Brookwood School District #167 Student Growth Guidebook

Student Growth Guidebook Table Of Contents

Section Page Number

Section 1: Introduction

Introduction to Student Growth 3

Performance Evaluation Ratings 3

SLO Cycle 3

Important Vocabulary 5

Section 2: Assessments

Assessment Requirements 6

Assessment Library 7

Assessment Approval Checklist 8

Student Exemptions 8

Repeat Assessments/Retesting 8

Assessment Administration 8

Working with Assessment Data 9

Section 3: The SLO Process

SLO Framework 10

Creating Your SLO 12

SLO Part 1: The Population (SLO Roster) 12

SLO Roster Inclusion 12

SLO Roster Exclusion 13

SLO Part 2: The Assessment 14

SLO Part 3: Baseline Data Analysis 14

Measurement Models 14

SLO Part 4: Growth Targets 14

District Approved Growth Goal Types 15

Criteria for High Quality Goals 16

SLO Part 5: SLO Approval 16

SLO Part 6: Midpoint Update

16

1

Section 4: Summative Student Growth Rating

Calculation of Overall Rating 17

Summative Performance Evaluation Rating 18

SLO Approval Timeline 18

Growth Collection Timelines 19

Appendix

Assessment Approval Checklist 22

SLO Tool 23

SLO Roster 25

Growth Goal Templates 26

Rating Matrices 30

Growth Collection Timelines 32

2

Section 1: Introduction The Brookwood School District #167 Performance Evaluation Reform Act (PERA) Joint Committee has agreed upon an evaluation process to promote best practices in instruction and assessment and supports the growth of all students through the use of evidence based practices. The plan that follows outlines the procedures for obtaining student growth data, completing relevant tools and analyzing scores to determine a summative evaluation rating. The district will be using a Student Learning Objective (SLO) tool to organize the goal­setting process and use student data in an accurate and meaningful way. With the SLO, educators can implement strategies to increase student achievement and maximize student growth. Using SLOs allows the educator to monitor student progress throughout the year and adapt teaching methods that are responsive to the learning needs of students. SLOs also connect to the Danielson Framework for Teaching, representing another layer of the work around educator effectiveness and fulfilling Danielson’s agreement. Multiple measures of educator’s practice, which include frequent observations, conferences, regular feedback, and student growth measures, provide a more complete picture of an educator’s performance and create more meaningful dialogue and evaluations. Introduction to Student Growth Student growth is defined as the change in understanding/knowledge over two or more points in time. Growth is not the same as attainment which can be evidenced by a single assessment measure (eg: final exam score or single NWEA MAP score). Growth must be measured by looking at the change in student performance from a baseline assessment to another assessment or post­test. According to PERA, student growth (not attainment) must be used as one measure on an educator evaluation. Performance Evaluation Ratings Student growth will represent 30% of an educator’s summative performance evaluation rating.

Year of Implementation School Year Percent of Student Growth

Percent of Professional Practice

Year 1 2015 ­ 2016 30% 70%

Student growth ratings will combine with the professional practice ratings to arrive at a summative performance evaluation rating. At the end of the evaluation cycle, educators will receive a summative performance evaluation rating: “Excellent”, “Proficient”, “Needs Improvement”, “Unsatisfactory”. (See Section 4: Calculation of Overall Rating) The SLO Cycle The Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) outline a process in which growth can be measured through various assessment tools. Educators will collaborate with evaluators to set growth targets using approved assessments and regularly monitor the student’s learning. Through this process a picture of the students’ learning and growth (and the educator’s contribution to that growth) will be measured and monitored. It is a data­informed process that involves diagnosing and improving specific student learning needs.

3

SLOs are: Targets of student growth Set by educators at the start of the instructional interval Articulations of expected growth during a specified instructional interval Based on a thorough review of available data Reflections of student baseline skills Approved after collaboration

The SLO component is part of the evaluation cycle. (See Figure 1.1) The SLO cycle includes 5 steps. Step 1 includes gathering baseline student data from a growth pre­test, and the development of the SLO by the educator (See Section 3). Step 2 includes a discussion between the evaluator and the educator which leads to approval of the SLO or revisions of the SLO. After approval, the educator works with students to achieve learning goals. Step 3 is the midcourse check­in where the uniform process (occurring at the midpoint of the evaluation cycle) by which the educator will collect data specific to student learning. This is not used in the performance evaluation. This will help an educator assess his or her progress and adjust the instruction, if necessary. Step 4 is the overall evaluation of the student growth. At this point, the educator administers the post assessment and the amount of student growth toward the target is analyzed. A score based on the number of students meeting or exceeding the target is assigned. Step 5 is the final step in which the professional practice and the student growth SLOs are combined to create an overall evaluation score (See Section 4: Calculation of Overall Rating). The cycle then repeats with a new group of students in a subsequent year.

Figure 1.1

SLO Guidelines: Each educator needs to use 2 assessments. Only one assessment can be used for a single SLO. Thus, every educator will be required to write two SLOs per evaluation cycle. (See Section 3: The SLO Process)

4

Important Vocabulary Assessment:A tool that measures a student’s knowledge and skills. Assessment Reliability: The degree to which an assessment tool produces stable and consistent results; repeatable results. Assessment Set: A series of mirrored assessments designed to measure student growth on a specific set of learning targets/content.

Assessment Validity: The degree to which an assessment accurately measures what we intend to measure. Attainmen: Meeting a target on a single test; measurement of knowledge at a single point in time. (ex: final exam, chapter test, spelling test)

Bloom’s Taxonomy: The level of rigor of assessment questions categorized into six levels of increasing rigor: remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating. Levels can be grouped into three

levels of basic, standard, or expanded.

Constructed Response Assessments: Asks students to construct their own answer to a question. Essential Skills: Key skills that are a requirement for success at the next level of learning for the scaffolding of skills that are going to be taught/learned.

Formative Assessment: Assessments for learning: they occur during the instructional interval and provide information about student learning progress.

Growth: Change in understanding/knowledge over time. Calculated by a numerical change between 2 or more assessment tools.

Inter­rater Reliability: The degree to which different judges or raters are consistent and repeatable in their assessment decisions.

Intra­rater Reliability: The degree to which a single, individual judge is consistent and repeatable the assessment decisions. Mirrored Assessment Set: A series of comparable assessments that can measure learning over 2 or more points in time. They are designed with the same form, content, and level of complexity.

Performance Assessments: Asks students to demonstrate understanding by performing or creating a product. Performance Evaluation Rating: The final rating of a educator’s performance, using the rating levels of “Unsatisfactory”, “Needs Improvement”, “Proficient”, and “Excellent” that includes consideration of both data and

indicators of student growth, when applicable under Sections 24A­25 of the Illinois School Code.

Pivot Points: Places in the educator’s lesson where student growth data will determine the next teaching steps. Question Complexity: The embedded level of cognitive demand when completing an assessment item. This level is typically represented through levels as defined by Bloom's Taxonomy, Webb’s Depth of Knowledge, or 3

levels of Basic, Standard and Expanded.

Selected Response Assessments: Asks students to select the correct answer from a provided set of answers. Summative Assessment: Assessments of learning: they occur at the end of an instructional interval and provide a final measurement of student mastery.

5

Student Learning Objective (SLO): A template for setting student growth targets that educators set at the start of the school year and strive to achieve by the end of the school year. These targets are based on a thorough

review of available data reflecting students’ baseline skills and are set and approved after collaboration between

the educator and evaluator.

Webb’s Depth of Knowledge (DOK): The level of rigor of assessment questions, categorized into four level of increasing rigor: Recall, Skills/Content, Strategic Thinking, and Extended Thinking.

Section 2: The Assessments The assessments are of integral importance to this process as they are the tool that will measure the amount of learning and growth that is happening. The tools themselves need to be designed carefully to accurately reflect the key skills and objectives of the instructional interval at the appropriate level of cognitive demand and in the appropriate format for the class or course. The assessments must be comparable for measuring growth and designed to capture the change in learning over time. Assessment Requirements Educators are required to use two assessments, and therefore, all educators will write two SLOs. According to PERA law, each educator evaluation must have a Type I or Type II and a Type III assessment set including a mirrored pre­test and a post­test designed to measure growth and learning.

Type I Type II Type III

An assessment that measures a certain group of students in the same manner with the same potential assessment items, is scored by a non­district entity, and is widely administered beyond Illinois.

An assessment developed or adopted and approved by the school district and used on a district­wide basis that is given by all educators in a given grade or subject area.

An assessment that is rigorous, aligned with the course’s curriculum, and that the evaluator and educator determine measures student learning.

Therefore, each educator is required to use two assessment sets. As a result, educators will complete two Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) (See section 3: SLO Process).

6

Assessment Library Category 1: General Education K­3, Departmentalized Reading & Math 4­8, Departmentalized STEM & Social Studies 4­8, and Interventionist (Special Education, Title I, Response to Intervention, Gifted, & English Language Learners) K­8

Choose 1 (Type I or II) Choose 1 (Type III)

NWEA MAP (I) Common Writing Rubric (II)

Common Math Assessment (II) Common Math Assessment (II)

Common Reading Assessment (II) Common Reading Assessment (II)

Common STEM Assessment (II) Common STEM Assessment (II)

Common Social Studies Assessment (II) Common Social Studies Assessment (II)

Common Writing Rubric (II) Teacher Created Assessment (III) Category 2: Special Area Teachers (Physical Education, Music, Band, Art, Technology, Foreign Language) K­8

Choose 1 (Type I or II) Choose 1 (Type III)

Common Physical Education Assessment (II) Teacher Created Assessment (III)

Common Music Assessment (II)

Common Band Assessment (II)

Common Art Assessment (II)

Common Technology Assessment (II)

Common Foreign Language Assessment (II) Category 3: Early Childhood/Pre­Kindergarten

Choose 1 (Type I or II) Choose 1 (Type III)

Common Early Childhood Assessment (II) Teacher Created Assessment (III)

7

Assessment Approval Checklist for Additional Type III Assessments All Type III assessments must adhere to the parameters set by the assessment approval document and must be mutually agreed upon by the educator and evaluator. (See Appendix: Approval Checklist)

Student Exemptions In some cases, students may be excluded from an educator’s growth SLO roster. (See Section 3: SLO Roster Exemptions) Exclusion agreements will be made through mutual agreement between evaluator and educator. Repeat Assessments/ Re­testing Students may re­test on post­tests when the following terms have been met:

An educator has created and has had approval of an additional mirrored assessment and communicates the re­take timeline, re­teaching provided, and students involved to the evaluator

Rationale and evidence documented/shared with evaluator Assessment Administration Assessments must be administered with techniques so that valid and reliable data can be obtained. Administration requirements may vary, based on the type of assessment. All Type I assessments must be administered using guidelines set forth by the assessment tool directions, testing conditions, and materials allowed must be consistent. All Type II assessments must be administered in a consistent fashion across the grade level. Testing conditions, and materials allowed must be consistent. Each Type I and Type II should consider the following and maintain consistency between pre­ and post­test

8

Categories Considerations

Testing Administrator

The same individual should administer the pre­ and the post­test. Ex: educator or qualified proctor

Materials Allowable on Assessment

Tools given to students should be the SAME across pre­ and post­test administrations. Tools must be the same for all educators giving the Type II. Ex: calculator, ruler, scissors, computer

Testing Instructions

Testing directions should be consistent. The same instructions should be given in the pre­ and post­test administration.

Preparing for Testing

Preparation which includes teaching skills is important. Preparation should not include telling students questions/answers. Students should not be given the assessment as practice before the assessment. Students should not be given a study guide with the questions to the assessment.

Answering Questions during Testing

Educators should clarify when necessary. Parameters for clarification should be consistent for Type II assessments across all educators of that grade or course.

Assessment Accommodations

Accommodations within IEP and 504 Plans should be given to students. Modifications as written in IEP and 504 must be followed. Additional modifications or accommodations must be approved by the evaluator.

Scoring Assessments

Computer based assessments will be scored by computer. Pen and paper tests will be scored by a certified educator.

Data for Evaluator Scores will be entered into the SLO roster (see Appendix). Educators should keep copies of tests, reports, or any other artifacts to share as evidence.

Working With Assessment Data Step 1: Baseline Educators will need to collect baseline data to determine students’ strengths and weaknesses. This information will be used to set growth targets. Knowing where students start, and knowing what they have mastered, and what they have yet to master, will inform instruction. Educators should look for as much data as possible when determining students’ strengths and weaknesses. Data sources, including, but not limited to: state tests, interim/benchmark assessments,and/or Response to Intervention (RtI) data, can help facilitate educator understanding of each student. After collecting baseline data, educators will identify needs for their students. Using allowable data from their assessment sets, educators can target specific academic skills, or concepts, based upon approved assessments and student need.

9

Step 2: Baseline Data Analysis and Goal Setting Educators will examine baseline data, looking at pre­test and other relevant formative assessment/observational data to determine what students already know, including strengths and weaknesses. This will mean educators will disaggregate their data and examine each student’s performance. (See Appendix: SLO Roster) Educators will set rigorous and reasonable goals for students based on goal setting parameters as defined in section 4. (See Appendix: Growth Goal Templates) Step 3: Formative Instruction and Pivot Points After setting goals, educators will work with students to achieve goals through engaging in quality instruction aligned to the goals of the class or course. Strategic formative assessments will measure student learning toward the goals and embedded pivot points will allow educators to change their instructional plans to meet the unique needs of their students. As the end of the instructional interval approaches, educators and students alike should feel prepared to meet the goals. Step 4: Final Post­test and SLO Ratings Educators will administer a final post test at the culmination of the instructional interval. Student progress will be measured according to the approved measurement models (See Section 3: Measurement Models). Educators will calculate the percent of students who have met or exceeded their growth targets.

Section 3: The SLO Process The SLO framework is the process of setting targets and measuring the extent to which they are achieved. Targets must be measurable, rigorous, and realistic. SLOs are a long­term goal for advancing student learning. It is a data informed process that involves diagnosis and improving specific learning needs. SLO Framework All educators will submit two SLOs per evaluation cycle (See Figure 3.1 and Appendix: SLO Framework). The SLO documents will be submitted to evaluators in accordance with the District Timeline and Guidelines (See Section 4: and Appendix: Timeline). Tenured educator receiving “Excellent” or “Proficient” will still need to write one SLO in the non­summative years. This is one SLO per year with one SLO in Year 1 and one SLO in Year 2. Nontenured teachers will write two SLOs each year of the evaluation cycle. The SLO Framework provides a tool for the process of setting targets and measuring the extent to which they are achieved. All educators must submit one SLO form for all SLOs written. The framework is shown in Figure 3.1 (See Appendix: SLO Framework)

10

Figure 3.1

11

Creating Your SLO The process of writing an SLO starts at the beginning of the school year. It includes identification of the population and assessment, administration and analysis of the pre­test or baseline assessment and the setting of a growth goal or target. Part 1: The Population (SLO Roster) The population is the sample of students that will be measured for growth. The SLO Roster Each educator will have a representative group of students whose growth will be used to determine evaluation ratings. This group of students will be listed on that educator’s SLO Roster. The number of students on the SLO roster will vary based on educator assignment. Students will be documented as part of the roster through the SLO Roster and Scoring Template document (See Figure 3.2 and Appendix: SLO Roster). Figure 3.2

SLO Roster Inclusion For each SLO completed, educators will identify the specific students included in the SLO. Generally, educators will use the sample of all students enrolled in their class or course. The educator’s final SLO Roster may be different than the educator’s actual in­class roster. For special education educators with students on their caseload who may be enrolled in several different homerooms, courses, etc., educators may select a subset of the caseload enrolled in a class(s) with the same curriculum and objectives for a single SLO. Teachers do not need to write one single SLO for the entire caseload if the students are taking different courses, etc.

12

For specialist educators with a changing caseload of students (ex: Title I educator, RtI educator, or other specialist), educators create the SLO roster based on who is enrolled at the start of the instructional interval. If a student is removed from a specialist’s class/intervention group due to achieving goals or making appropriate gains prior to the end of the instructional interval, the specialist will count that student as meeting the goal even though they are not present for the entire instructional interval. For example: An RtI educator has 20 students receiving interventions. Three of the students improve quickly and reach goals within a two month period. Those students return to the regular classroom without additional intervention. Those three students are counted on the RtI educator’s SLO roster as “yes” for having met the goals even though they ended services after two months. The remaining 17 would be continually monitored for the rest of the instructional interval. The intent is to prevent educators from “slowing growth” to keep students on the roster for the entire instructional interval if growth to move out of RtI is possible. The student also counts on the regular classroom educator’s roster unless the student is pulled out for more than 90% of the instructional time related to the SLO assessment. In that case, the student counts only on the specialist’s roster. The following general criteria for student population on the SLO has been identified:

Student must be scheduled with the evaluated educator for at least 80% of the instruction related to the SLO assessment. (ex: A bilingual pull out student who is out of the classroom for more than 80% of the Reading Instruction time would not count on the Regular Education Teacher’s Roster for a Reading SLO)

Students enrolled during the first 15 student attendance days will be included in the SLO Roster

Pre­test and post­test data must be available. (Student is enrolled during SLO data collection window)

Exemptions are allowed based on evaluator approval

In some cases, not all students’ growth scores will “count” towards a educator’s success on a SLO. While educators will set goals for all students and monitor all students’ progress towards those goals throughout the year, there may be a case for student(s) exclusion from an educator’s roster. SLO Roster Exclusion In some cases, students may be excluded from a educator’s growth SLO roster. Exclusion agreements will be made through mutual agreement between evaluator and educator. Teachers should track data on the students they would like exempted from their SLO roster. This data may include information such as: referrals, counseling, attendance records, parent communication log, etc. Therefore, any requests for exemption are the responsibility of the educator. Students enrolled after the first fifteen days of student attendance at the start of the school year would not be included in a educator’s growth SLO roster, unless the evaluator and educator agree. This includes, but is not limited to: students who have transferred from another school, transferred from another class or been added to a caseload. For example, students who are not continuously enrolled in the educator’s class may not be included in the educator’s growth roster.

13

Part 2: The Assessment Assessments will be selected from the approved library (See Section 2: Assessment Requirements). The assessment will be administered within the first 2 weeks of the school year according to assessment administration policies. Part 3: Baseline Data and Analysis Teachers will collect baseline data through the administration of a pre­test aligned to end­of­year expectations. Teachers will look at student results and determine each student’s current strengths and weaknesses. These will be important data pieces for writing student growth targets. Teachers can use a myriad of techniques to break down data and gather a more comprehensive picture of the students’ starting points. This will help facilitate grouping of students, setting targets and making instructional decisions in the class. (See Section 2) Measurement Models When collecting student data to represent growth and learning, a minimum of two data points must be used (ex: baseline and post­test scores). Calculating the difference in learning based on these two points is done using one of many different methods known as measurement models.

“A measurement model is a collection of definitions, calculations or rules that summarizes student

performance over two or more time points and supports interpretation about the students, their

classrooms, their educators or their schools,”

Castellano & Ho (2013) A Practioner’s Guide to Growth Models. CCSSO retrieved from: http://Scholar.harvard.edu/files/andrewho/files/a_practioners_guide_to_growth_models.pdf

In this district, student growth will be calculated using a Simple Growth (Gain Scores) or Adjusted Growth (Projection) measurement models.

Simple Growth (Gain Score)

Adjusted Growth (Projection)

Compares pre­test to post­test (or more data points) Based on baseline results, sets a growth target of expected results.

Example:

(Post­test score)­ (Pre­test score) = total growth Example: Educator compares student score to historical data. Student “A” scores a 25% on the baseline. The educator looks at typical growth of other students starting at a similar place and sets a goal for that student based on expected results.

Part 4: Growth Targets Educators will set growth targets for students. This will capture the amount of growth a student should make in a single instructional interval calculated by the approved measurement model. There are multiple types of growth goals. Based on the allowable goal types and parameters, educators can set reasonable and rigorous goals for students. Using a growth goal template, (See Appendix: Growth Goal Template) educators can create goals based on a consistent format. Using the simple examples below, educators can tailor a series of goals that work well for their teams.

14

District Approved Goal Types: I. Whole Group: One goal is written for the average of an entire class, grade level, etc.. II. Individual Student: Personalized, individual goals are written for each student. III. Tiered: Students are broken into groups with similar features. Goals are written for separate tiers.

Whole Group Goals: One goal is written for the average of an entire class, grade level, etc.. Example Scenario Example Goal

An educator has 4 sections of 6th grade PE, 2 sections of 7th grade PE. The educator focuses on 6th grade. Teacher tracks performance growth in 3 major areas during the instructional interval using a district Fitness Rubric. The rubric produces an overall fitness rating of 6 leveled tiers.

Of the students in my 6th grade PE class, 75% will improve by 2 tiers or more on the common Physical Fitness Rubric.

Individual Student Goals: Personalized, individual goals are written for each student. Example Scenario Example Goal

The 2nd grade educator tests all students on the essential skills in reading comprehension using a district assessment set. Based on historical data, she sets expected growth targets for each student.

Of the students enrolled in my 2nd grade reading class, all students will reach their individual improvement goals­­see attached spreadsheet­­on the district reading common assessment set.

Tiered Student Goals: Students are broken into groups with similar features. Goals are written for separate tiers. These are not intended to be Response to Intervention tiers.

Example Scenario Example Goal

A middle school math educator baseline tests all students in 7th grade. Based on results, she sorts the students into 3 groups and sets a different goal for each group. Teacher writes: Students will be broken into 3 groups. In group 3

the students showed strengths in

the following areas: The Number

system (7.NS.1 and 7.NS.2). In

group 3 students showed greatest

weaknesses in Expressions and

Equations (7.EE.1­4) and Ratios

and Proportional Relationships

(7.RP.1­3)...

Of the students enrolled in Mrs. Johnson’s 7th grade math classes, all students will reach their tiered goal on the District Common 7th Grade Math Assessment Set. Group 1: will improve by 10% or more overall on the posttest (in each strand) Group 2: Will improve by 20% or more overall on the posttest (in each strand) Group 3: Will improve by 25% in EE and RP strands specifically

15

Criteria for High Quality Goals:

1. Goals must be based on pre­test data. Growth targets are set based on students’ starting places, therefore, educators must use pre­test data when setting a growth target. Growth goals cannot be written over the summer or before the start of the course.

2. Growth assessments must be mirrored. Growth targets measure the amount of growth expected between two data points; therefore, the assessments must measure the same skills with the same format and complexity. For example, if you are using a writing rubric, an educator cannot “switch” to a grammar assessment for your post­test. Also, if an educator uses AIMS Web for the pre­test he/she cannot “switch” to using an educator created post­test. There should be alignment between the assessment chosen for the pre­test, course goals, SLO goals, and post­test.

3. Growth targets should uphold high achievement. This means growth targets should be set with the expectation that students will achieve to the maximum of their abilities. If a student performs exceptionally well on a pre­test, the student should be expected to maintain a high level of achievement on a post­test.

4. Growth targets should be quantifiable goals. Educators should use numerical targets to set growth goals. Goals should be as clear as possible. (For example: Do not say, “Students will become better readers.” Instead say, “Students will increase their reading comprehension scores by 10% on a given reading assessment set.”)

Part 5: SLO Approval Teachers will submit their SLOs to the evaluator for approval, and together, the evaluator and educator will work collaboratively to ensure that the growth targets are feasible and attainable. (See Appendix: Growth Collection Timeline) Part 6: Mid­point update SLO Revision is an important step, especially during the first few years of implementation, when limited data is available by which to set feasible growth targets. The educator should regularly monitor student progress after the SLO is approved. At the midpoint of the instructional interval, data should be collected to document student progress. This data can be in the form of another mirrored assessment as well as portfolios of student work and other formative assessments. At the midpoint of the instructional interval, once more data is available, the educator is allowed the opportunity to revise growth targets, based upon the progress monitoring data or changes in the classroom. Key Points on SLO Revisions:

1. A meeting is optional, at either the educator’s or evaluator’s request. a. Educators submits the revised SLO, the original SLO, and evidence for revisions, and baseline

data. 2. The evaluator reviews and must approve any changes.

a. The evaluator rejects the proposed SLO if it is not satisfactory against the SLO Framework and the data does not support any changes.

3. If educator and evaluator do not agree, even after several meetings, the educator may appeal the decision to the PERA Joint Committee for an additional review.

16

Section 4: Summative Student Growth Rating The summative student growth rating will be determined by multiple SLO scores. Educators will complete each SLO and the SLO will be approved by the evaluator. After administration and grading of the post­test, the percent of students meeting or exceeding a target will be calculated by the educator. This will be recorded in the SLO Roster Tool (See Appendix: SLO Roster). Evidence should be kept by the educator to support calculations and may be referenced during the post conference. Evidence can include, but is not limited to: graded student tests, scoring printouts, photographs/recordings of student work, data analysis sheets. Measurement Models Student growth will be calculated using a Simple Growth (Gain Scores) or Adjusted Growth (Projection) measurement models. (See section 3: Measurement Models) Calculation of Overall Rating Educators will calculate their own scores and bring scoring documents and evidence to the evaluation conference. Evaluation ratings are calculated as follows:

1. After administration of the final assessment (post­test) of the Growth Assessment Set, the educator enters each student’s final score. 2. The educator enters if each individual student exceeded or met the growth target by answering yes or no by comparing the growth

target to the final score. 3. Overall educator rating of student growth measures on this SLO will be computed once the relevant information has been entered into

the worksheet.

# Students

Making Target (A) Calculate = Count

total “yes”

Total Students (B)

% of students

Target≥

Calculate

=(A/B)x100

% of students ≥Target

Descriptive Rating Numerical

Rating

80.0­100% Excellent 4

65.0­79.99% Proficient 3

50.0­64.99% Needs Improvement 2

>50.% Unsatisfactory 1

For example, if an SLO roster has a total of 20 students, and 16 students make their targets, 80% of the students met their target. This would give a descriptive rating of “Excellent” and a numerical rating of 4. Each SLO will have a numerical rating assigned based on the percentage of students meeting or exceeding the growth targets. The educator and evaluator will average all scores for all SLOs. The average score becomes the summative student growth rating. NOTICE: This number may be a decimal and not a whole number. In the case that the number is not a whole number, please use the following thresholds to determine the summative growth rating.

17

Summative Student Growth Rating

Thresholds

Excellent 3.3 or higher

Proficient 2.5­3.29

Needs Improvement 1.7­2.49

Unsatisfactory 1.6 or less

Summative Performance Evaluation Rating Student growth will represent 30% of a educator’s summative performance evaluation rating with professional practice representing 70% of the overall rating. Student growth ratings will be combined with professional practice to calculate an overall rating of “Excellent,” “Proficient,” “Needs Improvement,” or “Unsatisfactory.” See Figure 4.3 for how to combine measure of growth and practice into a single rating. Figure 4.3

SLO Approval Timeline Educators will enter into an annual cycle for baseline assessment administration, SLO development, SLO approval, midpoint checks, post­test administration and calculation of summative growth evaluation rating. Educators will submit SLOs to the evaluator for approval. With evaluator support, the educator works towards achieving growth targets.

18

15 school days after start of semester

4 weeks after start of semester 6 weeks after start of semester

Baseline assessment window.

All enrolled students take approved baseline assessment

SLO framework is completed by teacher

SLO is submitted to evaluator for approval

Evaluators approve SLO If SLO is not approved at

initial conference, educator will resubmit within 5 school days.

SLO Approval Elements

1. The evaluator and educator jointly discuss and review SLO. 2. The agreed upon SLO must be rigorous and attainable. Goals should have rationale identified which

aligns with teaching strategies and course curriculum goals and reflect strengths and needs of student population.

3. If the educator and evaluator cannot agree on the SLO, even after several meetings, the educator may appeal the decision to the PERA Joint Committee for an additional review.

Growth Data Collection Timelines After the 2015­2016 school year, tenured teachers will collect data over instructional intervals within a two year period. Non­tenured teachers will collect and use data over a single year’s instructional interval. During the initial implementation years, 2015­2016 tenured teachers will use two SLOs during their instructional intervals. By the fall of 2017, all tenured teachers may use one SLO during each year of the evaluation cycle. Figure 4.5 describes this timeline. (See Appendix: Growth Collection Timeline) Figure 4.5 All non­tenured and tenured on year two of the evaluation cyle 2015­12016

19

Non­tenured educators 2016­2017 and after Tenured educators on year one of the evaluation cycle

in 2015­2016 and all tenured 2016­2017 and after

20

Appendix Section

21

Brookwood Approval Checklist for School­based Assessments Level/Subject: ________________________________________________________ Teacher (s): __________________________________________________________ Principal/ Evaluator _____________________________________________________

Standards & Alignment

All items in the assessment align to grade/subject standards

The assessments are aligned vertically

All assessments are designed with a Backwards Planning Model (i.e. aligned to end­of­instructional interval goals)

Question Complexity

The assessments are designed so all students will be able to demonstrate growth

The assessments measure the spectrum of standard complexity; items match the full range of cognitive thinking required in class

Validity & Reliability

The teacher has a plan for administering assessments consistently across all classes

Clear scoring rubrics or guidance exists for open­ended questions or performance­based assessments

Assessment content in unique (ex: Reading passages students have never seen before but are aligned to class objectives that will/have been taught)

Assessment intentionally measures skills and knowledge, aligned to standards and objectives, that it was designed to measure

Assessment set produces similar results over time (multiple years)

Mirrored Assessment

Mirrored versions have been developed to assess growth at more than one point in time.

Mirrored version is mirrored in form, content and complexity

Assessment results will provide data for teacher pivot points: adjusting instruction for improved student understanding

I approve of this assessment/task and any accompanying rubrics without further change.

Please make changes suggested and resubmit the assessment/tasks and rubrics.

Signature of Evaluator _____________________________________ Date: _____________

Signature of Teacher _____________________________________ Date: _____________

Student Learning Objective Framework

22

A Student Learning Objective (SLO) is a detailed process used to organize evidence of student growth over a specified period of time. The SLO process is appropriate for use in all grade levels and content areas and establishes meaningful goals aligning curriculum, instruction, and assessment. The SLO process supports the measurement of student growth using multiple and varied assessments over multiple points in time. This process provides more valid and reliable evidence of the influence that educators have on student learning. This template guides educators and evaluators through a collaborative SLO process.

SLO General Information

A. Educator Name

B. Date of Conference

C. School Name

D. Course Name/Subject

E. Grade(s)

F. Assessment Type Type II or III

G. Assessment Name *Attach a copy of assessment *Explain assessment rationale.

H. Pre­Assessment Window *Anticipated date(s) for implementing

I. Mid­point Assessment Window *Anticipated date(s) for implementing

J. Post­Assessment Window *Anticipated date(s) for implementing

K. Collaboratively Developed *List assessment/SLO team members and position (if applicable):

Yes No

SLO Context and Statement

1. Selected Standards *Which standards are being addressed and rationale.

2. Mirrored Assessment (pre, mid, & post) *Explain how mirrored assessments are designed and rationale. (form, content, and complexity)

3. Baseline Data and Historical Trends *Explain students’ scores and expected growth based upon historical data

4. SLO Statement *Attach SLO Roster

5. Instructional Strategies for Obtaining Objective

23

6. Midpoint Review *Explain pivots you will make in your instruction based on midpoint data review

7. End of Instructional Interval Results *Adapted from Georgia Department of Education

Signature of Evaluator

____________________________________ Date: _____________

Signature of Teacher

____________________________________ Date: _____________

24

Brookwood 167

SLO Roster Scoring Template This template may be used to organize data for SLO’s.

Directions for Use: 1. Teacher adds name or identification number for each student into the worksheet. Additional rows may be added as needed. 2. After administration of the Growth Assessment Set’s Baseline (Pre Test), the teacher enters each student’s baseline score. 3. After analysis of baseline scores, historical data, and other pertinent information, the teacher enters each student’s established

growth target. Growth targets should be rigorous, yet reasonable targets of student growth appropriate for that individual student. 4. When setting growth targets, the teacher should note rationale for growth target. 5. Where applicable*, after administration of a mirrored midpoint assessment, teacher enters student score. 6. After administration of the Growth Assessment Set’s Final Assessment (Post Test), the teacher enters each student’s final score. 7. Comparing the Growth Target to the Final Score, the teacher enters if each individual student exceeded or met the growth target by

answering yes or no. 8. Once the relevant information has been entered into the worksheet, overall teacher rating of student growth measures on this SLO

will be computed. Teacher Name: SLO Title:

Student Name or Identification Number

Baseline

Score

Midpoint Score*

Final Score

Growth Target

Growth Target Rationale Notes ≥Target? (yes/no)

* Midpoint scores are recommended for measuring and monitoring student progress toward growth targets. Midpoint scores will be discussed at “mid­point

check” as well as used for pivot points to ensure students grow to the targeted score.

SLO Score Calculations

# Students Making Target (A) Calculate = Count total “yes”

Total Students (B)

% of students Target≥

Calculate =(A/B)x100

% of students Target≥ Descriptive Rating Numerical Rating

80.0­100% Excellent 4

65.0­79.9% Proficient 3

50.0­64.9% Needs Improvement 2

>50.0% Unsatisfactory 1

25

Growth Goal Types & Sample Templates

There are multiple types of growth goals. Based on the district or building’s allowable goal types and parameters,

teachers can set reasonable and rigorous goals for students. Using a growth goal template, teachers can create

goals based on a consistent format. Using the simple examples below, your district can tailor a series of goals

that work well for your teams.

Goal Types In This Document: I. Whole Group: One goal written for the average of an entire class, grade level, etc.. II. Individual Student: Personalized, individual goals are written for each student. III. Tiered: Students are broken into groups with similar features. Goals are written for separate tiers.

Whole Group Goals: One goal written for the average of an entire class, grade level, etc.

Example Scenario Example Goal

A teacher has 4 sections of 6th grade PE, 2 sections of 7th grade PE. The teacher focuses on 6th grade. Teacher tracks performance growth in 3 major areas during the instructional interval using a district Fitness Rubric. The rubric produces an overall fitness rating of 6 leveled tiers.

Of the students in my 6th grade PE class, 75% will improve by 2 tiers or more on the common Physical Fitness Rubric.

A Special Education teacher has a caseload of 11 students. He has a co­taught 7th grade reading class. He writes his goal and tracks the growth of the whole group of students in the 7th grade reading class.

Of the students enrolled in 4th period reading, 80% will gain 50% of the growth needed to score 100% on the reading comprehension assessment set.

Whole Group Goal: Template and Samples This format sets a single goal for a whole group of students. It may focus on a grade, class or course average (ex:

class average will improve by 30%) or it may apply a single growth pattern to a group of students (ex: all students

will move 2 tiers on a rubric).

Template (Whole Group)

Of the students enrolled in (insert course or class name), all students will improve by (insert expected growth amount), on the (insert name of assessment tool).

26

Example A Template

Of the students enrolled in Mr. Jackson’s PE Class, all students will improve by 2 tiers or more, on the common Physical Education Fitness Rubric.

Example B Using Template

Of the students enrolled in Mrs. Smith’s and Mr. Fry’s co­taught reading class, all students will improve by 30% or more, on the District 7th grade Reading Comprehension Assessment Set.

Individual Student Goals: Personalized, individual goals are written for each student. Example Scenario Example Goal

The 2nd grade teacher tests all students on the essential skills in reading comprehension using a district assessment set. Based on historical data, she sets expected growth targets for each student.

Of the students enrolled in my 2nd grade reading class, all students will reach their individual improvement goals­­see attached spreadsheet­­on the district reading common assessment set.

A High School Special Education teacher has 10 students in a Life Skills class. The teacher uses the same performance rubric for an outing to a restaurant for all 10 students, but sets individual goals for each student based on their individual needs.

Of the students in the Life Skills Class, all students will reach their individual improvement goals­­see attached list­­ on the community­based assessment’s communication rubric.

Individual Student Goal: Template and Samples This format allows each student to have a different growth goal. The growth goal may be set based on historical

data, individual student abilities, student conferencing and goal setting or other methods which should be specified

when writing the rationale for goal.

Template (Individual Student)

Of the students enrolled in (insert course, class caseload name), students will reach their individual improvement goals­­see attached spreadsheet­­on the (insert name of assessment tool).

Example A Using Template

Of the students enrolled in Algebra II, students will reach their individual improvement goals­­see attached spreadsheet­­on the district type II Common Math Assessment Set.

27

Example B Using Template

Of the students on my 6th grade caseload, students will reach their individual improvement goals­­see attached spreadsheet­­on the Visualizing and Verbalizing Reading Comprehension Rubric by the SLP

Department.

Tiered Student Goals: Students are broken into groups with similar features. Goals are written for separate tiers.

Example Scenario Example Goal

A Middle School Math teacher baseline tests all students in 7th grade. Based on results, she sorts the students into 3 groups and sets a different goal for each group. Teacher writes: Students will be broken into 3 groups. In group 3 the

students showed strengths in the

following areas: The Number system

(7.NS.1 and 7.NS.2). In group 3 students

showed greatest weaknesses in

Expressions and Equations (7.EE.1­4)

and Ratios and Proportional

Relationships (7.RP.1­3)...

Of the students enrolled in Mrs. Johnson’s 7th grade math classes, all students will reach their tiered goal on the District Common 7th Grade Math Assessment Set. Group 1: Will improve by 10% or more overall on the post­test (in each strand) Group 2: Will improve by 20% or more overall on the post­test (in each strand) Group 3: Will improve by 25% in EE and RP strands specifically

A kindergarten teacher baselines all students in pre­reading and reading skills. Based on the baseline test, he finds that there are some students not recognizing letters yet some students that can read. He groups students into tiers based on similar ability, and sets specific goals for each tier.

Of the students enrolled in Mr. Brown’s Kindergarten Class, all students will reach their tiered goal on the Kindergarten Common Reading Growth Assessment Tool. Group 1: Will improve letter recognition and sight word recognition by improving scores by 40% or more. Group 2: Will improve reading comprehension by 25% or more.

Tiered Goal: Template and Samples This format allows goals to be crafted to groups of similar students.

Template (Tiered Goal)

Of the students enrolled in (insert course, class caseload name), students will reach their tiered goal on the (insert name of assessment tool).

*Tiered Goal must be defined and provided with rationale.

28

Example A Using Template #7

Of the students enrolled in Mrs. Johnson’s 7th grade math classes, students will reach their tiered goal on the District Common 7th Grade Math Assessment Set.

Group 1: Will improve by 10% overall on the posttest (in each strand) Group 2: Will improve by 20% overall on the posttest (in each strand) Group 3: Will improve by 25% in EE and RP strands specifically

Example B Using Template #7

Of the 10 students in the targeted population of Ms. Gray’s Speech Caseload, students will reach their individual student goals­­see attached spreadsheet­­on the District Speech 6­level Rubric.

Targeted population is selected based on the referral and pretest data: see attached spreadsheet.

29

30

31

32