1. March, 2016 SLO End of Course Command Levels

2. OUTCOMES Teachers will… be prepared to determine end of course command levels for each student. be prepared to submit end of course command levels in the SLO Application.

3. 3

4.  Teachers administer end of course performance based tasks.  Teachers determine end of course command levels for each student and submit via the SLO Application.  Teachers engage in LEAP EOY conversations.  School leaders receive LEAP EOY conversation information.  School leaders may begin LEAP EOY conversations as early as mid-April.  Teachers receive information about end of course command levels from school leader.  School leaders receive end of course command level information from IS or ARE.  Teachers may begin administering end of course performance based tasks as early as mid-April.  School leaders approve/request revisions on SLO submissions.  School leaders conduct LEAP EOY conversations.

5. 1. Schedule LEAP EOY conversations. 2. Schedule SLO submission deadline for ~1 week before conversations. Communicate deadline to teachers. 3. Review each teacher’s SLO submission before LEAP EOY conversation. 4. Plan SLO portion of LEAP EOY conversation. It is recommended that school leaders…

6. SCHOOL LEADER ROLE The School Leader will… approve teachers’ assignments of students’ end of course command levels based on appropriate evidence from data sources and SLO learning progression rubric, AND ensure that teachers have made a strong case for their end of course command levels and can back-up their decisions with evidence.

7. DETERMINING END OF COURSE COMMAND LEVEL PROTOCOL End of course command levels are about each student’s competence on the standards included in the SLO. 7

8. DETERMINING END OF COURSE COMMAND LEVEL PROTOCOL End of course command levels should be determined at the student level ❑ using a body of evidence, and ❑ weighting stronger data and recent evidence more; ❑ including the district-made end of year Performance Based Task (PBT), if using a model SLO; or an alternate, evaluator-approved summative task/assessment; 8

9. DETERMINING END OF COURSE COMMAND LEVEL PROTOCOL End of course command levels should be determined at the student level ❑ according to the definitions of the command levels as described by the SLO learning progression rubric; and ❑ in collaboration with teacher teams and school leader. 9

10. END OF COURSE COMMAND LEVEL DEFINITIONS The end of course command level definitions are unique to each SLO and should be clearly defined in the SLO learning progression rubric. Below Limited Command Limited Command Moderate Command Strong Command – This command level indicates the expectation for grade level, end of course proficiency, and should be written using the grade level, course standards. Distinguished Command 10

11. 11 Limited CommandModerate CommandStrong CommandDistinguished Command Students demonstrate a limited or inaccurate understanding of a grade level appropriate text; given a teacher-provided main idea, recounting some of the details, but without explaining how the details support the main idea. Students demonstrate a basic understanding of a grade level appropriate text by determining the main idea, recounting some of the key details, providing little or an unclear explanation of how the details support the main idea. Students may identify a concept that is not entirely the central idea or theme, but can support it with details. Students demonstrate a thorough understanding by accurately determining the main idea of a grade level appropriate text, recounting most of the key details, and providing an explanation of how the details support the main idea. Students demonstrate an in- depth analysis of a grade level appropriate (or above) text by accurately determining the main idea, fully recounting the key details, and providing a thorough explanation of how the details support the main idea. Students write informative/explanatory pieces that address a topic inaccurately and with little evidence of facts, definitions, and details with little clarity and cohesion. Students write informative/explanatory pieces that address a topic with insufficient development of facts, definitions or details and moments of clarity and cohesion. Students write informative/explanatory pieces that examine a topic and convey related ideas that are developed with facts, definitions, and details skillfully, with clarity and cohesion. Students write informative/explanatory pieces that thoroughly examine a topic and convey related ideas that are clearly developed with linked facts, definitions, concrete details, and examples in a precise and insightful way with clarity and cohesion. Students engage in collaborative discussions, asking questions and listening to others’ ideas and expressing their own thinking, with reliance on teacher-created oral language supports (e.g., sentence stems). Students engage in collaborative discussions, asking questions, listening to others’ ideas and expressing their own; students explain their thinking and understanding at the end of the discussion, with little reliance on teacher-created oral language supports. Students independently engage effectively in collaborative discussions, asking questions, building on others' ideas and expressing their own clearly, in order to explain their own ideas and understanding. Students engage skillfully in collaborative discussions, posing and responding to questions, building on others' ideas and expressing their own clearly to review and explain the key ideas discussed; students demonstrate automatized ability to engage in oral discourse.

12. 12 Limited CommandModerate CommandStrong CommandDistinguished Command With scaffolds and supports, students access sources to identify interconnectedness in straightforward historical, geographic, economic or civic issues. Students comprehend sources to identify ideas and interconnectedness in straightforward historical, geographic, economic and/or civic issues. Students analyze a variety of sources and research related topics to explain significant ideas and interconnectedness in complex historical, geographic, economic and civic issues. Students analyze a variety of sources and research related topics to justify and evaluate significant ideas and interconnectedness in complex historical, geographic, economic and civic issues. Students engage with primary and secondary sources by reading, writing and speaking, with scaffolding and support. Students identify point of view and purpose as well as define credibility. Students comprehend primary and secondary sources by reading, writing and speaking. Students identify point of view and purpose to determine source credibility and accuracy. Students analyze primary and secondary sources by reading, writing and speaking. Students explain point of view, purpose and context to assess source credibility and accuracy. Students analyze and prioritize the value of primary and secondary sources by reading, writing and speaking. Student evaluate the impact of point of view and purpose to justify source credibility and accuracy. With scaffolds and supports, students comprehend primary and/or secondary sources by reading, writing and speaking to objectively describe central ideas or information to define interconnected. Students comprehend primary and secondary sources by reading, writing and speaking to objectively summarize central ideas or information to identify significant ideas and define interconnected. Students analyze primary and secondary sources from multiple perspectives by reading, writing and speaking to objectively evaluate central ideas or information and corroborate conclusions about the significance of ideas and the interconnected nature of the world. Students synthesize information from primary and secondary sources from multiple perspectives by reading, writing and speaking to objectively evaluate central ideas or information and corroborate and constructively critique others’ conclusions about the significance of ideas and the interconnected nature of the world. With scaffolds and supports, students state opinions and positions about straightforward historical, geographic, economic and civic issues supported orally and in writing with relevant information. Students state opinions and positions about straightforward historical, geographic, economic and civic issues supported orally and in writing with domain-specific language and relevant information. Students defend and justify opinions and positions about complex historical, geographic, economic and civic issues supported orally and in writing with domain-specific language and relevant information that addresses the complexity of the topics. Students evaluate and critique their and others’ opinions and positions about complex historical, geographic, economic and civic issues supported orally and in writing with domain-specific language and relevant information that addresses the complexity of the topics.

13. STUDENT GROWTH POINT DECISION BOXES 13 Below Limited Command Limited Command Moderate Command Strong Command Distinguished Command Significantly Underprepared Teacher & Evaluator Decision: 0, 1, or 2 3333 Underprepared Teacher & Evaluator Decision: 0 or 1 2333 Somewhat Prepared PreparedNA* AheadNA* Teacher & Evaluator Decision: 2 or 3 For these decision boxes, teachers will determine how many growth points they believe match the amount of growth for that student. The school leader’s role is to approve each of these decisions.

14. “RED FLAG” SITUATIONS Teachers have large numbers (or all) students from the Baseline Preparedness level of Significantly Underprepared moving to Moderate, Strong, and/or Distinguished Command. 14 Significantly underprepared to Limited command signifies more than 2 years of growth!