1. STUDENT GROWTH OBJECTIVES
RW 7/1/13
We have always set learning objectives…we have always known where we are going with student learning and how we will get our students to that outcome. Goals have a new focus because of evaluation…
NOTE TO PRESENTER: The New Jersey Department of Education has put together a resource guide for writing SGOs. It can be downloaded from the ACHIEVE section of their website, and is included as a resource with this workshop. While it can be a helpful tool, all the worksheets in the appendix are SUGGESTED for use in school districts and not required. The requirements from the regulations are in red boxes and dispersed through the guide.
Also, this workshop seems to elicit many questions. It is probably best to save questions until the end of each section….The introductory section (Slides 1-7), and then each of the subsequent sections which are labeled with different symbols on the slide.
Professional Development and Instructional Issues Division
Fall 2013

2. Inputs of Effective Teaching Outcomes of Effective Teaching
Teacher Evaluation: Overall formula
The TEACHNJ Act requires evaluations to include multiple measures of student progress and multiple data sources.
New teacher evaluation systems will include the following components:
Teacher Practice
Performance on a teacher practice instrument, driven primarily through observation
Stu. Growth Percentile
State-calculated score that measures individual teacher’s ability to drive growth on NJ ASK
NJASK
Stu. Growth Objective
Locally-calculated score that measures an individual teacher’s impact on stu. achievement
Summative Rating
Overall eval. score that combines the multiple measures of practice and student progress
According to the proposed evaluation regulations as of 5/1/13, the teacher practice component will make up 55 percent of a teacher’s evaluation. This is a change from the split that was in the original proposed regulations.
N.J.A.C.
6A:10-4.1
Inputs of Effective Teaching
Outcomes of Effective Teaching

3. INTRODUCTION TO STUDENT GROWTH OBJECTIVES
All teachers will set Student Growth Objectives (SGOs):
SGOs are long term, specific, and measureable academic goals based on growth and achievement for groups of students.
Establishing an SGO is a collaborative process between teacher and supervisor with the principal having final decision.
SGOs may be based on appropriate national, state, or LEA- developed assessments, including rubric-measured portfolios.
In teachers with an SGP score will set a minimum of 1 SGO.
In teachers without an SGP score will set 2 SGOs.
One point to reinforce throughout the workshop is that writing an SGO is a COLLABORATIVE process. This means a conversation between teacher and supervisor. Just like with PDPs, if there are disagreements, a supervisor can impose an SGO, but, there needs to be some level of conversation about the process between the teacher and the supervisor.
Throughout the workshop it is also important to emphasize that an assessment does not necessarily need to be a written test. It can be a performance based assessment or a portfolio as well.
TEACH NJ requires “multiple measures of student achievement.” The NJDOE interprets this as being the use of SGP and SGOs for tested subjects. In non tested subjects, this is the reason for having 2 SGOs. In proposed regulations, non tested subject teachers will be required to write 2-4 SGOs, and tested subjects 1-2 SGOs. The numbers for school year are reflected on the chart.

4. WHAT IS A STUDENT GROWTH OBJECTIVE ?
A Student Growth Objective is a long-term academic goal that teachers set for groups of students. It must be:
Specific and measureable
Focused on the right content and /or skills
Aligned to state/national standards
Based on available prior student learning data
Based on growth and achievement
Ambitious and feasible
The phrase “ambitious and feasible” shows up in several places in NJDOE documents. It is going to be a challenge for our members to continually address what is “feasible” against what some administrators might consider “ambitious.” It is also going to be a challenge for our members who might set a goal that is too “ambitious” that might come back to haunt them later.

5. TIMELINE FOR DEVELOPING SGOS *
This timeline is from materials designed by the NJDOE. It should be self explanatory, but lays out a timeline that shows that you cannot write an actual SGO without first doing some assessment and getting to know your students. In some districts, administrators have been quick to jump the gun and attempted to develop SGOs prior to the beginning of a school year, which is inappropriate. The timeline will make more sense as teachers gain a better understanding of the process throughout this workshop.
* Suggested timeline from the New Jersey Department of Education

6. WEIGHTING OF COMPONENTS (TESTED)
45%
Student Achievement
45%
Student Achievement
55%
Teacher Practice
55%
Teacher Practice
The latest proposed regulations May, 2013, from the NJDOE have increased the percentage of the teacher practice score and decreased the student growth portion. Teacher practice portion of the evaluation components is now 55% with 45% for student growth. The future target is just one scenario that the DOE envisions for the future. It is meant for illustrative purposes, not as a hard target for what the future holds.
The decrease in SGP percentage came as pressure has mounted from the public. We continue to work for further reductions, though that probably isn’t going to happen.
Tested Grades and Subjects (Currently grades 4-8, Math and ELA): 55% from teacher practice and 45% from student achievement measures
* The Department will look to incorporate other measures where possible and percentages will change as system evolves.

7. WEIGHTING OF COMPONENTS (NTGS**)
15%
Student Achievement
50%
Student Achievement
85%
Teacher Practice
50%
Teacher Practice
For the present, Student Growth Objectives will count for only 15% of a teacher’s overall summative evaluation. This can change each year. In the proposed regulations, the commissioner of education has the authority to change this formula each spring for the following school year. TEACHNJ, however, required that there be a maximum of 50% evaluation from student achievement data and a minimum of 50% based on teacher practice.
Teacher in Non-Tested Grades and Subjects: Weights will be phased in over time to move towards 50% teacher practice and 50% student achievement
*The Department will look to incorporate other measures where possible and percentages will change as system evolves.
** Non Tested Grades and Subjects

8. KEY STEPS AND TIMELINE FOR TEACHERS
Choose or develop a quality measurement tool that is aligned to applicable standards.
Determine students’ starting points in September – October through pre-assessments or other measures.
With supervisor input and approval, set ambitious yet achievable student growth objectives by Nov. 15, 2013; by Oct. 15 in all subsequent years.
Track progress, refine instruction accordingly, make adjustments to SGOs with your supervisor approval’s by Feb. 15.
Review results and SGO scores and discuss them with your supervisor by the end of the school year.
This is an introductory slide to writing SGOs. Please note the symbols on the right hand side. In subsequent slides, the symbol for each step can be found on the bottom right hand side of the slide, giving a visual cue as to the step. When you get to the last slide with any particular symbol, it might be a good idea to stop and answer questions at that point on the section you have covered.

9. Measurement Tools QUALITY MEASUREMENT TOOLS Traditional
Assessments used to track progress on SGOs can include national standardized tests; statewide assessments; or locally-developed measures such as tests, portfolios, etc.
Measurement Tools
Traditional
Portfolio Assessments
Performance Assessments
The first step in creating an SGO is to think about the most important content or skills from a course or class. SGOs can be created around a summary of content from a course, using something like a final exam, or can include standards that stand out as “power standards.” SGOs can also be written around specific skills that a group of students might need to have in order to be successful in a course. Remember that these are skills or content that are required for a particular group of students in a particular class.
Once a teacher has determined the content of the SGO, the teacher needs to know how to measure success at the end of the year.
There is no need to reinvent the wheel on these quality measurement tools. Common assessments, exams, portfolios that are already collected can all be used, but, be aware that the final data will need to be collected before annual reviews and summative conferences in the spring, which in some districts, could be as early as April.
Teachers with SGPs may NOT use the NJASK as their measurement tool. They can have LAL and Math SGOs, but cannot use the NJASK as the measuring tool.

10. TRADITIONAL ASSESSMENT
National
DIBELS to AP Exams
State Tests
End – of – Course Exams
District/School/Departmental
Final Exams
Benchmark Tests
Assessments developed in collaborative teams
Traditional
• National norm-referenced tests (e.g., Advanced Placement exams, DIBELS)
Note: Using something like an AP exam must be done with care. In some districts, not all students who take an AP course go on to take the exam. This is a case where the culture of the school might dictate how a certain exam is used.
• State-developed tests (e.g., biology end-of-course exam)
• District-developed tests (e.g., final exams, benchmark tests)
Individual teacher developed assessments are considered of lesser quality than those developed by collaborative teams or nationally or state normed assessments by the NJDOE. In deciding on the assessment, teachers should remember that these will be used both to measure student growth and as a piece of their evaluation.

11. PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT Collection of work over a period of time
True multiple measure of student achievement
Demonstrates wide-range of student growth
If using portfolio assessments, teachers will need to develop the rubric or checklist for scoring the portfolios at the beginning of the year and be very clear about what will be needed to determine that a student has successfully completed the rubric.
Examples inculde:
Portfolio Assessments
• Gold® (pre-K, K)
• Writing and reflection samples (ELA)
• Laboratory research notebook (sciences)
• Student project-based assessments (all subjects)
• Portfolio of student work (art, photography, graphic design, etc.)
• Log/comparison of workouts (physical education)

12. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS
Requires students to demonstrate mastery of specific skills and competencies
Method of teaching and learning
Involves process and product
Not just testing strategy
Demonstrates what students can DO with knowledge vs. how much they know
Requires critical thinking skills
Performance Assessment
•Lab Practicum (sciences)
•Sight reading performance (music)
•Dramatic performance (drama)
•Skills demonstration (physical education)
•Persuasive speech (public speaking)
In its simplest terms, a performance assessment is one which requires students to demonstrate that
they have mastered specific skills and competencies by performing or producing something.3 Advocates
of performance assessment call for assessments of the following kind: designing and carrying out
experiments; writing essays which require students to rethink, to integrate, or to apply information;
working with other students to accomplish tasks; demonstrating proficiency in using a piece of equipment
or a technique; building models; developing, interpreting, and using maps; making collections; writing
term papers, critiques, poems, or short stories; giving speeches; playing musical instruments; participating
in oral examinations; developing portfolios; developing athletic skills or routines, etc.
Performance assessment is a method of teaching and learning that involves both process and product. It is not just a testing strategy.
Performance assessment tasks involve students in constructing various types of products for diverse audiences. Students also are involved in developing the process that leads to the finished product.
Performance assessment measures what students can do with what they know, rather than how much they know. Performance assessment tasks are based on what is most essential in the curriculum and what is interesting to a student.
Performance Assessment Tasks Require Thinking Skills
Thinking skills provide the "verb" that directs the action in performance assessment tasks includ[ng getting information, processing it, and using it to make a product. Thinking skills include those activities related to understanding the audience and creating a product that fulfills a certain purpose for that audience. The assessment of the student's work should not only look at the final product but should also assess the processes that led to it.
A performance task can be broken down into a process that requires the following thinking skills:
Getting information (finding, completing, counting, collecting, reading, listening, defining, describing, identifying, listing, matching, naming, observing, recording, reciting, selecting, scanning)
Working with the information (comparing, contrasting, classifying, sorting, distinguishing, explaining why, inferring, sequencing, analyzing, synthesizing, generalizing, evaluating, making analogies, making models, and/or reasoning)
Using information for a purpose (informing, persuading, motivating)
Using information to craft a product/presentation (speaking, debating, singing, writing, surveying, designing, drawing, computing, constructing, demonstrating, acting out)
Using information to communicate with specific audiences (such as peers, younger, older, informed, uninformed, friendly, hostile, apathetic, homogeneous, or diverse groups)

13. QUESTIONS TO GUIDE CHOICE OF ASSESSMENTS
What type of assessment would best measure student
growth in my area?
Is there an assessment I use now that would be
appropriate?
Can I use the same assessment as a pre-assessment?
Does my assessment measure a depth of understanding?
Activity: In small groups, look through forms 1-4 in the appendix of the Achieve NJ guidebook. Remind participants that these forms are NOT required, but rather can be used as a guide to help develop SGOs.
After they have looked through the forms, use the Quality Assessments worksheet to record some ideas of what they would include in their own final assessments. Be ready to share out. When they are finished, facilitate a discussion around some ideas for assessments.

14. STARTING POINTS Getting to know your students
Data regarding current student performance
Data sources align to the skills and/or content focus
Data is both qualitative and quantitative
Highest-quality sources possible
Multiple evidence sources
Character of the class
SGOs are based on a specific set of students, so it is important that teachers gather good information at the beginning of the year. It is ALSO important that teachers be ready to advocate for themselves if administrators try to create SGOs for an entire grade level or subject area.
Getting to know your students –
Qualitative vs. quantitative:
Qualitative focuses on observations describes the quality – essay questions, analysis, free response
Quantitative focuses on numbers or quantities that can be measured – multiple choice, short answer, fill in the blank
The character of your class: See the NJEA Resource Guide) on website – Class Profile sections
Classroom Demographic
Income levels – Free and reduced lunch
Special needs – IEPs, 504s, ELL, Basic skills, G&T
Social Status – homeless, foster care
Medical issues
Starting Points

15. SOURCES OF DATA TO DETERMINE STARTING POINTS
Beginning of course diagnostic tests or performance task measuring:
Prerequisite skills for course material
Level of content knowledge
Prior year tests
Tests from other subjects/courses
Students’ grades in previous classes
NJEA Evaluation Teacher Resource Guide
REMEMBER: An SGO is developed for a specific group of students, not for an entire grade level or content area in a school or school district.
Activity: Small group discussion around some of the tools teachers can use as pre assessments to determine starting points. If it looks like time will permit, have a report out so that teachers can see a variety of ways to collect data.

16. DEVELOPING STUDENT GROWTH OBJECTIVES
Student Growth Objectives (SGOs) are academic goals for groups of students that are aligned to state standards and can be tracked using objective measures.
Types
General
General – Tiered Goal
Specific – Student Group
Specific – Content / Skill
Teachers may set goals for all of their students or for specific subgroups of students, such as students with disabilities, English language learners, or those performing below proficiency. The goals may be based on a comprehensive set of academic standards or one or more specific standards.
General
Focused on the teacher’s entire student population for a given course. Includes large proportion of curriculum.
EXAMPLE:
Covers all of the students in a teacher’s Algebra I classes and most of the Algebra I course.
General - tiered goal
Same as above, but with student goals tiered by preparation levels
Same as above, but with student goals tiered by preparation levels.
Specific — student group
Focused on a subgroup of students that need specific support.
Covers a group of students that scored below 45 percent on the pre-test.
Specific — content/skill
Focused on specific skills or content that students must master.
Students will all master 80 percent of the New Jersey Common Core State Standards related to Quadratic Functions and Modeling.
NOTE: It is inappropriate for an administrator to set SGOs for an entire grade level or subject area. Goals are specific to an individual teacher’s student population. SGOs are to address the unique needs of the students assigned to an individual teacher. This is why the goals are developed collaboratively.

17. SGOS ARE SMART GOALS Specific Measurable Achievable Relevant Timely
Identifies the skill or content to be mastered
Measurable
Identifies a way to measure the results
Achievable
Based on current student data
Relevant
Reflect the standards for the course work
Timely
Can be accomplished in the specified time frame
There are a number of different ways to define smart goals…this is the best way to think of them when referring to SGOs. It is important that an SGO be carefully worded so that everyone is clear on the expectation from the start. This is important for students and classroom planning, as well as from the new angle of evaluation.

18. GENERAL SGO Simple Method
Determine how many students are expected to meet a single target
Predict what percentage of students will be able to meet particular score on a final assessment
Develop a scoring guide on how well teacher meets SGO
Target score on final assessment that indicates considerable learning
Number of students that can reasonably meet that mark
Percentage of students in the course that this represents
10-15% range around this number
Particularly at the beginning of this process, when everyone is learning how to use SGOs and we are learning the impact they have on evaluation, it is probably best to keep things as simple as possible.
The following slides will show how to develop the scoring guide.

19. Attainment Level in Meeting Student Growth Objective
GENERAL SGO
Simple SGO: At least 70% (45/65) students will attain a
score of 80% or above on the end of course test.
Target Score
Attainment Level in Meeting Student Growth Objective
Students will attain a score of 80% or above on the end of course test.
Exceptional (4)
Full (3)
Partial (2)
Insufficient (1)
Percent of students meeting target
At least 85%
At least 70%
At least 55%
Less than 55%
Number of students
55-65
45-54
35-44
<35
This material can be very confusing when first exposed to it. Encourage participants to grasp what they can and then use the guide book later to go back and read the material. The sample used on these slides is the same as the sample in the guidebook.
The example on these slides is for a student group of 65 students. This could be the case for a secondary teacher who has several sections of the same subject.
The range for each of the attainment level is not set in stone. This is another place where, based on the students in a class, a teacher might need to advocate for themselves in setting these levels.
In this example, the target score on the final assessment that indicates considerable learning is 80% on the end of course test. Based on pre assessments, the teacher predicts that 70% (45) students can reach the 80% mark by the end of the year. That means that a full range (which results in a score of 3) of students meeting this target would be students. To determine the exceptional range, add 15% to the full range. In this example, that would be students. Partial and Insufficient ranges are determined by subtracting 15%.
Again, the range is not set in stone and are developed collaboratively with supervisors based on the students in the class.
Target score on final assessment that indicates considerable learning
Number of students that can reasonably meet that mark
Percentage of students in the course that this represents
10-15% range around this number

20. GENERAL SGO Tiered Method
Requires a closer look at any pre-assessment data
Break down a class based on their performance on pre-assessments
Preparedness
Score on Pre-Assessment
Number of Students
Percentage of Students
Low
35-49
36/65
56%
Medium
50-66
21/65
32%
High
67-80
8/65
12%
The chart shows an example of a hypothetical class and their scores on a pre-assessment. Following the chart across, on this assessment, the teacher predetermined that a low score on the assessment would be When the assessment was given 36 out of 65 students scored in this range, which represents 56% of the class. The same calculations are completed for the medium and high students. On the next slide, we will see how this data translates into a tiered SGO

21. GENERAL SGO Tiered Method
Use the pre-assessment data to develop a goal for each group of students based on their preparedness
Preparedness Group
Number of students in each group (Total)
Target Score on Post –Assessment
Number of students required for “Full Attainment”
Low
36/65 70
25-30
Medium
21/65 80
15-18
High
8/65 90
6-7
Full attainment would equate to a “3” or an “effective” score on a 1-4 scale. This range of 70-84% is a suggestion and not mandatory. The number should be set in collaboration between teacher and supervisor depending on the particular class/group for which the SGO is being developed. Each preparedness group is scored separately and then a final score is calculated. The next slide includes a chart on the student performance that equates to each of the teacher scores.
Full Attainment = 70-84%

22. GENERAL SGO Tiered Method
Determine the teacher score (objective attainment) based on % of students achieving the target score
Preparedness Group
Target score on Final Assessment
Objective Attainment Based on Percent (and Numbers) of Students Achieving Final Score
Exceptional 4
Full 3
Partial 2
Insufficient 1
Low 70
>85% (31-36)
70-84% (25-30)
55-69% (18-24)
<55% (0-17)
Medium 80
>85% (15-18)
70-84% (15-18)
55-69% (11-14)
<55% (0-10)
High 90
>85% (8)
70-84% (6-7)
55-69% (4-5)
<55% (0-3)
This chart takes the figures from the last slide and puts them into a form that allows you to determine the values for a teacher score. In a later slide, we will revisit this information to actually create a teacher score.

23. SPECIFIC SGOS Set for a more specific, limited purpose
Subset of Students
Gifted and Talented
Special Education
English Language Learners
Other students with a specific need or characteristic
Subset of Content
Specific Content area
“Power Standards”
Specific Skill area
Once a specific SGO is set for a subgroup or content/skill area, the rest of the process is the same for determining starting points and creating the SGO. Focusing on a specific subset of students might include any group of students for which there is a specific need. In an inclusion/in class support class, this might include students with IEPs. It might include English language learners, or perhaps students who did significantly poorly on pre assessments. It might include students who have a history of high absentee rates. This is another reason why creating SGOs MUST be done for a particular class and cannot be done at the school or district level. They should reflect the unique nature of a particular group of students.
SGOs can also be set for specific content or skills. This might include such things as “power standards” or skills that are necessary for success in a specific content area. One school defines a power standard as one that a student will need to be successful in life, successful in the class, and successful in state assessments. In order the qualify as a power standard, it must fit ALL three categories.
ACTIVITY: In small groups, participants can brainstorm who would be subsets within their class settings that they might set SGOs for, what the content would be for those subsets, and/or what would be specific skills or “power standards” that they might include in specific SGOs and how would they measure those skills, both at the end of the year and as a pre-assessment.

24. CREATING COLLABORATIVE SGOS
In pairs, role play the process of creating an SGO
Educator:
Think about a current class and its students and content
Describe your class and content, advocate for the creation of a particular SGO
Administrator:
Give feedback that either supports or rejects the educator’s SGO
Activity: Allow participants the opportunity to role play advocating for a particular SGO for a class, group of students, or content area. Allow for discussion afterwards focusing on strategies for presenting information that will support the creation of a particular SGO

25. TRACKING PROGRESS On-going student progress monitoring
Use of formative assessment
Adjust instruction accordingly
Adjust expectations if necessary
By February 15th
Monitor student progress using multiple measures
Formative assessment is the assessment for student learning and is used over the course of the year to adjust instruction and to ensure progress toward your student goals.
Using formative assessment data and reflective practice, adjust instruction to meet the needs of your students.
If your SGOs need to be amended, the DOE has set the timeline of February 15th for any adjustments to SGOs. Any revisions must be requested via your Principal and approved by the CSA.

26. TRACKING PROGRESS
Periodically through the year, and perhaps mid year with a supervisor, ask these questions:
How are students progressing toward SGOs?
How do I know?
Which students are struggling/exceeding expectations?
What am I doing to support them?
What additional resources do I need to support my work as I work to achieve my SGOs?
The DOE suggests a mid year meeting with supervisor to review the progress that students are making toward the SGO. In most places, this will probably not happen because of lack of time. However, if a teacher has not had the resources necessary for students to meet their SGOs, they should request a meeting well before February 15th to review the progress students have made and the resources that they will need to be successful.

27. REVIEW RESULTS Supervisor calculates the SGO
Prior to meeting, prepare evidence of student progress based on SGO
Score assessments, portfolios, performance rubrics, etc.
Calculate your own scores
Bring evidence and scores to annual summary conference
This calculation of final results may occur at the annual summative review conference. Teachers should be sure to be prepared for this meeting. The final assessment should be scored, and, teachers should compute their own SGO score before they get to the meeting. (the following slides will show how to compute the final score). The DOE says that the supervisor calculates this score, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN A TEACHER SHOULD NOT COME PREPARED AND READY TO STATE THEIR CASE IF STUDENTS DID NOT REACH THE LEVEL EXPECTED AND/OR DID NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT RESOURCES TO BE SUCCESSFUL.

28. REVIEW RESULTS
Results of the student group from tiered goal on slide 22
Preparedness Group
Target Score (%)
Number of Students at Target Score
Low 70 31
Medium 80 16
High 90 4
This and the ones on the following slides reflect the tiered goal set on slide 21 and show how the SGO will be scored. The number of students at Target Score is an illustrative group of students and the number of scores within each preparedness group.

29. REVIEW RESULTS
Using SGO Form, translate student performance to Objective
Attainment Level
Preparedness Group
Target score on Final Assessment
Objective Attainment Based on Percent (and Numbers) of Students Achieving Final Score
Exceptional 4
Full 3
Partial 2
Insufficient 1
Low 70
>85% (31-36)
70-84% (25-30)
55-69% (18-24)
<55% (0-17)
Medium 80
>85% (15-18)
70-84% (15-18)
55-69% (11-14)
<55% (0-10)
High 90
>85% (8)
70-84% (6-7)
55-69% (4-5)
<55% (0-3)
For this teacher, since 31 students in the low group reached a score of at least 70, the teacher attained an exceptional level for this group, 16 students reached a score of 80, so the teacher attained a full score for this group, and in the high group, only 4 students reached the goal score of 90, so the teacher had an attainment score of 2 for this group.
The teachers full SGO Attainment Level is the average of each of these groups, or a score of 3. It is possible for this final score to be a decimal, and not a whole number.
Explain that teachers with two SGOs will average the scores of the two together to arrive at their final SGO score
= /3=3
3 is the teacher’s Objective Attainment Level for this SGO

30. REVIEW RESULTS Weighted method
Determine the percentage of students in each group
Use that percentage to weight the assigned Attainment Score
Preparedness Group
Number of students in each group (Total)
Percentage of Students in Each Group
Weight Assigned to Attainment Score
Low
36/65
56%
.56
Medium
21/65
32%
.32
High
8/65
12%
.12
The weighted method is probably a more accurate way to determine the growth of an entire group of students, but is a bit more complicated.
The first step is to determine the percentage of the group that is made up of each of the preparedness groups. The next slide shows the next step in determining the teacher score.

31. REVIEW RESULTS Weighted Method
Calculated Weights then applied to straight scores
Preparedness Group
Number of Students at Target Score
Objective Attainment Level
Weight
Weighted Score
Low 31 4
x0.56
2.24
Medium 16 3
x0.32
.96
High 2
X0.12
.24
Total
3.44
The number of students at the target score for each preparedness level is used to determine the objective attainment level (teacher score for each group). Using the percentage as a weight, multiply by the decimal to come up with the weighted score. Adding the scores together give the total teacher score.
There is no requirement to use one scoring method over the other. Teachers should calculate both scores prior to the meeting to come equipped with the score that puts them in the best light. Since the DOE has created a “business rule” that will allegedly use data that puts teachers in the best light for SGPs, then teachers should use the method.

32. REVIEW RESULTS Work in pairs to role play the following scenario
Use the data in the two scenarios on reviewing results…non-weighted and weighted
Teacher partner should advocate for the use of the weighted version of the results
Administrator partner should advocate for the use of the non weighted version of results
Use this role play to give participants another opportunity to practice advocating for themselves and their SGO

33. IMPROVING PRACTICE USED PROPERLY SGOs can help us focus:
On content that matters
On solid instructional practices
On differentiation
On formative assessments that drive instruction
On collaboration with peers
It should not be forgotten that SGOs can be used to successfully improve both teacher practice and student learning. Adding the evaluation component can sometimes make it difficult to stay focused on the positive impact SGOs can have, but staying focused on this area may reduce anxiety about the evaluation component of the SGO process.