Rating the Quality of an SLO Educator Effectiveness System Module

DESIRED OUTCOMES This module is designed to increase the understanding of what constitutes “quality” in SLOs by utilizing the “Rating for the Quality of Student Learning Objectives” rubric. Copyright: The National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment (2013)

Rubric for Rating the Quality of Student Learning Objectives The purpose of this rubric is to provide criteria to teachers, school administration, and district administration for acceptable SLOs. The left column lists the four components of the SLO: learning goal, assessments, and targets, and instructional strategies. The top row displays the range of ratings: acceptable, needs improvement, and insufficient. For any SLO to be used for teacher performance ratings, all four aspects must meet the “acceptable quality” rating on this rubric. Rubric Copyright: The National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment (2013)

The Learning Goal Component Includes: Big Idea Standards Rationale Interval of Instruction The Learning Goal consists of five sub-components: Learning Goal Big Idea Standards Rationale Interval of Instruction 11/11/2018

Rubric: Rating the Quality of SLOs Acceptable Quality Quality Needs Improvement Insufficient Quality Learning Goal Assessments and Scoring Targets Instructional Strategies To get clarity on the differences of the three levels for each SLO aspect, let’s look at one row at a time. Reviewing the Learning Goal row of the rubric, highlight or underline the words and phrases that help you differentiate the three levels of ratings: What are the differences between and Acceptable and Quality Needs Improvement? What are the differences between Quality Needs Improvement and Insufficient Quality? Copyright: The National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment (2013)

Differences Between Levels of Learning Goal The highlighted phrases represent the differences between the three levels of the quality rating rubric. 11/11/2018

Rating the Learning Goal Sample This learning goal thoroughly describes what students will know and be able to do by the end of the interval of instruction. 11/11/2018

Rating the Learning Goal Sample Big idea: Strong arguments require writers to read, research, gather data, analyze it, and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of multiple perspectives. This big idea is a declarative statement that describes a writing concept that goes beyond grade levels in the and represents the most important learning of the course. It is directly related to the learning goal. 11/11/2018

Rating the Learning Goal Sample Standards/Benchmarks: 7.W.1 Write arguments to support claims with clear reasons and relevant evidence. a. Introduce claim(s), acknowledge alternate or opposing claims, and organize the reasons and evidence logically. b. Support claim(s) with logical reasoning and relevant evidence, using accurate, credible sources and demonstrating an understanding of the topic or text. c. Use words, phrases, and clauses to create cohesion and clarify the relationships among claim(s), reasons, and evidence. d. Establish and maintain a formal style. e. Provide a concluding statement or section that follows from and supports the argument presented. 7.L.1: Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking. 7.L.2: Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English capitalization, punctuation, and spelling when writing. The standards are listed in full statements that are clearly aligned to the learning goal. 11/11/2018

Rating the Learning Goal Sample The written argument is considered a key skill for college and career readiness and has received a special place of emphasis in the CCSS (CCSS Appendix A). The state has identified the written argument as a key strategy in preparing students to be college and career ready. Our school has decided to focus heavily on written argument as a vehicle to help prepare students for the type of writing they will to do in college and in many careers. This is reflected in our Academic and Financial Plan. The ability to integrate multiple sources as support for a written argument is a DOK 3. The rationale clearly explains why the learning goal is an appropriate focus addressing a priority learning need for students as it describes College and Career skill alignment as well as it being a priority area for the state and school. It also clearly explains how the learning goal addresses high expectations and deep understanding. 11/11/2018

Rating the Learning Goal Because all learning goal sub-components are of acceptable quality and are all in alignment, this learning goal is acceptable. 11/11/2018

The Assessment, Scoring and Criteria Component Includes: Assessments, Scoring and Criteria Summative Assessments Formative Assessment Process Scoring rubric or guide The Assessment, Scoring, and Criteria section consists of three sub-components: Summative Assessments Formative Assessment Process Scoring Rubrics and/or Scoring Guides 11/11/2018

Rubric: Rating the Quality of SLOs Acceptable Quality Quality Needs Improvement Insufficient Quality Learning Goal Assessments, Scoring and Criteria Targets Instructional Strategies To get clarity on the differences of the three levels for each SLO aspect, let’s look at one row at a time. Reviewing the Assessments, Scoring and Criteria row of the rubric, highlight or underline the words and phrases that help you differentiate the three levels of ratings: What are the differences between and Acceptable and Quality Needs Improvement? What are the differences between Quality Needs Improvement and Insufficient Quality? Copyright: The National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment (2013)

Differences Between Levels of Assessments and Scoring The highlighted phrases represent the differences between the three levels of the quality rating rubric. 11/11/2018

Rating Assessments, Scoring and Criteria Sample Assessments will include: Small-group and whole-class discussions; peer-group analysis of reasonable and credible supporting evidence; journals, exit passes, sample drafts of argument components; Self and peer assessments using checklists and student-friendly rubrics to determine progress as needed or appropriate to the learning. In addition: Each quarter, students will write argumentative essays on controversial topics, self-selected or chosen by the teacher. (e.g., Should school uniforms be required? Should companies market to children? Are cell phones dangerous? Do violent video games cause behavior problems?). Students will have access to several print and/or digital sources reflecting different points of view on their topic. Students will have time to revise and edit their work.   Teachers will score individual papers using the SBAC written argument rubric. http://www.smarterbalanced.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/TaskItemSpecifications/EnglishLanguageArtsLiteracy/ELARubrics.pdf The described assessments are in alignment with the Learning Goal, measuring the entirety of the goal and is in consistence with the depth of knowledge and cognitive process. There is an attached rubric with frequency of implementation defined as well as how student learning will be formatively monitored. 11/11/2018

Rating Assessments, Scoring and Criteria Because all learning goal sub-components are of acceptable quality and are all in alignment with each other and the Learning Goal, the Assessments, Scoring and Criteria component is acceptable. 11/11/2018

The Expected Targets Component Includes: Three Starting Point Data Sources Initial Performance Groups The Expected Targets section consists of three sub-components: Three Starting Point Data Sources Initial Performance Groups Expected Targets 11/11/2018

Rubric: Rating the Quality of SLOs Acceptable Quality Needs Improvement Insufficient Quality Learning Goal Assessments and Scoring Expected Targets Instructional Strategies Review the Expected Targets row of the rubric, highlight or underline the words and phrases that help you differentiate the three levels of ratings: What are the differences between and Acceptable and Quality Needs Improvement? What are the differences between Quality Needs Improvement and Insufficient Quality?

Differences Between Levels of Expected Targets The highlighted phrases represent the differences between the three levels of the quality rating rubric. 11/11/2018

Rating Expected Targets Sample At the beginning of the school year, students in my English class read short informational articles on different sides of a controversial topic. They also watched several related short video clips. Through small- and large-group discussions, students were asked to develop and support a claim, and then write a short essay scored using the ELA 4-point rubric provided by the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium. Other data sources used for grouping include 2 samples from the students’ grade 6 writing portfolio. On the initial class essay: 5 students scored a 1; 22 students scored a 2; 3 students scored a 3; 0 students scored a 4. Based on the data sources, with more consideration given to the short argument essay students were placed into four groups Three data sources are used to determine initial performance groups. 11/11/2018

Rating Expected Targets Sample Performance Groups Students Expected Targets Below Proficiency 4 Approaching Proficiency 17 Proficient 6 23 Above Proficiency 3 Outcomes are differentiated for the various performance groups. They are rigorous, realistic and attainable. 11/11/2018

Rating Expected Targets Sample The expected targets are based on at least three data sources that demonstrates student starting points. Rigorous, realistic and differentiated outcomes are determined from the initial performance groups. Therefore, the Expected Target component is acceptable. 11/11/2018

The Instructional Strategies Component Includes: Evidence-based strategies Strategies that addresses gaps in learning The Instructional Strategies section consists of two sub-components: Evidence-based Strategies Strategies that addresses gaps in learning 11/11/2018

Rubric: Rating the Quality of SLOs Acceptable Quality Needs Improvement Insufficient Quality Learning Goal Assessments and Scoring Targets Instructional Strategies Review the Instructional Strategies row of the rubric, highlight or underline the words and phrases that help you differentiate the three levels of ratings: What are the differences between and Acceptable and Quality Needs Improvement? What are the differences between Quality Needs Improvement and Insufficient Quality?

Differences Between Levels of Instructional Strategies The highlighted phrases represent the differences between the three levels of the quality rating rubric. 11/11/2018

Rating Instructional Strategies Sample All Students: Students will work closely with the criteria for strong arguments. They will analyze strong and weak models of written arguments to guide their understanding. Students will score and discuss sample arguments. Direct instruction will be provided during focused mini lessons on how to state a claim as well as how to quote, paraphrase and summarize in order to incorporate the words of others into an argument. Students will receive direct instruction and multiple examples of how to address alternate or opposing claims. They will use strategies such as the “doubting game” and “believing game”. Students will use graphic organizers to record primary arguments as well as the pros and cons of each argument as they read about their topics. Students will take part in multiple partner and small group discussions with their peers on the pros and cons of various arguments. Students will be guided to use appropriate academic and domain specific vocabulary during their discussions. Students will be taught to annotate written sources as they gather evidence. Students will also be taught close reading strategies as they examine multiple sources. Instructional strategies are evidence-based and are specific to the Learning Goal 11/11/2018

Rating Instructional Strategies Sample Below and Approaching Proficiency Students: Students will receive additional instruction in small groups. They will be provided sentence starters and/or paragraph frames to structure their arguments. They will receive some additional computer based instruction on grammar conventions to support their understanding. They will be given appropriately leveled reading material on the topics that are being investigated prior to being given reading materials at grade level. They receive additional direct instruction and peer practice on incorporating evidence from sources into their arguments. Highly engaging videos will be used as sources in order to model and practice the process of incorporating sources. They will practice using academic vocabulary in speaking and writing and supportive word walls will be maintained to support this work. Strategies that address gaps in learning are described. 11/11/2018

Rating Instructional Strategies The instructional strategies component describes evidence-based strategies that are specific to the Learning Goal. Additional strategies are planned to address gaps in learning. Therefore, the Instructional Strategies component is acceptable. 11/11/2018

Overall SLO Quality Rating Because all of the components are of acceptable quality and each section is aligned, the SLO is acceptable overall. 11/11/2018

Thank you! Educator Effectiveness System Website www.doeohr.weebly.com Hawaii Department of Education 2013