1. SLO End of Course Expectation Levels
March, 2017
The purpose of this session is to provide educators with key information that all teachers need in order to be able to (as accurately as possible) assign students’ end of course expectation levels.

2. OUTCOMES
Teachers will…
be prepared to determine end of course expectation levels for each student.
be prepared to submit end of course expectation levels in the SLO Application.
After participating in this session, teachers will be prepared to use the “Determining End of Course Expectations Level Protocol” with their teams in order to as accurately as possible determine end of course expectation levels for each of the students on their SLOs as well as submit those end of course expectation levels to their evaluators via the SLO Application.

3. SLO Timeline 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.

4. MARCH, APRIL AND MAY ARE BUSY!
Teachers
School Leaders
March
Teachers receive information about end of course expectation levels from school leader.
School leaders receive end of course expectation level information from IS or ARE.
April
Teachers may begin administering end of course performance based tasks as early as mid-April.
School leaders receive LEAP EOY conversation information.
School leaders may begin LEAP EOY conversations as early as mid-April.
May
Teachers administer end of course performance based tasks.
Teachers determine end of course expectation levels for each student and submit via the SLO Application.
Teachers engage in LEAP EOY conversations.
School leaders approve/request revisions on SLO submissions.
School leaders conduct LEAP EOY conversations.
In order to adequately accomplish all pieces for SLO, our recommendation would be that you as a school leader set a deadline for SLO submission (for example, one week before LEAP EOY conversations begin) in order to allow you time to review SLO submissions in the SLO Application and prepare for the LEAP EOY conversation. No SLO score will be sent to LEAP until the SLO is approved. Therefore, if you do not agree with an SLO submission, and you need to request revisions of the teacher, that teacher will need to resubmit, you will need to review again and then approve - THEN you will see a score in the LEAP Application Tool for Student Growth for that teacher.

5. It is recommended that school leaders…
Schedule LEAP EOY conversations.
Schedule SLO submission deadline for ~1 week before conversations and communicate deadline to teachers.
Review each teacher’s SLO submission before LEAP EOY conversation.
Plan SLO portion of LEAP EOY conversation.
Our recommendation to school leaders is that they backwards plan when scheduling the next three months of schools. School leaders should schedule the LEAP EOY conversations for their teachers, and then schedule the SLO submission deadline for about one week before EOY conversations begin. This will allow school leaders time to review SLO submissions before entering into the EOY LEAP conversation with teachers and plan accordingly for that conversation. Teachers will want to consider EOY LEAP conversation schedules and SLO submission schedules at their schools before determining when to administer their EOY Performance Based Tasks. Teachers will want to give themselves enough time to administer the PBT, score student work, and come together with their teams to look at the SLO Body of Evidence and determine end of course expectations levels. Then, teachers will need to enter that information into the SLO application.

6. The School Leader will…
SCHOOL LEADER ROLE
The School Leader will…
approve teachers’ assignments of students’ end of course expectation 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 expectation levels and can back-up their decisions with evidence.

7. DETERMINING END OF COURSE EXPECTATION LEVEL PROTOCOL
End of course expectation levels are about each student’s competence on the standards included in the SLO.
These standards 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
In contrast with baseline preparedness levels, EOC expectation levels are not a general assessment of how students are performing in the content area of the SLO. Rather, EOC expectation levels refer to a student’s level of competence specifically on the standards define in the SLO.
It should not generally 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, and proficiency at the end of the course, (Met Expectations in the leanring progression), should be possible only after an entire year of rigorous learning and excellent instruction.

8. DETERMINING END OF COURSE EXPECTATION LEVEL PROTOCOL
End of course expectation levels should be determined at the student level using a body of evidence that
weighs stronger data and recent evidence more;
includes the district-made end of year Performance Based Task (PBT), OR
an alternate, equally rigorous, evaluator-approved summative task/assessment;
The Determining End of Course Expectation Levels Protocol is a process teachers can go through with their teams to determine EOC expectation levels for each student on their SLOs. Although teachers have been collecting a body of evidence over the duration of the course, when determining end of course expectation levels, teachers really need to be looking about 3-4 great pieces of evidence for their SLOs - evidence that is recent and encompasses the skills/knowledge defined by the SLO and the learning progression rubric. One of those 3-4 pieces of evidence should be the district model performance based task or some other summative task/assessment. An evaluator needs to approve the use of a different summative task in order to ensure that the evaluator is in agreement with the use of that assessment as a final piece of evidence for the BOE. The assessment should encompass the SLO as completely as possible and should be reflective of the rigor and end of year expectation for the standards of that SLO and course.

9. DETERMINING END OF COURSE EXPECTATION LEVEL PROTOCOL
End of course expectation levels should be determined at the student level
according to the definitions of the expectation levels as described by the SLO learning progression rubric; and
in collaboration with teacher teams and school leader.
Contrary to baseline preparedness levels, EOC expectation levels are defined by the learning progression rubric for each particular SLO, and as with all components of the SLO Process, it is recommended that determination of end of course expectation levels be done in a team setting, if possible.

10. END OF COURSE EXPECTATION LEVEL DEFINITIONS
The end of course expectation level definitions are unique to each SLO and should be clearly defined in the SLO learning progression rubric.
Partially Met Expectations
Approached Expectations
Met Expectations
This level indicates the expectation for grade level, end of course proficiency, and should be written using the grade level, course standards.
Exceeded Expectations
The learning progression rubric addresses the learning progression that should happen in that particular course. A student at Partially Met Expectations has mastered some initial grade-level content, and the learning progression should reflect that.
If students start distinctly far behind/below grade level, even with excellent growth it is possible they do not begin to master grade level material. In the SLO Application, these students can be assigned ‘Did not Yet Meet Expectations’. Teachers would then choose the growth points that appropriately reflects student progress (guidance on this choose is on the ARE SLO website, in the document: ‘Overview of SLOs and Student Growth’

11. Partially Met Expectations
Approached
Expectations
Met
Exceeds
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.
This sample 3rd grade literacy rubric illustrates how expectation levels are defined for a particular SLO.

12. Partially Met Expectations
Approached
Expectations
Met
Exceeds
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.
This sample secondary rubric further illustrates how SLO expectation levels are defined by the learning progression associated with that SLO.

13. STUDENT GROWTH POINT DECISION BOXES
Did not Yet Meet Expectations
Partially Met Expectations
Approached
Expectations
Met
Exceeds
Significantly
Underprepared
Teacher & Evaluator Decision:
0, 1, or 2
0 or 1
Somewhat Prepared
Prepared
NA*
Ahead
2 or 3
For these decision cells, 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.
Remember that there are points where teachers will need to make a growth point decision based on each student and the body of evidence they have for that student. There is additional guidance on how to make these decisions in the “Overview of SLOs and Student Growth” document, on the DPS SLO webpage:

14. STUDENT GROWTH POINT DECISION BOXES
Did not Yet Meet Expectations
Partially Met Expectations
Approached
Expectations
Met
Exceeds
Significantly
Underprepared
Teacher & Evaluator Decision:
0, 1, or 2
Additional Evidence Needed
0 or 1
Somewhat Prepared
Prepared
NA*
Ahead
2 or 3
For these Additional Evidence cells,
in the SLO Application:
teachers will first need to request the ability to choose these levels,
the school leader grants access,
the teacher can then choose these levels, should provide rationale for each student, and can then submit
the school leader reviews the entire SLO, with particular focus on students with extreme-growth levels
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.

15. OPPORTUNITIES FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION
Teachers have large numbers (or all) students from the Baseline preparedness level of Significantly Underprepared moving to Approached, Met or Exceeded Expectations
Significantly Underprepared
to Partially Met Expectations
signifies more than 2 years of growth!
Additionally, teachers with large numbers of students earning 3 points, regardless of the location of the blue boxes.