The Oregon System for Teacher and Administrator Professional Growth and Support System Focus on Student Learning and Growth Goals October
Stronge Teacher Effectiveness Performance Evaluation System
PRESENTED BY THERESA RICHARDS OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AUGUST 2012 Overview of the Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and.
Compass: Module 2 Compass Requirements: Teachers’ Overall Evaluation Rating Student Growth Student Learning Targets (SLTs) Value-added Score (VAM) where.
Using Student Growth Percentiles in Educator Evaluations
Information for school leaders and teachers regarding the process of creating Student Learning Targets. Student Learning targets.
Evaluation Team Progress Collaboration Grant 252.
Student Learning and Growth Goals: Collaborative Writing Practice August 2015 A challenge from last year that you would like to avoid this year OR An effective.
STUDENT GROWTH MEASURES Condensed from ODE Teacher Training.
Student Growth Measures in Teacher Evaluation Using Data to Inform Growth Targets and Submitting Your SLO 1.
Student Growth within the Teacher Professional Growth and Effectiveness System (TPGES) Overview 1.
FEH BOCES Student Learning Objectives 3012-c.
Developing High Quality Student Learning Objectives
Student Growth Focus on… PROCESS NOT CONTENT.
Using Student Growth Percentiles in Educator Evaluations.
Student Growth Percentiles Basics Fall Outcomes Share information on the role of Category 1 assessments in evaluations Outline steps for districts.
Primary Purposes of the Evaluation System
SLG Goals: Reflecting on the First Attempt Oregon Collaboration Grant Statewide Grantee Meeting November 21, 2013.
SEPT 2014 Administrator Student Growth Goal Planning.
A Closer Look Quality Goals Appropriate Assessments.
TEACHER EVALUATION After S.B. 290 The Hungerford Law Firm June, 2012.
OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION COSA PRINCIPAL’S CONFERENCE 2015 ODE Update on Educator Effectiveness.
Student Growth within the Teacher Professional Growth and Effectiveness System (TPGES) Overview 1.
DISTRICT NAME HERE Using Student Growth Percentiles (Option A)
Teacher Effectiveness: All of Your Questions Answered Matt Gill, Tammy Meyer, Robin Curtis 10/15/2015.
Learning More About Oregon’s ESEA Waiver Plan January 23, 2013.
Student Learning Objectives (SLO) Resources for Science 1.
Changes in Professional licensure Teacher evaluation system Training at Coastal Carolina University.
Last Revised: 10/01/15. Senate Bill 290 has specific goal-setting requirements for all licensed and administrative staff in the State of Oregon. In ,
Educator Evaluation and Support System Basics. Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and Support Systems Alignment of State and Federal.
OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION COSA LAW CONFERENCE 2015 ODE Update on Educator Effectiveness.
Teacher Evaluation Process Update March 13, 2015 SCASPA Roundtable.
Presented at the OSPA Summit 2012 January 9, 2012.
The Use of Artifacts as Evidence in Educator Evaluation Fall 2015.
Vision: Every child in every district receives the instruction that they need and deserve…every day. Oregon Response to Intervention Vision: Every child.
Best Practices in CMSD SLO Development A professional learning module for SLO developers and reviewers Copyright © 2015 American Institutes for Research.
1 Teacher Evaluation Institute July 23, 2013 Roanoke Virginia Department of Education Division of Teacher Education and Licensure.
Understanding Growth Targets and Target Adjustment Guidance for Student Learning Objectives Cleveland Metropolitan School District Copyright © 2014 American.
DECEMBER 7, 2015 Educator Effectiveness: Charter School Webinar.
The New Educator Evaluation System
The New Educator Evaluation System
Phyllis Lynch, PhD Director, Instruction, Assessment and Curriculum
SOESD’s Teacher Evaluation & Support System
The New Educator Evaluation System
Teacher Evaluation “SLO 101”
Student Learning and Growth Goals Foundations
Outcomes Review 8 components of Student Learning and Growth (SLG) goals Understand requirements for scoring SLG goals Recognize the role of SLG goals.
Student Learning and Growth Goals Foundations
Roadmap November 2011 Revised March 2012
Presentation transcript:

Student Learning and Growth Goals Foundations 1

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

SLG Requirements for 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

Required Components of SLG Goals Content (Standards) Assessment Context Baseline Data Student Growth Goals (Targets) Rationale Strategies Professional Learning & Support fectiveness/slgg-guidance.doc

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

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

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)

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

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

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

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

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: = = – 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 , 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

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

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

Resources Toolkit 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

Questions?

Contacts Educator Effectiveness Team: Tanya Frisendahl Sarah Martin Sarah Phillips Brian Putnam