Supporting Administrators in the SLG Goal Setting Process – Part I

1. Supporting Administrators in the SLG Goal Setting Process – Part I June 2014

2. Professional Learning Outcomes for 2014-15: SLG Goal Setting Process • Articulate the impact SLG goals have on improving student learning • Identify the characteristics of assessments that measure growth and inform instruction • Utilize the components of the SLG goal template • Create a common understanding of the depth of knowledge needed for college and career readiness • Set targets for all students

3. Professional Learning Outcomes for 2014-15: Inter-rater Reliability • Demonstrate familiarity with district rubric • Describe proficient practice based on district rubric descriptors • Provide feedback to educators based on evidence collected • Calibrate of evaluators

4. Outcomes for Today • Deeper examination of targeted components of the SLG goal setting process • Understand the connection/relationship between content and assessment • Understand the connection/relationship between context and baseline data • Revise personal goal based on today’s learning

5. Purpose of SLG Goals • How we got where we are today • Celebrating Oregon’s successes • Intention of SLG Goals • Collaborative conversations • Recognition for what you are doing well • Educators and students get the support they need in real time

6. The Oak Tree Analogy The Tree Analogy

7. Explaining the concept of educator contribution to student growth by evaluating the performance of two gardeners Explaining the influence of educators on student learning and growth by examining the performance of two gardeners • For the past year, these gardeners have been tending to their trees trying to get them to grow as much as possible. • Each gardener used a variety of strategies to help their own tree grow… Which of these two gardeners was more successful with their strategies?

8. To measure the performance of the gardeners, we will measure the height of the trees today (one year after they began tending to the trees). • Using this method, Gardener B is the superior gardener. This method is analogous to using Achievement to measure student learning.

9. … but this achievement result does not tell the whole story. • These trees are four years old. • We need to find the starting height for each tree in order to more fairly evaluate each gardener’s performance during the past year. • The trees were much shorter last year. Oak A Age 3 (1 year ago) Oak A Age 4 (Today) Oak B Age 3 (1 year ago) Oak B Age 4 (Today)

10. We can compare the height of the trees one year ago to the height today. • By finding the difference between these heights, we can determine how many inches the trees grew during the year of gardener’s care. • Tree B had more growth this year, so Gardener B is the superior gardener. This is analogous to using Simple Growth, also called Gain, to measure performance .

11. … but this simple growth result does not tell the whole story either. • We do not yet know how much of this growth was influenced by the strategies used by the gardeners themselves. • This is an “apples to oranges” comparison. • For our tree example, three environmental factors we will examine are: Rainfall, Soil Richness, and Temperature.

12. High Low Low High High Low

13. How much the gardeners’ own strategies influenced the growth of the trees… • We can take out each environmental factor’s contribution to growth. • After these external factors are accounted for, we will be left with the effect of just the gardeners. • To find the correct adjustments, we will analyze available data on trees tended by these gardeners.

14. Based on data, we identify growth expectations for each of these environmental factors, and we convert them into a form usable for our calculations. Now we can go back to Tree Aand Tree Bto adjust for their growing conditions.

15. To calculate our new adjusted growth, we start with gains. • Next, we will use our adjustments to account for the effect of each tree’s environmental conditions. • When we are done, we will have an “apples to apples” comparison of the gardeners’ influence on growth. +20 Gain +14 Gain

16. Based on data, we found that high rainfall resulted in extra growth on average. For having high rainfall, the extra growth is subtracted from Tree A’s growth to compensate. Similarly, for having low rainfall, Tree B’s growth is increased to compensate. +20 Gain +14 Gain ↑ for Rainfall ↓ for Rainfall

17. For having poor soil, Tree A’s growth is adjusted up to compensate. For having rich soil, Tree B’s growth is adjusted down to compensate. +20Simple +14 Simple ↑ for Rainfall ↓ for Rainfall ↓ for Soil ↑ for Soil

18. For having high temperature, Tree A’s growth is adjusted up to compensate. For having low temperature, Tree B’s growth is adjusted down to compensate. +14 Simple +14 Simple ↑ for Rainfall ↓ for Rainfall ↓ for Soil ↑ for Soil ↓ for Temp ↑for Temp

19. Now that we have removed the effect of environmental conditions, our adjusted growth result puts the gardeners on a level playing field. We calculate that Gardener A’s effect on Tree A is a given number of inches We calculate that Gardener B’s effect on Tree B is a smaller number of inches +20 Simple +14 Simple ↑ for Rainfall ↓ for Rainfall ↓ for Soil ↑ for Soil ↓ for Temp ↑ for Temp _________ + Y inches Adjusted Growth _________ + X inches Adjusted Growth

20. Using this method, Gardener A is the superior gardener. By accounting for last year’s height and environmental conditions of the trees during this year, we found the influence of each gardener on the growth of the tree. This is analogous to the student learning and growth goal process. + Simple + Simple ↑ for Rainfall ↓ for Rainfall ↓ for Soil ↑ for Soil ↓for Temp ↑ for Temp _________ + Y inches Adjusted Growth _________ + X inches Adjusted Growth

21. How does this analogy relate to student learning and growth goal calculations in the education context?

22. Baseline student performance data in a classroom on a Category I or II assessment

23. Using baseline student data and other information on factors that can influence student learning and growth to set targets

24. At the end of the course, students showed growth

25. Bringing all the information together

26. Similarly we calculate Ms. Johnson’s influence on each Tier and average across Tiers Ms. Johnson’s influence on Tier A learning and growth

27. Two teachers with student populations that look similar may have good reasons to set different expectations

28. THE SLGG process recognizes teachers of lower-achieving students who are as effective as a teacher of higher-achieving students (or more)

29. Reflecting on 2013-14 • Find someone not at your table Share: • Successes • Roadblocks

30. Clarifications • Where does goal setting originate? • *What is the role of SLG goals in overall evaluation? • Who has to set SLG goals? • Who are SLG goals set for? • *What kinds of Assessments can be used? • What is the scope of SLG goals? • What is the difference between Achievement and Growth? *Pending USED approval of Oregon’s waiver

31. Revisions to SLG Goal Guidance • Rationale added to the template • *Category 3 removed • State checklist and scoring rubric *Pending USED approval of Oregon’s waiver

32. Revisions Specific to Administrators • Targeted goals rather than school wide • All goals must be focused on academic growth

33. Digging Deeper into the Process Content: • Based on the relevant content and skills students should know or be able to do at the end of the course /class, a clear statement of a specific area of focus is selected. These should be based on specific state or national standards. A statement such as “CCSS in Math” is not specific enough.

34. Content Example: HS Writing Students will write arguments to support claims using valid reasoning and sufficient evidence, write informative/explanatory texts to examine and convey complex ideas, concepts, and information through the effective selection, organization, and analysis of content, and write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, well-chosen details, and well-structured event sequences. Related Oregon ELA standards: • W. 9‐10.1 - W.9‐10.3, W.11‐12.1 - W.11‐12.3 Knowledge = YELLOW Skills = BLUE Standards = PINK

35. Content Example: HS Writing Students will write arguments to support claims using valid reasoning and sufficient evidence,write informative/explanatory texts to examine and convey complex ideas, concepts, and information through the effective selection, organization, and analysis of content, and write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, well-chosen details, and well-structured event sequences. Related Oregon ELA standards: • W. 9‐10.1 - W.9‐10.3, W.11‐12.1 - W.11‐12.3

36. Reflecting on Content Component • Think about the content you wrote in your goal • Do you still think it is appropriate? • Why or why not? • Do you need to narrow the focus? • Share your reflections with someone at your table

37. Digging Deeper into the Process Assessment: • Describes how student learning and growth will be measured. In Oregon, two categories of assessments are used for SLG goals. Assessments must be aligned to state or national standards and meet state criteria.

38. Assessment Example: HS Writing District‐developed writing prompts will be used. These prompts are from vetted assessments such as NAEP, AP exams, and released statewide assessment items. Students will complete one formal writing piece for each type of writing (arguments, explanatory, narrative) which will be scored using the Oregon Writing Scoring Guide. Students will receive an average score calculated across all three essays.

39. Assessment Example: Answers How is learning measured? Performance tasks Which categories do the assessments fall under? Category 2 Are the assessments aligned with standards and do they meet state criteria? YES – use state scoring guide

40. Reflecting on Assessment Component • Think about the assessment you used • Do you still think it is appropriate? • Why or why not? • What would you change? • Share reflections with someone at your table • How can you use the assessment you chose to measure the growth in the content you identified?

41. Digging Deeper into the Process Context: Description of the demographics and learning needs of all student in the class/course. Includes as relevant: number of students and their gender, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, attendance, and any students with diverse learning needs (EL, TAG, IEP, 504 plans). For those educators who do not meet with students on a regular basis, including contact time provides additional context for the goals developed.

42. Context Example: MS Math • 60% of students enrolled in ABC Middle School receive free or reduced lunch. As the result of our school’s block scheduling, all students participate in four 70 minute math periods per week. 82 students, or approximately 14%, are students with disabilities who have an IEP but are not eligible to take the extended assessment. 52 students are boys; 30 students are girls. 50% (41) of the students have IEP goals in math.

43. Reflecting on Context Component • Think about the context in the goal you brought • What context(s) did you include to address all the learning needs of your students? • How did you use context to set targets and select strategies? • What would you do differently? • Share your reflections with someone at your table

44. Digging Deeper into the Process Baseline Data: Provides information about the students’ current performance at the start of course/class. It is generally the most recent data available and can include the prior year’s assessment scores or grades, results from a beginning of the year benchmark assessment, a pre-test, or other evidence of student learning. Determine students’ strengths and areas of weakness that inform the goal.

45. Baseline Data Example: MS Math Our original set of data included an analysis of OAKS results from the previous year which revealed a 48% gap in performance between students who received SPED services in Math and those that didn’t. Only 31% of students with IEPs in math scored at or above proficiency. We have analyzed their results and found three distinct tiers of performance. • Group 1: 31% of students met or exceeded • Group 2: 44% of students nearly met • Group 3: 25% of students did not meet

46. Reflecting on Baseline Data • Share the baseline data in the goal you brought • What are the strengths/limitations of the baseline data you collected? • To what extent would the baseline data you collected allow you to tier your targets? • How will context inform your tiers? How won’t it? • Share your reflections with someone at your table

47. Applying the SLG Goal Tools • Reflect on today’s learning • Review your goal using the Quality Review Checklist. • Justify your selection of YES or NO for each of the five questions with evidence from your goal.

48. Wrap-Up • Use an index card from your table to write down: • Two new learnings or “a-has” you had as a result of today’s professional learning • One question you still have regarding the student learning and growth goal setting process. • Homework for October • Bring a draft of an SLG Goal that you develop for the 2014-15 SY