annual umes summer institute “making the adjustment” student learning objectives 1
TRANSCRIPT
State Teacher Evaluation ModelProfessional Practice Student Growth
Planning andPreparation
12.5%
Instruction12.5%
Classroom Environment
12.5%
Professional Responsibilities
12.5%
Elementary/Middle School Teacher
Two Tested Areas
20% MSA Lag Measure based on 10% Reading and 10% Math 15% Annual SLO Measure as determined by priority identification at the district or school level 15% Annual SLO Measure as determined by priority identification at the classroom level
Elementary/Middle School Teacher One Tested Area
20% MSA Lag Measure based on either 20% Math or 20% Reading15% Annual SLO Measure as determined by priority identification at the district or school level 15% Annual SLO Measure as determined by priority identification at the classroom level
K-12 Non-Tested Area/Subject Teachers
20% SLO Lag Measure based on School Progress Index Indicators ( Achievement, Gap Reduction, Growth, College and Career Readiness), Advanced Placement Tests, or similarly available measures15% SLO Measure as determined by priority identification at the district or school level 15% Annual SLO Measure as determined by priority identification at the classroom level
High SchoolTeacher Tested Subjects
20% SLO Lag Measure based on HSA Algebra, HSA English 2, HSA Biology, or HSA American Government and including an HSA data point15% Annual SLO Measure as determined by priority identification at the district or school level 15% Annual SLO Measure as determined by priority identification at the classroom level
50 % Qualitative MeasuresDomain percentages proposed by LEA and approved by MSDE
oror
50 % Quantitative MeasuresAs defined below
oror oror
DRAFT 6/6/13
A Student Learning Objective (S.L.O.) is…
Adapted from New York State District-wide Growth Goal Setting Process – Road Map for Districts
5
Objective Summary Statement• Summary of goal
Data Review & Baseline Evidence• Data sources• Instructional starting point for students
Student Population• Student sub groups• Performance level/grade level
Learning Content• Critical content, skill mastery
Instructional Interval• Length of time the teacher has for instruction to meet the target
Target• Projected student performance levels• Rationale for appropriateness and rigor of target
Evidence of Growth• Measures that document growth toward target
Strategies• Methods of instruction that support student growth
Teacher Professional Development and Support• Resources/assistance to increase instructional effectiveness
SLO COMPONENTS
Student Learning Objectives
• Can be used for teachers in both tested and non-tested areas
• Teachers have 2 or 3 SLOs, principals may have more• High school teachers in tested areas and high school
principals must have one SLO with HSA as a data point
• Recommend use of team, grade or content SLO• Recommend alignment of teacher and principal SLOs
with school and district improvement plans
• STEP 1 - Professional Development• STEP 2 - Data Review• STEP 3 – SLO Development• STEP 4 - Review and Approval Conference• STEP 5 - Mid-Interval Conference• STEP 6 - Final SLO Review• STEP 7 – Integration of SLO Results• STEP 8 – Next Steps
SLO Process
7
Ensure evaluator accountability
SLO Quality Assurance Domains
1. Priority of Standard2. Quality of Measure & Evidence3. Rigor of Target4. Action Plan
Student Learning ObjectivesQuality Assurance
8
Quality Assurance Domains
Priority of Standard
The content is aligned to common core, international, national, state, local or industry recognized standards.
The skills and/or knowledge is critical for advancement to future coursework (i.e. if students do not master the standards, they will not be able to progress to the next level).
The content reflects school and district priorities.
The scope of the content is appropriate for the length of the instruction interval.
Quality Assurance Domains
Quality of Measure & Evidence
The source(s) of evidence provides the data you need to determine if the target has been met.
The measure(s) is aligned to the standards and provides evidence relative to the target.
The measure is appropriate for the student population.
The measure meets the criteria established by the state, district or school.
12
Quality Assurance Domains
Rigor of Target The target is anchored in baseline data including historical data (i.e. district, school and student level data) and multiple measures if possible.
The rationale explains how the rigor and attainability of the numerical target were determined. For example, the target is based on the past performance of students or the expectation of a year’s growth or the mastery of a standard or incremental improvement.
The numerical target represents an appropriate amount of student learning for the interval of instruction.
If appropriate, the SLO differentiates targets for individuals or groups of students based on baseline data so that all targets are rigorous yet attainable.
Quality Assurance Domains
Action Plan The selected instructional strategies support students in reaching the target for this SLO.
The identified professional development supports the successful implementation of the SLO.
Frame evaluation process as part of the continuous improvement process
Align State – District - School goals with S.L.O. goals Connect S.L.O process with other aspects of good
teaching Integrate S.L.O. training with Common Core and
other curricular training Integrate S.L.O. development with existing data
review/analysis processes Provide opportunities for collaboration
14
Making the Connections
Teacher & Principal Evaluation System
http://www.marylandpublicschools.org/MSDE/programs/tpe
Dr. Linda Burgee: [email protected] 410-767-0487
15
Student Learning ObjectivesAdditional Resources