student learning and growth goals foundations 1. outcomes understand purpose and requirements of...
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 Goal Student 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 finishlines.
Achievement Goal Student Learning Growth Goal80% of 3rd 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 2015-16REQUIRED
• 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 & Supportwww.ode.state.or.us/wma/teachlearn/educatoreffectiveness/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
www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=3836
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 websitewww.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=3637
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:• 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
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
Y-A
xis:
PP
/ P
R
LEVEL 4
Collegial
*SLG Inquiry
3
Facilitative or
Collegial
* SLG Inquiry
3 or 4
Facilitative
4
Facilitative
4
LEVEL 3
Collegial or Consulting
*SLG Inquiry
2 or 3
Collegial
3
Collegial
3
Collegial
3
LEVEL 2
Consulting
2
Consulting
2
Consulting
2
Collegial or Consulting
* PP/PR Inquiry
2 or 3
LEVEL 1
Directed
1
Directed
1
Consulting or
Directed
* PP/PR Inquiry
1 or 2
Consulting
* PP/PR Inquiry
2
LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3
LEVEL 4
X-Axis: SLG
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
Questions?
ContactsEducator Effectiveness Team:• Tanya Frisendahl
[email protected] • Sarah Martin
[email protected] • Sarah Phillips
[email protected] • Brian Putnam