An Introduction and Results of a Field Test

 Julie Oxenford O’Brian  Director, Center for Transforming Learning and Teaching  Catalyzing and co-creating the transformation of learning environments through the use of assessment so that all are engaged in learning and empowered to positively contribute in a global society.  Some of our Partnerships: Jefferson County, Karval, CDE, other states (Hawaii, Mississippi)

 Write:  at least one question you have about student learning objectives for teacher evaluation on an index card.  Share:  Your Name  Role  A question about student learning objectives

Participants will:  Define student learning objectives (SLOs).  Understand how SLOs can be used as part of educator evaluation.  Learn about an approach to implementing SLOs  Understand what worked, what was challenging and next steps for implementing SLOs based on a field test in Jeffco (spring 2013)

 HB – Colorado’s Achievement Plan for Kids  SB – Educational Accountability Act  SB – Educator Effectiveness Act  February, Colorado receives waiver from certain provisions of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act  HB Read Act

Colorado reform initiatives over the last five years require the use of assessment, to:  Inform instruction  Determine students’ readiness for school (determine if they need a school readiness plan)  Evaluate school and district performance  Measure the progress of school and district improvement efforts  Measure principal effectiveness (one component)  Measure teacher contribution to student learning growth (50% of evaluation)  Identify students with significant reading deficiencies

 SB10-191: Ensuring Quality Instruction through Educator Effectiveness  Evaluating the effectiveness of educators is crucial to improving the quality of education in Colorado.  Educators must be evaluated in significant part (50%) based on the impact they have on the learning growth of their students.  New systems in place by school year (hold- harmless for educators).

Requirements for measuring teacher contribution to student learning growth...  One or more measure of student learning growth that can be attributed to an individual licensed professional.  One or more measure of student learning growth that can be collectively attributed.  When available, state summative assessment results (TCAP)  When available, Colorado Growth Model results (median growth percentiles)

 Site-based, with local discretion  Must meet state requirements  Depends upon approach to measuring the goals.  Options include:  Student Learning Objectives  Equated Pre- and Post-Assessment  ?? An alternative (that meets state requirements)

“A participatory method of setting measurable goals, or objectives, for a specific assignment or class, in a manner aligned with the subject matter taught, and in a manner that allows for the evaluation of the baseline performance of students and the measureable gain in student performance during the course of instruction.” (CRR ) A.K.A. Student Academic Growth Objectives

 Actively involve educators throughout the process  Support effective teaching practices  Expectations situated directly within the classroom context  Adaptable to new assessment resources  Adaptable to all teaching assignments  Have face validity – developed by educators

1. Student Learning Focus (SLO Learning Goal) 2. Measure(s) of student learning growth in relationship to the student learning goal  Evidence that will be used (assessment instruments)  Scoring 3. Performance Targets (How the evidence will be analyzed and interpreted)

 Learning Goal (an objective statement)  Rationale for the Learning Goal  Standards Reference  Success Criteria  Student Population  Interval of Instruction

 Evidence Source(s) (Assessment/Measure)  Alignment of Evidence Source(s) to Learning Goal  Data Collection and Scoring

 Baseline Data  Performance Groups  Student Performance Target(s) (expected gain)  Rational for Targets

 Select a partner. Consider the Student Learning Objectives Form (draft) and Example  Review each of the components, considering the following questions:  About which components do you need further clarification?  How could teachers develop each of these components? With which might they struggle? Why?

 Turn to SLO Learning Goals Handout:  How to identify a learning goal  What makes a good learning goal  Do you agree with the description of what makes a good learning goal?  How do the steps in the process for identifying SLO learning goals align with other efforts in the district?

 Develop an approach that can be used in Jeffco to measure student learning growth in a way that could be attributed to an individual educator.  Ensure this approach focuses educators on efforts that are likely to improve student learning at the same time (incorporate formative assessment practice).  Learn from “trying it out” in real schools.  Building the plane while flying it.

Educator Evaluation should  Honor the belief that effective employees increase student achievement  Provide a roadmap for actionable, honest, and timely feedback  Lead to a district wide increase in excellence

Assessment Mania The measurement of educators’ individual contribution to student learning growth should not cause massive assessment development in classrooms across the district.

 District Advisory Team  Development of a Jeffco approach to SLOs  Participating Schools  Teacher Participation in: pre-assessment, six on- site learning sessions, trying out practices within their classrooms, observations and onsite coaching, completing an example SLO.  School Leader participation in training, observation/coaching  Training Resources

 Day One Training: Overview and Introduction to Student Learning Objectives and Formative Assessment Practice  Day Two Training: Student Learning Goals  Day Three Training: Assessment and Data Collection Methods (including informal assessment)  Day Four Training: Evaluating Assessment Instruments and Formative Feedback  Day Five Training: Scoring  Day Six Training: Setting Performance Targets and Self & Peer Assessment

 Five days at one school site and six days at the other  Format varied  Observation with de-brief  Work session  CTLT Coach, School Instructional Coach, Principal

 Day One: Intro to Student Learning Objectives and Identifying SLO Learning Goals  Day Two: More on SLO Learning Goals and Data Collection Methods  Day Three: Evaluating Assessment Instruments  Day Four: Scoring  Day Five: Setting Performance Targets and Points Calculation

 Built teacher capacity in a number of areas (aligned with observation rubric)  Teachers opened up about practice and skill gaps  Created focus for principal conversations with teachers  Focused principal and coaching support  Became school approach to implement standards (engaged teachers in purposefully investigating CAP and standards docs)  Connected data to daily practice

 Finding time (outside classroom) and timing it right (during the school year)  Managing 2 nd order change for many teachers  Revealing school culture issues  Teachers need support – can’t do on their own  Teachers needed to work in teams  Initially teachers did not recognize skill gaps  Teacher skill gaps (objectives vs. major learning goals, assessment literacy, perceptions of assessment, common vocabulary)

Comparability? Let Every Flower Bloom?

Field Test Focus: Student Learning Objectives

STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES EQUATED PRE-POST- ASSESSMENT  Focus is an SLO Learning goal (one major goal for course/class)  Analyze baseline data to identify student performance groups  Describe assessment(s) used to measure progress towards learning goal  Set performance targets for each student performance group  Monitor progress/adjust instruction  At the end of the instructional interval determine whether student performance groups met targets  Focus is all content for course/class (in one content area)  Select technically rigorous assessment instrument(s).  Provide evidence of technical quality of instrument and growth scores that will be used.  Determine how to aggregate individual student growth scores to ratings for the population.  Monitor progress/adjust instruction  At the end of the instructional interval calculate individual student growth ratings and aggregate to ratings for the student population

FIELD TESTINDIVIDUAL GROWTH GOALS  Student Learning Goals  Learning Goal Statement  Rationale  Standards Reference  Success Criteria  Student population and interval of instruction  Growth Measures  Evidence Sources  Alignment to Goal  Collection and Scoring  Performance Targets  Baseline Data  Performance Groups  Expected Gain  Rationale for Targets  Student Learning Goal Statement  Student Population and interval of instruction  Body of Evidence (Assessment Instruments) and Scoring  Baseline Data and Performance Groups  Performance Targets  Points Calculation  Distribution of Points  Goal Weight (number of points) Not part of field test

 Teachers have asked for this to be the focus of capacity building for the coming year  Extend to the rest of the staffs in both schools.  Participating teachers gradually expanding to other content areas.  Schools are finding ways to make this work  Focus of PLCs in the coming year.  Integrate with other continuous improvement/ data- driven efforts

Your questions...

 Written: Use another index card  + the aspects of this session that you liked or worked for you.   The things you will change in your practice or that you would change about this session.  ? Question that you still have about the topics we addressed today.  Ideas, ah-has, innovations  Oral: Share out one ah ha!