 Multiple Measures Models and Lessons Learned

Student Growth and Professional Goal Templates  District Examples  Ashland  Lincoln Co.  North Clackamas  Similarities and Differences

Lessons Learned  Writing Student Growth Goals  Writing Professional Goals

Specialists  How are pilot districts addressing student growth goals with Specialists?

Collaborative Goal Setting Process  Student Growth Goals  OEA Guidelines  Lincoln Co. Checklist

Scoring/Rating Student Growth Goals  Pendleton Domain 5  Lincoln Co. Domain 5  OEA setting collaborative benchmark of 1 – 4  Lessons learned from pilot districts

Pendleton Domain 5 UnsatisfactoryBasicProficientExemplary Formative/Summative Assessments Less than 70% of students in the teacher’s class Met SLO goals 70% of students in the teacher’s class met SLO goals 80% of students in the teacher’s class met SLO goals 90% of students in the teacher’s class met SLO goals. Portfolios Less than 70% of students in the class demonstrated proficiency on standards level work or above in a student portfolio. Met SLO goals? 70% of students in the class demonstrated proficiency on standards level work or above in a student portfolio. 80% of students in the class demonstrated proficiency on standards level work or above in a student portfolio. 90% of students in the class demonstrated proficiency on standards level work or above in a student portfolio. Standardized Assessments Less than 65% of students achieve a grade level standard or higher on standardized or norm referenced exam. 65% of students achieve a grade level standard or higher on standardized or norm referenced exam. 75% of students achieve a grade level standard or higher on standardized or norm referenced exam. 85% of students achieve a grade level standard (2 years growth or target) or higher on standardized or norm referenced exam. Performance Assessments Less than 70% of students in the teacher’s class meet proficiency or make more than one year’s growth on post- assessments according to a proficiency based rubric 70% of students in the teacher’s class meet proficiency or make more than one year’s growth on post- assessments according to a proficiency based rubric 80% of students in the teacher’s class meet proficiency or make more than one year’s growth on post- assessments according to a proficiency based rubric 90% of students in the teacher’s class meet proficiency or make more than one year’s growth on post- assessments according to a proficiency based rubric

IV – SLG Scoring Options Student Learning Goals  The teacher and administrator/evaluator set the performance indicators when they set the goal Analytic example No ProgressLimited ProgressGood ProgressExceptional Progress Few students reach the SLG Less than significant number of students reach the SLG Significant number of students reach the SLG Exceptional number of students reach the SLG Less than 13 students meet their growth target on OAKS-R. At least students meet their growth target on OAKS-R. At least students meet their growth target on OAKS-R. At least 29/33 students meet their growth target on OAKS-R.

Professional Practice and Professional Responsibilities  How are you collecting evidence of professional practice and professional responsibilities?

Combining Measures  Matrix or Weighted Models

Medford/549-C  Weighted Percentage example: ComponentDescription of ComponentRubric Rating (A) Professional Practice Standards 1-8 ____ % Evidence of teacher’s proficiency re: Learner Development, Learning Differences &Environments Content Knowledge, Application of Content, Assessment, Planning for Instruction, Instructional Strategies ____ % x rating (1-4) = (B) Professional Responsibilities Standards 9-10 ____ % Evidence of teacher’s progress toward their own professional goals, contribution to school improvement goals/plan and collegial learning. ____ % x rating (1-4) = (C) Student Learning & Growth ____ % Evidence of teachers’ impact on student learning and growth through goal setting, planning, assessment, and instructional strategies ____ % x rating (1-4) = (D) Summative RatingSum of A + B + C =

Medford/549-C  Weighted Percentage example: ComponentDescription of ComponentRubric Rating (A) Professional Practice Standards % Evidence of teacher’s proficiency re: Learner Development, Learning Differences &Environments Content Knowledge, Application of Content, Assessment, Planning for Instruction, Instructional Strategies 60 % x rating (3) = 1.8 (B) Professional Responsibilities Standards % Evidence of teacher’s progress toward their own professional goals, contribution to school improvement goals/plan and collegial learning. 20 % x rating (4) =.8 (C) Student Learning & Growth 20 % Evidence of teachers’ impact on student learning and growth through goal setting, planning, assessment, and instructional strategies 20 % x rating (3) =.6 (D) Summative RatingSum of A + B + C = 3.2

Weighted Model PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES Domain 1Domain 2Domain 3Domain 4Prof Goal Comp.ScoreComp.ScoreComp.ScoreComp.Score A3A3A3A33 B3B3B3B3 C3C3C3C3 D4D3D3D3 E3E3E3E3 F3F3 Total D:119Total D:218Total D:315Total D:415

Weighted Model Cont. STUDENT LEARNING & GROWTH SLO 1SLO 2 ComponentScoreComponentScore A3A3 B3B3 C3C3 Total9 9

Summative Score Area Score Eval Points Professional Practice 68 Pts PossibleArea PercentagePoints as 58.6% of Eval Total %44.81 Professional Responsibilities 24 Pts PossibleArea PercentagePoints as 20.7% of Eval Total %15.53 Student Learning & Growth 24 Pts PossibleArea Percentage Points as 20.7% of Eval Total %15.53 Score ** All scores assigned on a 1-4 scale Key Unsatisfactory<50 Basic50-74 Proficient75-89 Distinguished90-100

SUMMATIVE RATING ON CONTINUUM* *Via measures of Professional Practice and Professional Responsibilities: Distinguished 2-YEAR SELF-DIRECTED PROFESSIONAL GROWTH GOALS BASED ON STUDENT GROWTH GOALS & RUBRIC: -Half of Professional Growth Goals based on improving Student Goals’ outcomes 2-YEAR SELF-DIRECTED PROFESSIONAL GROWTH GOALS: Teacher has total autonomy to guide their own professional growth plan. Proficient Basic COLLABORATIVE PROFESSIONAL GROWTH GOALS BASED ON STUDENT GROWTH GOALS & RUBRIC: Educator meets annually w/ Evaluator and collaboratively develop Professional Growth Goals based on improving Student Goals’ outcomes & targeted growth areas indicated in summative rating COLLABORATIVE PROFESSIONAL GROWTH GOALS: Educator will annually meet with Evaluator and collaboratively develop Professional Growth Goals based on improving targeted growth areas as indicated in summative rating Unsatisfactory PLAN OF AWARENESS: Supervisor/Evaluator immediately develops Plan of Awareness based on improving Student Goals’ outcomes & targeted growth areas as indicated in summative rating. Pre-step before a formal Plan of Assistance; monthly check-in required. DIRECTED IMPROVEMENT PLAN: Supervisor/Evaluator will annually develop Professional Growth Goals based on improving targeted growth areas as indicated in summative rating; quarterly check-in required. No progressLimited progressGood progressExceptional progress STUDENT LEARNING GOALS’ OUTCOMES

SUMMATIVE RATING ON CONTINUUM* *Via measures of Professional Practice and Professional Responsibilities: Distinguished 2-YEAR SELF-DIRECTED PROFESSIONAL GROWTH GOALS BASED ON STUDENT GROWTH GOALS & RUBRIC: -Half of Professional Growth Goals based on improving Student Goals’ outcomes 2-YEAR SELF-DIRECTED PROFESSIONAL GROWTH GOALS: Teacher has total autonomy to guide their own professional growth plan. Proficient Basic COLLABORATIVE PROFESSIONAL GROWTH GOALS BASED ON STUDENT GROWTH GOALS & RUBRIC: Educator meets annually w/ Evaluator and collaboratively develop Professional Growth Goals based on improving Student Goals’ outcomes & targeted growth areas indicated in summative rating COLLABORATIVE PROFESSIONAL GROWTH GOALS: Educator will annually meet with Evaluator and collaboratively develop Professional Growth Goals based on improving targeted growth areas as indicated in summative rating Unsatisfactory PLAN OF AWARENESS: Supervisor/Evaluator immediately develops Plan of Awareness based on improving Student Goals’ outcomes & targeted growth areas as indicated in summative rating. Pre-step before a formal Plan of Assistance; monthly check-in required. DIRECTED IMPROVEMENT PLAN: Supervisor/Evaluator will annually develop Professional Growth Goals based on improving targeted growth areas as indicated in summative rating; quarterly check-in required. No progressLimited progressGood progressExceptional progress STUDENT LEARNING GOALS’ OUTCOMES A teacher earning a Level 3 on the rubric and good progress toward goals will be on a self-directed 2 year plan

SUMMATIVE RATING ON CONTINUUM* *Via measures of Professional Practice and Professional Responsibilities: Distinguished 2-YEAR SELF-DIRECTED PROFESSIONAL GROWTH GOALS BASED ON STUDENT GROWTH GOALS & RUBRIC: -Half of Professional Growth Goals based on improving Student Goals’ outcomes 2-YEAR SELF-DIRECTED PROFESSIONAL GROWTH GOALS: Teacher has total autonomy to guide their own professional growth plan. Proficient Basic COLLABORATIVE PROFESSIONAL GROWTH GOALS BASED ON STUDENT GROWTH GOALS & RUBRIC: Educator meets annually w/ Evaluator and collaboratively develop Professional Growth Goals based on improving Student Goals’ outcomes & targeted growth areas indicated in summative rating COLLABORATIVE PROFESSIONAL GROWTH GOALS: Educator will annually meet with Evaluator and collaboratively develop Professional Growth Goals based on improving targeted growth areas as indicated in summative rating Unsatisfactory PLAN OF AWARENESS: Supervisor/Evaluator immediately develops Plan of Awareness based on improving Student Goals’ outcomes & targeted growth areas as indicated in summative rating. Pre-step before a formal Plan of Assistance; monthly check-in required. DIRECTED IMPROVEMENT PLAN: Supervisor/Evaluator will annually develop Professional Growth Goals based on improving targeted growth areas as indicated in summative rating; quarterly check-in required. No progressLimited progressGood progress Exceptional progress STUDENT LEARNING GOALS’ OUTCOMES A teacher earning a Level 1 on the rubric and limited progress toward goals will be on a plan of awareness

Ashland Matrix Model

Summative Ratings  Must be reported to ODE  Remember the purpose of evaluation

Pilot Districts Sharing  What process, criteria and/or lens did you use to design the multiple measures and goal setting processes?  What are the strengths and challenges of your multiple measures and goal setting element?  What are the strengths and challenges of your multiple measures and goal setting implementation process?

Questions