Annual UMES Summer Institute“Making the Adjustment”

Student Learning Objectives

1

2

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.

10

Establish Priority of Standard

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: lburgee@msde.state.md.us 410-767-0487

15

Student Learning ObjectivesAdditional Resources