1. Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) Beginning of year information

2. Outcomes Articulate the relationship between DDI and SLOs
Understand updates to the SLO Process for in response to teacher and school leader feedback
Overview of the initial SLO Process components (choosing standards, and writing an objective statement)*
*The ARE SLO website has additional information, resources, and turnkeys on other aspects of the SLO process.
Other SLO components have separate presentations.
See the ARE SLO website for information and turnkeys on developing a learning progression, selecting baseline data and determining preparedness levels, progress monitoring and a body of evidence, and determining end of year expectation levels.

3. What are student learning objectives?
SLOs are course-long learning objectives set by teachers to identify and then monitor student progress along a learning progression towards critical learning outcomes.
SLOs are a collection of instructional best practices addressing four questions:
What is important for my students to learn? (i.e. Where are my students going?)
Deep understanding and prioritization of the standards, knowledge and skills to be mastered in the course
[SLO Objective Statement and Learning Progression Rubric]
Where are my students starting?
Determining initial baseline preparedness for each student in an SLO
[SLO Baseline Data and Preparedness Levels]
Where are my students now?
Ongoing progress monitoring, formative assessment, instructional shifts
[SLO Body of Evidence, ongoing DDI]
Where did my students finish?
Determine End of Course Expectation Levels and mastery of the SLO learning objective using a learning progression

4. Student Learning Objectives (SLOs)
Course-long learning objectives set by teachers to identify and then monitor student progress along a learning progression towards critical learning outcomes

5. Data Driven Instruction (DDI)
“The use of standards and culturally and linguistically appropriate assessments to generate formative data that measures student learning and drives ongoing instructional improvements.” (DPS Strategic Plan)

6. We need to know where we are going (SLOs)
We need to know where we are going (SLOs). We need to know how to get there (DDI). When we use both, we improve instruction faster and move students quicker.

7. Impacted Instruction Ongoing DDI Standards
Learning Objective
Baseline preparedness
Impacted Instruction
Focused
Differentiated
Where are my students going?
Where are my students starting?
Instructional planning
What do I teach next?
Ongoing DDI
In our SLO/DDI Process, please notice that the Baseline Preparedness component of SLOs comes after we’ve determined our Student Learning Objective. It helps teachers to identify where students are starting in order to begin planning for instruction.
SLOs and DDI aren’t one set of steps to be followed like a recipe, rather a collection of practices that work together to inform and impact instruction. All of them are cyclical in nature and inform instruction at different times and in different ways (year long planning, lesson planning, unit planning, etc)
*Facilitator note: This slide has animation to introduce each of the four questions on it’s own, to slow down the introduction of the overall graphic and speak to each instructional best practice.
Where are my students now?
Determine growth
toward learning objective
Assignments, assessments, tasks, observations
End of Course Expectation Level
Where did my students finish?

8. EVOLUTION OF SLOS 1999-2000 DPS begins SGOs 2013-14
SLO Pilot with 15 schools
whole district SLO “learning year”
SLOs count as 45% teacher’s overall LEAP
SLOs to count for 30% or 40% teachers’ overall LEAP
differs based on whether the teacher is eligible for state growth measure (i.e. CMAS MGPs)

9. District Level lessons learned and planned improvements
Feedback
1617 Updates
Teachers and school leaders said:
They were uncertain about how to determine student preparedness levels and end of course levels
When available, students’ previous year command levels will now be viewable in SLO Application; resources on ARE SLO website that assist in connecting previous year command to current year preparedness
More detailed descriptions of preparedness levels have been created with content experts in priority areas, such as ECE, K, etc. ARE and C&I will continue to build out more detailed descriptions of preparedness
ARE will continue to work with AIO and CSO partners to develop a strategic plan to collect student examples of work
Mid-course data entry now possible in SLO Application, potentially facilitating more concrete discussions on student learning and progress (school leaders determine if required)
Model SLO and PBT bank continues to grow; nearly 200 model SLOs with associated PBTs
Model SLO bank can be found here (DPS log-in required):
A model SLO includes an objective statement, a list of standards addressed in the SLO, and a learning progression. Also, each model SLO has a end of course performance based task associated with it.
Reminder: some type of performance based task is required for every SLO. The district-provided PBT may be used, or teachers may use their own if it is of similar rigor.

10. District Level lessons learned and planned improvements
Feedback
1617 Updates
Teachers said:
Important SLO information does not reach teachers in a timely manner. SLOs only talked about at the beginning and end of school year.
ARE will continue to use the Teacher Weekly newsletter as the primary method for reminders/updates throughout year
Each school will designate an SLO lead whom will receive direct information and additional SLO training
School leader training at network meetings throughout year will continue
Teachers and SSPs said:
SLOs for teachers of students with special populations (interventionists, SPED, center-based, Pathways, etc.) need additional modifications to appropriately represent teacher impact on student growth.
ARE will continue to work with Student Services to research appropriate changes to process.

11. What’s Been Updated for 2016-17?
What’s being updated?
What’s the reason?
Semantics shift from ‘Command’ levels to ‘Expectations’ levels
‘Command’ levels were chosen in Summer of 2015 because CDE telegraphed they would use ‘Command’ levels to classify proficiency on PARCC.
CDE ended up using ‘Expectations’ levels, so we are shifting our language to increase alignment and coherence with other measures
This is a semantics shift only and does not affect the SLO process
Command Level
Below Limited Command
Limited Command
Moderate Command
Strong Command
Distinguished Command
Expectation Level
Did Not Yet Meet Expectations
Partially Met Expectations
Approached Expectations
Met Expectations
Exceeded Expectations
Purpose
Facilitator note: This slide has animation.
Talking Points

12. What’s Been updated for 2016-17?
What’s being updated?
What’s the reason?
Teachers join Special Service Providers in the requirement to complete two SLOs.
Everyone now required to complete two SLOs
Two SLOs allows for a more holistic understanding of your instructional impact to be included in your evaluation (allows evaluation measures to be more reliable)
Opportunity for SLOs to reflect a wider swath of the curriculum – i.e. emphasizes that curriculum should not be narrowed (allows evaluation measures to be more valid)
Moving to two SLOs further underscores that fundamental best practices of SLOs should be used in every classroom with every student
Purpose
Introduce that teachers will be required to complete 2 SLOs.
Talking Points
Just like we want assessments for students to be reliable and valid, so too do we want components of teacher evaluation to be reliable and valid.
Moving to two SLOs increases this reliability and validity.
Creates a stronger connection between every students’ learning and teacher evaluation.
Emphasizes that curriculum should not be narrowed.
All students should in a class where the best instructional practices of SLOs are being utilized.
As an FYI, 25% of teachers completed 2 SLOs in

13. SLO Timeline and Accountability

14. SLO Timeline August September October November December January
Teachers/SSPs
School Leaders
August
September
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
Review SLO components with grade or content peers
Create or select 2 SLO Objectives
Deadline LTG Phase: 9/30*
Determine Performance Criteria and LP Rubric
Collect and analyze Baseline Data
Determine students’ Preparedness Levels
Deadline LTG Phase:
10/30*
Review SLOs
Request revisions if necessary
All year-long and S1 SLOs approved by 10/30
Conduct mid-year LEAP conversations
Communicate mid-year SLO data entry expectations (not required by district)
Communicate EOY deadlines
Work with school leader on mid-year SLO data entry expectation
Prepare to discuss students’ progress on SLO at mid-year conversation
Deadline End of Course Phase**
Reflect on Student Growth
Submit End of Course Expectation Levels by school-determined date
Deadline End of Course Phase**
Work with SLT on calibration of expectations
Review SLOs
Request revisions if necessary
Over the course of the year, with support and guidance from school leaders, teachers and SSPs conduct ongoing formative assessment, DDI, data teams and instructional shifts
*BCC teachers and others with limited student contact time may submit by 10/30 in order to allow appropriate time to collect and analyze Baseline Data. School leaders have until the Friday before Thanksgiving break to approve.
**End of Course SLO information must be entered by the LEAP EOY Conversation (State law requires these be held by two weeks before the last day of school.) School leaders should determine a specific SLO deadline; it is recommended deadlines be as close to the LEAP EOY Conversation as possible.

15. SLO Scoring matrix Did Not Yet Meet Expectations
Partially Met Expectations
Approached Expectations
Met
Expectations
Exceeded Expectations
Significantly
Underprepared
Teacher & Evaluator Decision:
0, 1, or 2 3
Additional Evidence Needed
0 or 1 2
Somewhat Prepared 1
Prepared
NA*
Ahead
2 or 3
In order to determine the point values for each of the cells on this matrix, we began with the movement of a prepared student. A prepared student should leave the course/year at met expectations. This amount of movement would signal approximately one year’s worth of growth. Then, using this platonic ideal, point values for other cells were given. So, a somewhat prepared student should be leaving that course/year at least at Approached Expectations. An underprepared student should at least be leaving that course at Partially Met Expectations. Anything above this green diagonal would be considered higher growth, and therefore worth an additional point. Anything below this line would be considered less than expected growth, and therefore worth less points.
Please note the three gray decision boxes on this matrix. These boxes indicate opportunities for a teacher and evaluator team to make a collaborative decision about the point value appropriate for that student’s growth. So, for example, a student entering the course significantly underprepared (more than 2 years behind grade level) could still make more than a year’s worth of growth, or even up to 2 year’s worth of growth and not hit partially met expectations. In a case like this, it would be up to the teacher and school leader team to determine what point value the growth of that student is worth (0, 1, or 2), based on strong evidence. A student who entered ahead, may be expected to leave the course at distinguished, but we also allow for the fact that distinguished may not capture the true amount of growth of that student. If the evidence supports, a teacher and school leader team may decide to award 3 points for a student in that situation.
There is additional guidance on the SLO website for making these decisions (in the document: Overview of SLOs and Student Growth) with guiding questions.
*Right now, in order to be preparing for making these decisions when the time comes, you, as the evaluator, should be speaking with your teachers regarding the students they’re assigning to the significantly underprepared, underprepared and ahead preparedness levels. Remember that for the underprepared and significantly underprepared categories teachers will need to enter additional information in the SLO Application.
Also, if teachers wish to place students in the extreme-growth boxes in the upper right: they will first need to request approval to do so through the SLO Application. You return the SLO to the teacher and either grant or do not grant that request. They can then continue with the SLO, and submit it. If students have been placed in the extreme growth categories, they are asked to provide additional information for each student. You should particularly thoroughly review any student placed in these combinations. Significantly Underprepared to Met Expectations represents more than three years worth of growth. Research shows that students that start out behind rarely make more than 1.5 years of growth; they may catch up, but not at such an extreme rate.
Teacher & Evaluator Decision Cells:
Growth can look distinctly different for individual students falling in these cells. For example, a Significantly Underprepared student can demonstrate substantial growth, but still not meet the criteria for Partially Met Expectations of the current year standards.
In these cells, teachers and evaluators determine the student’s growth based on the individual student’s body of evidence.
Additional Evidence Needed Cells:
Teachers will need to request of their evaluator, through the SLO Application, the ability to place students in these extreme-growth combinations.
Once access to the extreme-growth combinations is provided, teachers will need to supply additional individualized evidence for students achieving these levels of growth.

16. LEAP STUDENT GROWTH 2016-17 State Assessment Growth Possible
(i.e. ELA and Math teachers , grades 4-9)
When No State Assessment Growth is Possible
Everyone is required to complete two SLOs. Each SLO counts for half of the indicated percentage.
Weight of individually-attributable measures is equal (40%) for both those with a state measure and those without.
Weight of SLOs decreases from 45% in to 30% for those with a state growth measure and 40% for those without a state measure in
School growth (collective measure) does not overly influence teachers’ scores.
All teachers have multiple measures of student growth.
Consistent with other district plans around student growth for 1617.

17. Student Learning Objectives
SLOs in LEAP in
Observations
Professionalism
Student Perceptions
CMAS Growth*
Student Learning Objectives
School Growth
SLOs
Primary Student Growth measure for all teachers in 15-16
All Teachers/SSPs must complete 2 SLOs
Talking Points:
In , SLOs were the primary measure of student growth for all teachers. (45% of the overall evaluation.)
5% of the overall evaluation was a collective, district-wide measure of growth.
In , CMAS Growth will be included, for math and literacy teachers in grades 4 through 9.
For most teachers (~60%) whom are not connected to CMAS Growth, SLOs will account for that percentage.
Teachers are required to complete 2 SLOs.

18. Deciding on the standards and objective statement of an SLO
What’s important for my students to learn?
i.e. Where are my students going?

19. What’s important for my students to learn?
i.e. Where are my students going?
Which standards should be the focus of an SLO?
To help answer this question, consider:
Standards included in the SLO should be:
The most important standards in the course; and
Build upon and require mastery of other grade level standards in order to be proficient, i.e. be the culmination of an entire year of rigorous learning
Pre-written district model SLOs are already written based on priority/high-impact standards.
We strongly recommend first-year teachers choose at least one model SLO
Work collaboratively with your team at your school.
We strongly recommend tthose teaching the same content use the SLOs
Teachers and SSPs must complete two SLOs each school year.
Data must be entered into and approved by your evaluator in the online SLO Application.
Purpose
Talking Points
It should not be possible for a student to master the content, skills, and standards of an SLO in one unit of a multi-unit course.
The learning progression should be the culmination of a year’s worth of learning.

20. Two different SLO objective statements can be written for:
What counts as two SLOs?
Two different SLO objective statements can be written for:
the same class/section of students, in the same content area, using different standards
the same class of students but different content areas
(i.e. an elementary teacher’s homeroom kids, one literacy and one math SLO)
altogether different courses
The same SLO objective statement should not be used for two different sections of the same course.
This is not two SLOs. You should include both sections in one SLO. Then, write another SLO with a different objective statement, addressing either different standards in that class or addressing a different course.
Purpose
Since two SLOs are required for all teachers, make explicit what constitutes two SLOs.
Note to facilitator: This slide contains animation, to allow you to control the talking points on the slide.
Talking Points
Background
*High School science and CTE model SLOs are written in such a way where a teacher might use the same SLO, but with different courses. This is an example of two SLOs in different courses and is considered two SLOs.

21. A strong objective statement…
is a goal that students should have to build towards, progressively mastering continually more challenging grade level material, for an entire course.
A strong objective statement is also:
grounded in the content and standards of a teacher’s subject area.
important:
centered on core learning that is critical for success in the course,
and high in rigor, requiring deeper level, meaningful thinking by the student.
It should not be possible to master the content, skills, and standards of an SLO in one unit of a multi-unit course.
The objective statement should be a goal that students build towards for an entire course. Nearly all students would take most, if not all, of the course to reach mastery of the culminating standards of the SLO.
The learning progression should show the step by step progress that a student would make on this trajectory of a year’s worth of learning.

22. Next Steps in the SLO Process
Additional resources on the ARE SLO website contain information regarding next steps in the SLO Process:
Writing an effective learning progression rubric, including the performance criteria (the mastery-of-standards column in the learning progression)
How to select baseline data and how to determine baseline preparedness
How to effectively progress monitor and collect a body of evidence
How to determine end of course expectation levels
How student growth as determined by SLOs fits into LEAP

23. The Long-Term Goal portion of the SLO, including Objective Statement, Performance Criteria, and Baseline Preparedness Levels should be submitted via the SLO Application by September 30 (October 30 for BCC teachers).

24. Questions? Email slohelp@dpsk12.org www.dpsare.com