Learning Objectives Guidebook Guidebook.pdfthe pre-assessment data to create a student learning goal. Once the goal is created, instructional strategies are selected that will be most

©Stronge, 2012 All Rights Reserved

Stronge Teacher Effectiveness Performance Evaluation System

Student Learning Objectives Guidebook

2012

1 P a r t I - I n t r o d u c t i o n a n d E x p l a n a t i o n


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Part I - Building Background Knowledge about Student Learning Objectives................................. 3

What Are Student Learning Objectives?............................................................................... 3

What Is the Purpose of Student Learning Objectives?.......................................................... 4

What Does Research Say about Student Learning Objectives?.............................................5

Under What Conditions Do Student Learning Objectives Work Best?................................. 8

What are the Advantages and Disadvantages of Student Learning Objectives?................... 8

Part II - How to Build SMART Student Learning Objectives........................................................... 10

Building Objectives - A Step-by-Step Guide.........................................................................10

Determining SMART Objectives.......................................................................................... 13

SMART Criteria.........................................................................................................14

The Student Learning Objective for Student Progress.......................................................... 15

Completing the Student Learning Objective for Student Progress Form.............................. 17

Student Learning Objectives Lessons Learned...................................................................... 20

Additional Rubrics and Checklists to Help in the SLO Process............................................ 22

Part III - Assessments and Student Learning Objectives................................................................... 28

Why We Assess in Student Learning Objectives.................................................................. 28

Types of Assessments............................................................................................................ 29

Assessment Measures Appropriate for Student Learning Objectives....................................30

Pre- and Post-assessment Measures Chart................................................................. 33

Subject and Grade Level Assessment Matrix............................................................ 44

Part IV - Sample Objectives ............................................................................................................. 48

Elementary School Student Learning Objective Examples................................................... 49

Middle School Student Learning Objective Examples.......................................................... 56

High School Student Learning Objective Examples............................................................. 61

Educational Specialist Learning Objective Examples........................................................... 68



List of Figures

Figure 1.1. Student Learning Objectives Advantages and Disadvantages ..................................... 8

Figure 2.1.Student Learning Objectives Process .......................................................................... 10

Figure 2.2. SMART Criteria ......................................................................................................... 14

Figure 2.3. Student Learning Objective Progress Form ............................................................... 15

Figure 2.4. Student Learning Objectives Steps and Objective Form Correspondence. ................ 17

Figure 2.5. Completed Student Learning Objective for Student Progress Form (Abbreviated)... 18

Figure 2.6. Student Learning Objective for Student Progress Form Checklist Review ............... 19

Figure 2.7. Optional Tools for Student Learning Objectives ........................................................ 22

Figure 2.8. Student Learning Objective Implementation Rubric .................................................. 23

Figure 2.9. Student Learning Objective Implementation Rubric .................................................. 25

Figure 2.10. SMART Objective Worksheet ................................................................................. 26

Figure 2.11. Student Learning Objectives Decision Tree ............................................................. 27

Figure 3.1. Recursive Assessment and Effective Instruction ....................................................... 29

Figure 3.2. Appropriate Measures Criteria ................................................................................... 30

Figure 3.3. Assessment Rules Decision Tree. ............................................................................... 31

Figure 3.4. Selected Pre- and Post-Assessment Measures ............................................................ 33

Figure 3.5. Assessments by Subjects and Grade Levels ............................................................... 44



Part I - Building Background Knowledge about Student Learning

Objectives

The research is clear: Teachers matter. What happens—or does not happen—in

classrooms everyday impacts student learning.1 When we look at school-based factors, teacher

quality has the most influence on student achievement.2 Teachers are the critical component for

the learning that impacts student learning.

How do we measure learning? Historically, the measurement has been student

achievement at the end of the year, regardless of the academic level of the student when he/she

entered the teacher's classroom in August/September. However, if we do not know where the

student began, it is difficult to measure teacher impact on student learning. Measuring a

student’s academic level when he/she enters the classroom allows for a comprehensive

assessment of learning as the student progresses through the curriculum. Additionally, student

growth analysis becomes possible. For these reasons, student growth is an integral component of

student learning objectives.

In this section, student learning objectives are explained and the following questions are

answered:

What are student learning objectives?

What is the purpose of setting student learning objectives?

What does research say about the process of student learning objectives?

Under what conditions do student learning objectives work best?

What are the advantages and disadvantages of student learning objectives?

What Are Student Learning Objectives?

Student learning objectives is a goal setting process that begins with a pre-assessment to

pinpoint students’ current performance level on skills or depth of content knowledge in relation

to the curriculum they will be learning in the classroom during the length of the course. When

the pre-assessment has been analyzed, the teacher has the information necessary to devise a

learning goal that reflects mastery of the curriculum content and skills. Thus, the teacher uses

the pre-assessment data to create a student learning goal. Once the goal is created, instructional

strategies are selected that will be most effective in helping students attain the goal. Then, upon

implementation, these instructional strategies are implemented and monitored for effectiveness.

They are refined or revised, as necessary, based upon student performance and progress. At the



end of the course or year, a post-assessment is administered to ascertain whether the goal has

been achieved.3

What Is the Purpose of Student Learning Objectives?

Simply stated, the purpose of student learning objectives is to increase learning as

measured by appropriate student achievement assessments. Student learning objectives can

facilitate learning by focusing attention on student growth and on instructional improvement. It

is based on a process of determining students’ baseline performance, setting a measurable

student learning goal, developing instructional strategies for goal attainment, and assessing

results at the end of the academic course/year.

The intent of student learning objectives is to:

Make explicit the connection between teaching and learning;

Make instructional decisions based upon student data;

Provide a tool for school improvement;

Increase the effectiveness of instruction via continuous professional growth;

Focus attention on student results; and, ultimately

Increase student achievement.4

The intent of student learning objectives is not to:

Replace classroom observation or other means of documenting performance; or

Make performance decisions based solely on the outcomes.

Student learning objectives are used in documenting student learning, and are just one

of multiple data sources for assessing the impact of teachers and instructional staff on

student performance.



What Does Research Say about the Process of Student Learning

Objectives?

Developing student learning objectives based on student achievement data is supported

by solid research in the education field.6 Good and Brophy stated in their summary of effective

classroom practices that “setting goals and making a commitment to trying to reach these goals

increases performance.”7 In discussing why educators should bother with target goals at all, one

researcher stated that the best reason for implementing a goal-setting process is simply that it

works.8

At the Student Level

Mastery Learning

Setting student learning objectives is closely linked

to mastery learning practices (feedback-corrective teaching).

These entail:

Giving students formative tests for the purposes of feedback;

Providing corrective instructional procedures; and

Administering additional formative tests to determine the extent to which students have

mastered the subject content.

In fact, there is solid evidence to show that formative assessment is an essential

component to classroom work that can raise student achievement.9

Cognitive Entry Prerequisites

Developing student learning objectives also is linked to enhancing the students’ initial

cognitive entry prerequisites. This entails:

Developing an initial skills assessment of

prerequisites for a course;

Administering the assessment to students at the

beginning of a course; and

Teaching students specific prerequisites they

lacked.

Researchers, such as Benjamin

Bloom, have found that students

taught under mastery learning

achieve, on average,

approximately 1.0 standard

deviation above the average of

students in conventionally

taught classrooms (i.e., 84th

percentile vs. 50th percentile).

5

Research indicates that students

taught the entry prerequisite skills

achieve, on average,

approximately .7 standard

deviations above the average of

students in conventionally-taught

classrooms (i.e., 76th

percentile

vs. 50th

percentile).10



Student Self-Assessment

Student learning objectives are also tied to student self-assessment; wherein, teachers

make students part of the goal setting process. Students whose teachers used student learning

objectives:

Achieved more than students whose teachers did not use academic goal setting;

Could state their own objectives; and

Were correct in self-assessing their progress in achieving objectives.

Improved Progress Monitoring

Student learning objective setting is closely associated with teachers’ practices of

progress monitoring. Fuchs and Fuchs found that systematic progress monitoring can be

beneficial to student learning in many ways:

To identify students in need of additional or different forms of instruction;

To enhance instructional decision making by assessing the adequacy of student progress;

To determine when instructional modifications are necessary; and

To prompt teachers to build stronger instructional programs that are more varied and

responsive to student needs.11

Increased Achievement

Research also has documented a strong, positive correlation between setting student

learning objectives and student achievement. For instance, Marzano, Pickering, and Pollock, in

their work on research-based strategies for increasing student achievement, report studies

showing percentile gains in student achievement associated with processes similar to setting

learning goals ranging from 18 to 41 percentile points.12

Additionally, they draw the following

two generalizations from the research on setting student learning goals:

Instructional goals narrow what students focus on. This means that while students

generally score higher on the instruction related to the specific academic goals, they

likely will score lower (about 8 percentile points) on information that is incidental to the

goals, but still covered in the class.

Students should be encouraged to personalize the teacher’s goals. Once classroom

academic goals are set, students should be encouraged to customize them to fit their

personal needs.13

Research indicates a strong, positive correlation exists between targeted goals and student

performance on statewide tests. For instance, in Denver, Colorado, students whose teachers



developed high quality student learning goals showed more than a year’s worth of gains on

independent state standardized assessments and national assessment. Another strong correlation

between student learning goals and student achievement was found in Charlotte-Mecklenburg

Schools in North Carolina.14

At the School Division Level

Learner Progress

There is evidence that students in schools and school systems that implement a student-

learning-based approach to performance assessment benefit from improved academic

achievement. Below is a summary of research findings:

Thompson School District of Loveland, Colorado, implemented a performance system in

which student learning was assessed as a component of teacher success. Following two

years of implementation, fourth-grade students in the district had the third highest

learning growth rank among Colorado’s 176 school districts in reading as measured on

the Colorado State Assessment Program (CSAP); they had the highest growth rank in

writing. Seventh-graders experienced similar academic growth.15

In a study of five school districts that had shown improvement for at least three years in

mathematics and reading for all subgroups of students as identified by No Child Left

Behind data, researchers found that all five districts made decisions based on data.

Additionally, administrators encouraged teachers to use data, rather than instinct, in

making instructional decisions.16

Case studies of five high performing urban school districts revealed that these school

districts focused on (1) using data to make instructional decisions, and (2) training

principals and teachers in how to use assessments for learning.17

In a synthesis of research on high performing schools, researchers found that these

schools focused on making decisions based on data, not only at the district level, but also

at the classroom and school levels, as well.18

Teacher Evaluation and Development

Student learning objectives provide a valuable mode for differentiating teacher

effectiveness. The process links evaluation directly with student learning, while respecting

teacher decision-making and judgment. The student learning objectives process also establishes

a clear process for improving teacher performance based on student achievement data and

growth. Further, it encourages teachers and instructional leaders to be more strategic and

systematic in their decisions designed to improve the quality of teaching that students receive. 19



Under What Conditions Do Student Learning Objectives Work Best?

Researchers found that student learning objectives are particularly effective under certain

conditions. Thus, ensuring these conditions are incorporated as objectives are devised and

implemented will help teachers create goals that are most beneficial and appropriate for student

growth. Here are those conditions:

The objectives are proximal rather than distal (objectives are oriented to the here-and-

now rather than to some ultimate objectives for the distant future, although it is important

to be conscious of the connection between here-and-now tasks and the accomplishment

of ultimate objectives).

The objectives are specific (but not too specific) rather than global.

The objectives are challenging (difficult but reachable) rather than too easy or too hard.

Instructional interventions are used that impact directly on the experience of learners.

Ongoing reviews and feedback on student progress are associated with remedial actions.

There are high teacher expectations of students.

Formative assessment is emphasized.20

What Are the Advantage and Disadvantages of Student Learning

Objectives?

As with any educational process, there are advantages and disadvantages of student

learning objectives. A list of both is found in Figure 1.1.

Figure 1.1. Student Learning Objectives Advantages and Disadvantages

Advantages:21

Disadvantages:

• The process is adaptable to a wide variety of

teaching assignments.

• The process can be adapted to new state or local

assessment structures as they are developed.

• Student learning objectives have credibility with

educators because they are immediately relevant

to setting and measuring classroom

expectations.

• The goals have face validity as teachers are

often the ones given the responsibility for

developing them.

• The process permits individual incentives,

especially when used in conjunction with

measures of school or group performance, to

create collective incentives.

• The objectives permit high degrees of

specialization for teachers and students.

• The process can increase teacher buy-in and

professional growth when teacher-made

measures are used.

• Without common assessments, or common

requirements for assessment, the results may not

be comparable or of consistent rigor across

multiple classrooms and schools.

• The knowledge of the predictive validation of

student learning objectives in alignment with

value-added or growth measures (such as

student growth percentile) is very limited.

• The process is time-demanding for teachers and

administrators.

• The assessments adopted may not cover all

teaching assignments or courses taken by

students.

• Some assessments may require time for teachers

to work together to develop consistent scoring

practices.



• When the process is used for co-teaching or

collaborative settings, it can build collective

school-wide or team-based effort around student

achievement.

• When the process is used for co-teaching or

collaborative settings, there will be little

information on the performance of individual

teachers. Teachers may perceive it as unfair as

they are held to a measure over which they have

limited ability to impact.

Summary The focus of Part I is to introduce student learning objectives, the rationale for use in

classrooms, and the research undergirding efficacy. How student learning objectives are best

implemented and some of the advantages and disadvantages are also discussed. Part Two is the

“how-to” portion of this guidebook. The student learning objective process is discussed and

described in detail.

10 P a r t I I - H o w t o B u i l d S M A R T O b j e c t i v e s


Part II - How to Build SMART Student Learning Objectives

In Part 1, the student learning objective process is briefly and succinctly explained. In

Part 2, the focus shifts to a more detailed explanation of student learning objectives. The

following questions are answered in this section of the guidebook:

How are ‘good’ objectives created?

How do we determine whether objectives are SMART?

What have we learned about student learning objectives?

Building Objectives - A Step-by-Step Guide

As previously discussed, student learning objective implementation is a process—not a

product. Developing student learning objectives that are SMART—more on this follows—

involves five major steps. Each of these is explained in some detail and depicted in Figure 2.1.

Figure 2.1.Student Learning Objective Process22

Step 1: Determine Needs

The student learning objective process begins with calibration; determining needs is the

first step. Curriculum needs and student needs must both be considered. Questions teachers

should ask themselves as they think about creating objectives include:

What do my students need to know and be able to do within the content area that I teach?

Step 4:

Monitor

student

progress

through on-

going

formative

assessment

Step 1:

Determine

Needs

Step 2:

Create

specific

student

learning

objectives

based on pre-

assessment

Step 5:

Determine

learning

objective

attainment

Step 3:

Create and

implement

teaching and

learning

strategies

Before

implementation

the objective must

be evaluated in

terms of SMART

criteria.



What are the skills and knowledge necessary for mastery?

What prior knowledge and understandings do they currently possess?

How do my students differ from one another in terms of knowledge and skills?

Stated another way, teachers determine their students’ current level of performance and

the expected level of performance projected at the conclusion of instruction. To do this, teachers

administer a pre-assessment to establish a baseline for each student. The assessment is analyzed

in terms of each student’s performance. Now the teacher has a starting point for the student

learning objective.

Step 2: Create Objectives Based on Pre-Assessment Data

With analysis of the pre-assessment data, the teacher knows where each student is

starting, and his or her knowledge about the topic. Importantly, this must be considered in

objective formation. Since students have different starting points, logically they will also, in

most cases, have different end points. Here is an example to consider:

A fifth grade reading teacher has a class of students reading from second-grade level through

seventh-grade level. This type of student learning variability frequently is true in classrooms

around the United States. A typical goal often times focuses on a class average and might be

stated in this way.

Although some might argue that the goal is laudable, and 80 percent can be a stretch goal

depending on class composition, this goal is problematic for several reasons. Expecting each

child to achieve to a certain level—for example, being on-grade level readers—is unrealistic, and

in this case, with above grade level readers, unacceptable. It is doubtful that a student reading at

the second grade level will be an on-grade level (5th

grade) reader by the end of the year.

Similarly, those reading above grade level have already surpassed a goal based upon on-grade

level reading. This goal does not take into account the needs of each and every student, which is

one of the benefits of creating student learning objectives. Since objectives are based on a pre-

assessment, and students’ needs are identified, teachers can create objectives that meet all

students’ needs. If we know that many of our students read below and above grade level,

averaging scores will not illustrate the needs of our class. An objective that focuses on growth

rather than achievement is more appropriate and accounts for every student. Perhaps this teacher

might establish an objective such as this:

A goal written this way accounts for all students—below grade level, on-grade level, and

above grade level readers. Further, it is a meaningful goal that requires a degree of rigor for each

and every student. It might be called a “stretch” goal because it requires hard work on the part of

both teacher and students to realize the goal.

By the end of the school year, 80% of my students will be grade level readers.

Every student will make measureable progress in reading comprehension, improving by at least one

grade level. Additionally, those students reading below grade level will increase comprehension by 1.5

years growth.



Criteria have been developed to judge whether objectives are meaningful. SMART

criteria are the measure used. These evaluation criteria are detailed in the section entitled

“Determining SMART Objectives” on page 13. Suffice it to say that objectives should not be

approved and implemented until they are deemed SMART. SMART criteria are provided on

page 14.

Step 3: Create and Implement Instructional Strategies

After the objectives is devised, instructional strategies are identified for implementation.

The selected instructional strategies and practices should be highlighted because they best align

with the objective and are designed for objective attainment. (Note: Identifying particular

instructional strategies does not mean that the strategies will be used to the exclusion of others.

Rather, it means that these particular instructional strategies are ones that are believed to be most

likely to help students succeed, given where the particular group of students start in their

learning.) They are the conduit that connects the objective to objective attainment. Careful

thought must be given to identifying strategies for implementation that are both specific and

focused. Also, they should be research-based, content specific, and developmentally appropriate.

For instance, in the objective example we are using here, the teacher is focused on

reading comprehension.

Every student will make measureable progress in reading comprehension, improving by at least

one grade level. Additionally, those students reading below grade level will increase

comprehension by 1.5 years growth.

Research indicates that differentiated instruction in the form of small group reading instruction is

effective for comprehension growth.23

Both heterogeneous and homogenous groups focusing on

different student needs are appropriate. Flexible grouping is a way to ensure groups are formed

to meet ongoing and changing student needs. Thus, one instructional strategy identified for use

with this goal is flexible, small group instruction. This strategy would be specific and focused on

research-based best practice for reading instruction.

Step 4: Monitor Student Progress and Make Adjustments as Necessary

Teachers implement instructional strategies and monitor student progress. Although the

SLO process includes a formal midyear review, assessment should occur regularly throughout

the year. Thus, the process is a recursive one. As Pressley asserts, “Excellent teachers are always

informally assessing their students, monitoring where each student is, and what each student

needs. The excellent teacher acts on that monitoring, providing appropriate instruction or

direction to each and every student in the room.”24

If progress is not what the teacher finds after implementing a given instructional strategy,

modifications can and should be made. Perhaps, through ongoing formative assessment, the

teacher concludes that a certain strategy implemented has had little or no impact on student

progress. It may be time to make some changes. Teachers must use professional judgment to



decide whether to continue or abandon a strategy. Questions to consider before abandoning a

carefully considered strategy might include:

Are any students benefitting from this strategy? If so, who?

Have I given the strategy enough time to see any effect?

Have I implemented the strategy as it was intended?

The answers to these questions will help with the decision of retaining, modifying, or

abandoning a given instructional strategy. Staying the course may be the correct answer for

students who are benefitting from the strategy. However, abandoning that same strategy that is

not having any effect with other students is a perfectly appropriate response. Flexibility and

dynamism are part of teaching and a part of the student learning objective process.

Step 5: Determine Objective Achievement

At some specific and predetermined point in time, it is necessary to assess objective

achievement. This is done through the administration and analysis of a post-assessment. With

SMART objectives, the process is straightforward. Results of the post-assessment are measured

against the established objective.

Determining SMART Objectives

Once objectives have been created, it is important to evaluate them in terms of SMART

criteria. This is done by both the teacher and the teacher’s evaluator, who is the final approval

authority for the objective. When an objective has been evaluated and approved, it is ready for

implementation.

SMART Objective Determination

The first level of objective evaluation is in terms of SMART criteria. These criteria

describe observable behavior and/or measurable results that would occur when an objective is

achieved. The acronym SMART is a useful way to self-assess an objective's feasibility and

worth. SMART stands for specific; measureable; appropriate; realistic, but rigorous; and time-

bound (see Figure 2.2). The definitions of each are listed below:



Figure 2.2. SMART Criteria

Sample Student Learning Objective:

During the 2011-12 school year, all students will make measureable progress in physical fitness.

Each sixth-grade physical education student will increase performance by 15 percent on four of six

state health and wellness test sub areas.

Specific: Focused on physical education, specifically the state health and wellness test sub areas

and a 15 percent performance gain in four of six sub areas.

Measurable: Identified state health and wellness test to be used to assess objective.

Appropriate: The teacher teaches the content and skills contained in the state health and

wellness test.

Realistic, but Rigorous: A 15 percent student performance increase is realistic. It is not out of

reach and yet not too easy. It requires students and the teacher to stretch to achieve it.

Time-bound: The goal can be measured by the end of the year with the final state health and

wellness test.

S M

A

A

Specific The objective is

focused such as by

content area and by learners’ needs.

Measurable An appropriate

instrument/measure

is selected to assess

the objective.

Appropriate The objective is

clearly related to

the role and

responsibilities of

the instructional

professional.

Time-bound The objective is

contained within a

single school year

or course. Realistic, but

Rigorous The objective is

attainable by the

instructional

professional, but

requires effort. It

is a stretch

objective.

This is a SMART objective.

T R

A



The Student Learning Objective Student Progress Form

The form that may be used for student learning objectives is found at Figure 2.3. As can

be seen, the sections on the form correspond to the five steps for SLO implementation already

discussed. Figure 2.4 depicts this correspondence.

Figure 2.3. Student Learning Objective Progress Form

Student Learning Objective Progress Form

Teacher’s Name: __________________________________________

Subject/Grade: ____________________________________ School Year: ____ -____

Directions: This form is a tool to assist teachers in setting an objective that results in measurable learner

progress. NOTE: When applicable, learner achievement/progress should be the focus of the objective.

Enter information electronically into the cells (the boxes will expand to fit the text).

Initial Objective Submission (due by _____________ to the evaluator)

I. Setting (Describe the population

and special learning

circumstances.)

II. Content/Subject/Field Area (The

area/topic addressed is based on

learner achievement, data

analysis, or observational data.)

III. Baseline Data (What is shown

by the current data?)

Data attached

IV. Objective Statement (Describe

what you want learners/program

to accomplish.)

V. Means for Attaining Goal (Strategies used to accomplish the objective)

Strategy Evidence Target Date



The objective is SMART: specific; measurable; appropriate; realistic, but rigorous; and

time-bound.

Comments:

Signatures:

Sign form after formative feedback has been provided and objective has been revised, if necessary.

Teacher’s Signature _____________________________________________ Date

Evaluator’s Signature ____________________________________________ Date

VI. Midyear Review (Describe

objective progress and other

relevant data)

Mid-year review conducted on____________

Initials: _____(teacher) _____(evaluator)

Data attached

Teacher’s Signature _________________________________________ Date _____________________

Evaluator’s Signature ________________________________________ Date _____________________

End-of-Year Review

Appropriate Data Received

Strategies used and data provided demonstrate appropriate student growth. Yes No

Evaluator’s Signature ________________________________________ Date _____________________



Figure 2.4. Student Learning Objective Steps and Objective Form Correspondence.

Student Learning Objective Implementation

Steps

Objective Form

Step 1 - Determine needs

Section I - Setting

Section II - Content/Subject/Field Area

Section III - Baseline Data

Step 2 - Create student achievement objective. Section IV - Objective Statement

Step 3 - Create and implement instructional

strategies. Section V - Means for Attaining Objective

Step 4 - Monitor student progress and make

adjustments, as necessary. Section IV - Midyear Review

Step 5 - Determine objective attainment Section VII - End-of-year Results

Completing the Student Learning Objective Progress Form

It is important to create a student learning objective form that is clear and thorough, but

succinct. The evaluator has many forms to review and approve; therefore, a form that is easily

analyzed is essential to efficient use of time. With this in mind, an example of each section of

the form is provided to illustrate this notion of clarity, thoroughness, and succinctness (Figure

2.5). This is followed by a checklist, which may be used by both the teacher and the evaluator,

to help ensure a complete and acceptable student learning objective form (Figure 2.6). It is

recommended that the teacher use this tool prior to submitting the form to the evaluator for

approval.

Importantly, evaluators should not be expected to review and analyze copious amounts of

student data. This is the responsibility of the teacher. The evaluator should be able to review

Section III quickly to ascertain students' current ability levels. The expectation is that the teacher

summarizes the data and displays it in a way that is quickly and easily processed. A table or

chart usually allows for this and is recommended.



Figure 2.5. Completed Student Learning Objective Progress Form (Abbreviated)



circumstances.)

I teach twenty-five fifth-graders, twelve boys and

thirteen girls. Twelve percent (3) have learning

disabilities (language-based). This is a full inclusion

classroom.


area/topic addressed is based on

learner achievement, data

analysis, or observational data.)

Reading comprehension


by the current data?)

The Informal Reading Inventory was administered on

September 15, 2012. Below are the results.

Data attached

Below Grade

Level Readers

On-Grade Level

Readers

Above Grade

Level Readers

10 (40 percent) 10 (40 percent) 5 (20 percent)



to accomplish.)

Every student will make measureable progress in reading

comprehension, improving by at least one grade level.

Additionally, those students reading below grade level

will increase comprehension by 1.5 years growth.

V. Means for Attaining Objective (Strategies used to accomplish the objective)


Flexible Groupings (homogenous and

heterogeneous)

Lesson Plans Bi-monthly regroupings as needed

May 2013

Dialogic Conversations (student-centered

conversations about authentic text)

Teacher

Notes

Bi-monthly

May 2013

Reading Comprehension Strategy

Instruction (Predicting, Clarifying,

Summarizing, Questioning)

Lesson Plans Weekly Instruction

May 2013



Figure 2.6. Student Learning Objective Progress Form Checklist Review

Did you include? Check if “Yes” Check if “No”

Beginning of form:

Your name as teacher

The subject/grade level(s) you teach

Your evaluator’s name

I. Setting

Number of students you teach

Number of classes

Number of students with special needs

II. Content

A brief course description targeted for objective

Previous performance or observations that

provide further context

(optional)

III. Baseline Data “What does the pre-assessment data for the current year show?”

A pre-assessment and its description

Brief explanation of the meaning of scores

Summary data on scores

Range and distribution of scores

Graphs or tables to illustrate the results

Analysis of relative strengths and weaknesses

(e.g., looking at subtests)

(optional)

IV. Objective Statement: Cannot complete if baseline requirements are not met.

Objective that is measurable

Objective based on pre-assessment analysis

Post-assessment using the same metric as pre-. Extra metrics can be

used for other

measures of student

achievement

Targets that ONLY relate to targeted pre-post

skills and abilities.

Definition of meaningful progress for all

students (how it will be measured)

V. Strategies

Instructional strategies (teacher actions)

Strategies tailored to identified skills and needs.



Student Learning Objectives Lessons Learned

As in any endeavor, preparation is key. Thought given prior to student learning objective

implementation can help to ease some of the uncertainty that will inevitably surround this

comprehensive process. With this in mind, teachers and administrators in more than 15 school

districts and 28 schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia were consulted about student learning

objective implementation. They were asked about what was working and what needed work.

Below are their thoughts and advice for consideration.

Recommendation No. 1: Involve teachers in leadership positions from the beginning and

invite participation.

Make teachers a part of student learning objective planning and implementation from

inception. They can act as leaders in training, as facilitators, as cheerleaders, and as

communication conduits. Involve as many teachers as possible in the implementation process.

Teachers can brainstorm and identify assessments, areas of concern regarding student learning,

research-based strategies specific to their areas of expertise, and so much more. They are

fountains of knowledge that can and should be tapped.

Recommendation No. 2: Collaborate with others.

Build opportunities for participants to work with others during the student learning

objective process. This helps ease uncertainties and provides needed support. Teachers,

educational specialists, and administrators, alike, noted how beneficial it was to discuss the

process with others and to work together when appropriate. Groupings were most often

comprised of grade levels and/or content areas. However, one school division benefitted from

cross-curricular groupings as well. In areas where specialties are one deep, such as school

counselors or music teachers, groupings comprised of participants across the district ensured

support was provided to all participating in the goal setting process.

Recommendation No. 3: Provide comprehensive and on-going training.

Although the student learning objective process is straightforward, many questions arise

specific to grade levels, content areas, and specialty areas. Periodic training to reinforce or

clarify the process is beneficial and helps to ensure a smoother implementation. Choose smaller

areas of focus within the student learning objective process (e.g. strategies, assessments) to focus

the training. These areas should be chosen based on need. Where are the most questions or

confusions materializing? What training would help to quell the uncertainties? Develop training

around these identified areas of need.

Recommendation No. 4: Have in-house resident experts in the goal setting process.

It is important to have experts available within schools. Teacher leaders can fill these

positions and can help with buy-in. In the Miami/Dade County Public Schools, two teachers per

school building participated in student learning objectives process training and were available

when questions arose or help was needed. This helped to smooth the way for an easier



implementation. Questions arise routinely as the process is implemented. Having an in-house

expert, someone trained and knowledgeable about the process, ensures that questions are

answered expeditiously, lessening potential frustration or confusion. Ready support is critical to

successful implementation.

Recommendation No. 5: Consider involving parents and students in the student learning

objective process.

One school district intentionally involved parents and students, and were pleased with the

outcomes. Teachers held conferences with students about their objective progress. Students

tracked their progress and devised strategies for learning. Doing this invests students in the

process and they take ownership for their own learning. Likewise, create a system to notify

parents and keep them apprised of student progress. Student and parent involvement in the

process creates a team focused on student learning and success.

Recommendation No. 6: Consider housing student learning objective training, pools of

objectives, and other pertinent information on an information website so that those not

able to attend trainings have the information available to them.

The benefit? All information is available to all participants at their convenience.

Participants can access the website to reinforce learning or clarify thinking as needed. This

keeps everyone in the learning loop. Additionally, a central repository allows schools to build

specific training as needed to meet the unique needs of their staffs.

Recommendation No. 7: Empower teachers in the process.

One school district recommends a fluid approach to revising objectives where teachers

take the lead. The responsibility is on the teacher to have student learning objective meetings as

needed and to bring important information to the attention of the administrator. This places

ownership for the process in the laps of the objective creators.

Recommendation No. 8: Embrace naysayers.

In any endeavor such as this, there are differing perspectives. Bring those who do not

embrace the process into the discussion. They have valuable insights to offer. Get everyone’s

perspective as it is important that those involved are encouraged to voice their opinions, their

concerns, and their support for the process. The more they are involved in the process, often

from a teacher leader role, the more likely they begin to buy-in to the process. Get them on your

side.

Recommendation No. 9: Analyze data purposefully.

One of the greatest benefits of the student learning objective process, voiced by both

teachers and administrators, is the purposeful analysis of student data surrounding an objective.

Honing in on the needs of students based on data allows for the development of objectives that



are SMART. The process helps administrators and teachers to develop analytical skills that, in

some cases, otherwise would be lacking.

Recommendation No. 10: Encourage teachers to establish stretch objectives.

Administrators should encourage objectives that help students reach their maximum

potential. Setting rigorous objectives—sometimes called stretch objectives—is one way to do

this. Stretch objectives consider all students and are structured with student growth for ALL

students in mind.

Recommendation No. 11: Set the tone for success.

When the student learning objective process begins, the novelty can feel unsettling and

apprehension may result. Openness and transparency are important to a successful

implementation. Administrators who acknowledged apprehension, and established a sense of

trust and openness, were able to build support within their schools. They offered their assistance

and support in this new process and, as a result, they noted the result was a “can-do” atmosphere

for objectives. They spoke of the positive impact of their honesty and how it aided buy-in from

the staff. They also made the time to get teacher leaders on their side so that staff members

presented a united front, making it easier for the school as a whole to embrace this new process.

Equally important was the overt assistance offered to teachers, with administrators in numerous

schools asking how they could help teachers to ease into the process. In response to teacher

requests for assistance, they were given answers and provided training to meet their pressing

needs.

Additional Rubrics and Checklists to Help in the Student Learning Objective

Process

Several tools have been created for use prior to and during the creation of student

learning objectives. Each is used for a specific purpose. The following list (Figure 2.7) provides

the tool and an explanation of its use. Following this are the tools themselves to be used as

needed.

Figure 2.7. Optional Tools for Student Learning Objectives

Tool Type Purpose

Figure 2.8. Student Learning

Objective Implementation Rubric

(Before Implementation)

Rubric

This tool may be used by schools or districts

to assess readiness for student learning

objective implementation. Once the rubric is

applied, steps for acquisition or training can

be developed.

Figure 2.9. Student Learning

Objective Implementation Rubric

(During Implementation)

Rubric

Teachers/administrators may use this tool to

ascertain level of knowledge/competence

within each of the five student learning

objective implementation steps. This

information may identify areas where more

expertise/training is needed.



Figure 2.10. SMART Objective

Worksheet

Progressive

Checklist

This tool may assist teachers/administrators

in determining whether or not an objective is

SMART.

Figure 2.11. SLO Decision Tree25

Decision Tree

This tool may assist the teacher in helping to

identify what is needed for successful SLO

implementation.

Figure 2.8. Student Learning Objective Implementation Rubric Before Implementation

Highly Effective

In addition to the

Effective rating,

…

Effective Developing Basic

Tec

hn

ical

Assessments We have

assessments that

can assess student

progress in both

content AND skill

application.

We have a variety

of valid and

reliable1

assessments that

measure student

progress for each

teacher’s subject

area.

We have a limited

number of valid and

reliable assessments

that measure student

progress for each

teacher’s subject

area.

We have few or

no valid and

reliable

assessments that

measure student

progress for each

teacher’s subject

area.

Alignment We have created

assessments we

believe to be valid

and reliable and

thoroughly aligned

to our state and

district curriculum.

Our assessments

align directly to

our state and

district

curriculum.

Our assessments are

mostly aligned with

our state and district

curriculum.

Our assessments

only marginally

align with our

state and district

curriculum.

Per

son

al Training Key staff members

can serve as

trainers for others

new to the process.

All necessary staff

members have

attended training

on SLOs.

Key leadership

personnel have

attended the training

on SLOs.

Few personnel

have attended the

training on SLOs.

Org

an

izati

on

al Supports Staff members have

a clear way to

express concerns

and questions that

can be shared with

the staff overall

when necessary.

Staff members are

organized into

collaborative

groups to support

one another

through the

process.

Staff members have

loosely organized

themselves into

collaborative groups

to support one

another through the

SLO process.

Staff members are

not organized into

collaborative

groups.

1 An assessment that has a high degree of validity measures the content and skills that the assessment intends to assess. In

addition, the assessment should be aligned to the Virginia Standards of Learning for the specific subject/grade level. An

assessment with a high degree of reliability is an assessment that reduces error in an assessment. Standardized assessments have

higher degrees of validity and reliability due to procedures in developing the assessment and field-testing items. Validity and

reliability of division-created or teacher-created assessments can be addressed by having teachers who are content experts and

who are trained in assessment develop assessments for use across the school division.



Structures Staff members have

a forum to meet

collectively to

discuss the process,

including

questions,

concerns, and

successes.

Staff members

have the resources

they need to

engage in effective

SLO formation,

such as common

planning times or

access to

curriculum

experts.

Staff members have

limited access to

curriculum experts

and/or resources to

engage in effective

SLO formation.

Staff members do

not have the

resources they

need to engage in

effective SLO

formation.



Figure 2.9. SLO Implementation Rubric During Implementation

Highly Effective In addition to the

Effective rating, …

Effective Emerging Basic

Step 1:

Determining

Needs

In addition to the

Effective definition, a

wide variety of school-

collected data is also

considered.

A variety of district or

state supplied data are

used to determine a

critical area of focus

that is neither too

broad nor too narrow.

A limited amount of

district or state-

supplied data are used

to determine a critical

area of focus that may

be either too broad or

too narrow.

Narrow selections of

data are used to

determine an area of

focus that is overly

broad or narrow.

Step 2:

Creating

Objectives

In addition to the

Effective definition,

teachers collaborate

together to create

objectives that are both

specific to the

individual learning

needs but similar

enough to allow year-

long collaboration.

Teachers create

objectives that are

based on student

progress and meet the

SMART criteria for

students and individual

learning needs in their

classrooms.

Teachers create

objectives that are

based mostly on

student progress, meet

most of the SMART

criteria, though they

may not consider

individual learning

needs in their

classrooms.

Teachers create

objectives that are not

based on achievement,

and do not use the

SMART criteria.

Step 3:

Instructional

Strategies

In addition to the


the chosen

instructional strategies

target the widest

variety of students in a

way that differentiates

for learning needs.

Teachers choose

between two and four

initial instructional

strategies based on

best practices that are

tightly aligned with the

assessment and

objective.

Teachers choose

between two and four

initial instructional

strategies, most of

which are based on

best practices and


assessment and

objective.

Teachers choose an

inappropriate number

of instructional

strategies, do not base

their strategies on best

practice, or choose

strategies that are not


assessment or

objective.

Step 4:

Monitoring

In addition to the


teachers administer

brief formative

assessments

throughout the year

that are aligned with

the assessment and

objectives to modify

instruction as

appropriate the entire

year.

Teachers use a mid-

year assessment that

mirrors the pre- and

post-assessment to

modify instructional

strategies for the whole

class or individual

students.

Teachers conduct a

mid-year assessment

that mirrors the pre-

and post-assessment,

but modifications to

instructional strategies

are limited.

Teachers conduct few

formative assessments

throughout the year,

and/or do not use

assessments to make

instructional

modifications to

instructional strategies.

Step 5:

Evaluating

In addition to the


teachers share the

reflection and

collaborate with others

to increase teaching

effectiveness for

upcoming teaching

assignments.

Teachers engage in

self-reflection to

actively evaluate their

students’ progress,

acknowledge the

connection between

teaching and learning,

and use that reflection

to make instructional

decisions for

upcoming teaching

assignments.

Teachers engage in

limited self-reflection

while still

acknowledging the

connection between

teaching and learning;

teachers may or may

not use the reflection

to make instructional

decisions for

upcoming teaching

assignments.

Teachers engage in

little or no self-

reflection, do not

acknowledge the

connection between

teaching and learning,

and/or do not use the

reflection to make

instructional decisions

for upcoming teaching

assignments.



Figure 2.10. SMART Objective Worksheet

S Is the objective focused as to

content area and students'

needs?

Yes, continue.

No, clarify the elements.

M Is the instrument you will use

to measure student

achievement of the objective

identified?

Yes, continue.

No, identify the specific

instrument.

A Is the objective age and

learning outcome appropriate

to the student learning

objective?

Yes, continue

No, make needed

adjustments.

R Is the objective realistic in

terms of achievement, but also

rigorous?

Yes, continue.

No, make needed

adjustments.

T What is the time frame to

conduct the assessment of

student progress?

Yes, continue.

No, identify timeframe for

assessing progress.



Figure 2.11. Student Learning Objectives Decision Tree

Identify your position and

describe your setting:

Collect Data

Do you teach a subject

tested by the state of

Virginia and/or school

division?

Yes

No

Review and

analyze state

and/or district

assessment data

Is there an

appropriate

assessment

already

administered in

your school

division? Yes

No

Review and

analyze

baseline data

Create and/or find a valid

assessment of student learning

related to important curricula aims

Administer

assessment

Use appropriate

assessment data to

establish baseline

Set SMART Objectives

Develop means

for attaining

objectives

(strategies)

Meet with

supervisor to

review/approve

objectives

(They must be

SMART.)

Implement

strategies

Mid-year

review with

supervisor:

monitor

implementation

of strategies

and progress

toward

objectives

Continue to

implement strategies

with modifications,

if necessary, and

continue to monitor

student progress

Gather data Review and

analyze data

End of year data

results: determine

objective

attainment and

document Review with

Administrator

28 P a r t I I I - A s s e s s m e n t a n d S t u d e n t L e a r n i n g

O b j e c t i v e s


Part III - Assessment and Student Learning Objectives

The importance of assessment and its impact on student learning objectives cannot be

overstated. Without assessment, setting student learning objectives is fruitless. Assessing what

students know when they enter a classroom, and what they have learned when they leave that

classroom—student achievement—is essential to the student learning objective process.

Choosing appropriate measures for objectives is critical to success. Part III addresses assessment.

It is organized into three areas:

Why we assess in the student learning objective process;

Types of assessments; and

Assessment measures appropriate for student learning objectives

Why We Assess in the Student Learning Objective Process

Assessment is an essential component of the student learning objective process. Before

objectives can be created, teachers must understand what individual students know and what they

need to know. The question that teachers should ask at the beginning of the year or the

beginning of the semester is this: In the subject areas for which I am responsible, where are my

students academically when they enter my classroom, and what do they need to know by the end

of the year or semester when they leave my classroom?

Once this knowledge of what students already know when they enter the classroom is

gleaned—through assessment—planning and instruction can begin. Only through assessment

can the understanding that undergirds and guides instructional planning and instructional

delivery be gained. Therefore, assessment is the beginning and provides the foundation. It is also

the middle and the end. Assessment embedded throughout instruction is formative assessment; it

continually informs teaching and learning and is integrated into the act of teaching.26

Summative

assessment measures what students learned as the result of their instruction. Effective teachers

use formative assessment frequently and routinely to inform their planning and instruction.27

They use summative assessment to measure student learning outcomes. This recursive cycle is

depicted in Figure 3.1 below:


O b j e c t i v e s


Figure 3.1. Recursive Assessment and Effective Instruction

Types of Assessments

Careful consideration must be given to assessment selection. There are myriad measures

that can be used. They can effectively be grouped into two categories: criterion-referenced and

norm-referenced measures. Differentiating between the two is important. Since data from these

measures is interpreted differently, objectives will be structured uniquely based on which

measures are selected for assessment use.28

Assessment

Analysis

Instructional Planning

Instructional

Delivery

Student

Learning

CURRICULUM


O b j e c t i v e s


Assessment Measures Appropriate for Student Learning Objectives

Choosing which measures to use in the student learning objective process is important.

In selecting an assessment, four appropriateness criteria should be considered: a) measures must

have a pre- and post-test capability, b) measures must be cumulative, c) measures must be linked

to important curricular goals, and d) measure results must be available by the end of the year or

end of the course. Figure 3.2 explains the rationale for each criterion.29

Figure 3.2. Appropriate Measures Criteria

Pre- and Post-Test Capability

Since measuring student growth and achievement is the objective of SLOs, capabilities to do that must be embedded. Pre- and post-testing allows for this measurement and is a prerequisite for SLOs.

Cumulative over Time

Since measuring student growth and achievement is the objective of SLOs, assessments must be able to measure accumulated knowledge. Therefore, assessments must be cumulative.

Linked to Curricular Goals

SLOs and assessments must be linked to curricular goals. Curricular goals are most often derived from state standards. Instructional objectives or goals are created to address these standards. For those subject areas that do not have state standards, national goals or professional organizational subject area goals can and should be used.

Results Are Available by Year End or Course Completion

Assessment results must be available by year end or course completion. Teachers and administrators must have access to post-assessment results before the close of the school year in order to ascertain whether or not objectives have been achieved.


O b j e c t i v e s


Selecting appropriate assessments for the student learning objective process is critical. A

SMART objective is only as SMART as the data upon which it is based. School districts may

have appropriate assessments in place for some content areas and grade levels. Most likely,

however, there will be many content areas and grade levels that lack assessments to support the

SLO process. In preparation, it is recommended that school districts:

1. Conduct an analysis of district-wide assessments that are in place;

2. Identify those grade levels and content areas for which appropriate assessments are

available; and

3. Identify those grade levels and content areas for which appropriate assessments are not

available.

Once this process has taken place, the school district will need to make further decisions.

As depicted in Figure 3.3, school districts will need to plan for the adoption and/or creation of

assessments as appropriate.

Figure 3.3. Assessment Rules Decision Tree.

Will the district require

the use of existing,

common district-wide

assessments for any

specific grade/ subject?

Are there grade/subjects

where the district wants to

prioritize buying or

creating additional

district-wide assessments?

Identify which grades/

subjects and assessments.

Will they be district,

regional, or third party

created?

YES

What will the district

require for any remaining

teachers who are not yet

covered?

NO

Determine Rules for How Specific Goals Will Be Set When No State Assessment Exists


O b j e c t i v e s


In addition, the following recommendations should be taken into consideration when

creating and/or adopting assessments:

Use district or regionally-developed assessments.

Collaborate across grade levels and/or content areas to create common assessments to

increase coverage.

Increase the number of high-quality assessments that are utilized across grades/subjects

within the district.

Use teacher-made assessments as the division develops common assessments and

monitor for validity and reliability.

On the following pages, selected assessments that would be appropriate in a variety of

settings are listed. These assessments provide a comprehensive list of possibilities that may be

commercially-produced or developed by school districts and/or teachers. When teacher-made

assessments are used, it is strongly encouraged to engage teams of teachers in creating the

assessments and administering the assessments across grade levels and content areas. Figure 3.4

is a comprehensive list of possible measures organized by content area and grade level. Included

is an explanation of the measure, its appropriateness for SLOs, and the rationale for inclusion or

exclusion. Figure 3.5 organizes assessments into a grid format allowing for a quick review of

possible assessment measures for use in the student learning objective process.


O b j e c t i v e s


Figure 3.4. Selected Pre- and Post-Assessment Measures2

K-12 or Multiple Content Areas

Assessment Description Appropriateness

for SLOs Rationale

Advanced

Placement

Assessments

Advanced placement classes are offered in many subject areas

for high school age students.

Yes This assessment allows for pre-

assessment, progress monitoring, and

post-assessment. Therefore, it is

appropriate for the student learning

objective process.

AIMSweb AIMSweb is a paper/pencil assessment tool used for academic

universal screening (K-8) and progress monitoring (through

high school) in reading and mathematics. A computerized

component is used to score assessment results.30

Yes and No AIMSweb is appropriate for K-8 as it

has pre- and post-assessment and

progress monitoring capability.

However, this capability is not

available for high school students.

Benchmark Tests Benchmarks tests are tests administered by school districts to

monitor student progress throughout the year. Benchmarks tests

may be developed by the school districts or a commercial

product may be used.

Yes and No

Benchmark tests are appropriate to

use in the student learning objective

process if the first benchmark test is

a pre-assessment and student gain

can be determined by the end of the

year. In addition, school districts

should ensure that benchmarks align

with the curriculum and follow best

practice in test construction.

Edison Learning

Learning Force

Edison Learning’s 30+ hour Learning Force program is

targeted for students who are low performing or who have

learning gaps on some foundation skills. It is for use with

grades 3-8. Reading Force is the reading program

component and Math Force is the mathematics program

component.31





objective process.

2 Note:: The assessments included here are ones commonly found in use in preK-12 school settings. However, in no way does this list imply endorsement for any

particular company.


O b j e c t i v e s



for SLOs Rationale

Interactive

Achievement (IA)

IA assessments are computerized or paper/pencil assessments

available in mathematics, English, history, and science.32

Yes The IA assessment allows for pre-




objective process.

International

Baccalaureate (IB)

The IB program is an internationally recognized curriculum. Yes The IB program allows for pre-




objective process.

Measures of

Academic

Progress (MAP)

MAP assessments are computerized diagnostic, adaptive

assessments in mathematics, reading, language usage, and

science. The assessments can be administered up to four times

yearly and are aligned to state standards. Questions become

easier or more difficult based on previous student answers.

Scores are reported as percentile, achievement, or growth

scores.33

Yes The MAP assessment allows for pre-




objective process.

Pearson Inform Pearson Inform is an achievement data analysis tool built

specifically for K-12. Pearson Inform includes capabilities for

tracking and measuring Response to Intervention (RTI).34

No Pearson Inform analyzes data. It does

not provide pre- and post-testing

capability.

Pearson Inform

with Limelight

Pearson Inform with Limelight combines an achievement data

analysis tool with test-building capability. Online, reliable

assessments allow educators to assess and analyze data, and

intervene and re-test students when necessary. Limelight’s test

banks offer tens of thousands of standards-aligned questions that

enable teachers to implement interim, benchmark, diagnostic

and classroom assessments.35

Yes Pearson Inform with Limelight

allows for pre-assessment, progress

monitoring, and post-assessment.

Therefore, it is appropriate for the

student learning objective process.


O b j e c t i v e s



for SLOs Rationale

Performance

Assessments with

Accompanying

Rubrics

Performance Assessments with accompanying rubrics can be

used in all instructional areas.

Yes (with

explanation)

This assessment allows for pre-




objective process. However, careful

rubric construction is crucial for

valid and reliable assessment results.

Teachers must ensure that rubrics

align with the curriculum.

PLATO Test

Packs

PLATO Test Packs with Prescriptions provide grade-level fixed

benchmark assessments for grades 2-12 in reading and

mathematics, and grades 7-12 in writing, 7-11 in science, and 7-

12 in social studies. PLATO Test Packs then provide

personalized, prescriptive assignments to PLATO curriculum—

targeting each student's areas of need.36





objective process.

Publisher Pre- and

Post-Tests

Textbook publishers oftentimes provide pre- and post-tests for

use.

Yes and No These assessments may allow for

pre-assessment, progress monitoring,

and post-assessment. If so, then they

are appropriate for the student

learning objective process. However,

care must be taken to ensure

curricular aims are addressed and

tested in the assessment.

Qualitative

Reading Inventory

(QRI)

QRI in an informal reading inventory. Within the assessment are

comprehension, sight word vocabulary/word recognition,

fluency, and listening comprehension subtests.37





objective process.


O b j e c t i v e s



for SLOs Rationale

Skills Checklist Skills checklists can serve to measure master learning when

administered as pre- and post-assessments

Yes Checklists allow for pre- assessment,

progress monitoring, and post-

assessment. Therefore, they are


objective process.

State Released

Tests

States issue released tests from previous years of

administration.38

Yes Released tests can be used to pre-

assess what students know and are

able to do. Therefore, they are


objective process.

Stanford Tests Stanford tests are available in mathematics, Lexile measure,

reading, language, spelling, social science, and science in grades

K - 12.39





objective process.

Teacher

Developed Pre-

and Post-Tests

Teachers may develop pre- and post-tests addressing specific

curricular aims or areas of focus.

Yes (with

explanation)



post-assessment. Therefore, it may be



test construction is crucial for valid

and reliable assessment results.

Teachers must ensure that

assessments align with the curricular

aims and follow best practice in test

construction.


O b j e c t i v e s



for SLOs Rationale

Textbook

Publisher Pre- and

Post-Tests

Textbook publishers create pre- and post-tests based on subject

matter from textbooks.

Yes (with

explanation)





objective process. Textbook tests

may or may not be aligned with state

standards. Careful evaluation of tests

should be undertaken to ensure they

align with curricular aims.


O b j e c t i v e s


K-12 English


for SLOs Rationale

Achieve 3000 Achieve3000 solutions differentiate language arts and

technology skills instruction based on each student's Lexile

level. The entire class receives the same assignments and

activities, and each student receives the assignments via email

tailored automatically and precisely to his or her Lexile level.40

Yes Achieve 3000 allows for pre-




objective process.

Diagnostic

Spelling

Assessments

(e.g. Words Their

Way,

Word Journeys)

Diagnostic spelling assessment programs are developmentally

driven instructional approaches focused on word study. Using a

hands-on approach to instruction, they help to develop phonics,

vocabulary, and spelling through an emphasis on sound, pattern,

and meaning.41

Yes These assessments allow for pre-


post-assessment. Therefore, they are


objective process.

Gates-MacGinitie

Reading Tests

Gates-MacGinitie reading tests are paper/pencil, group

administered reading survey tests used to assess student

achievement in reading.42

Yes Gates-MacGinitie reading tests allow

for pre-assessment, progress


Therefore, they are appropriate for

the student learning objective

process.

Informal Reading

Inventory (IRI)

An IRI assessment measures student reading comprehension,

fluency, and sight vocabulary. Students receive an independent,

instructional, and frustrational reading level based on the results

of the assessment.43

Yes An IRI allows for pre-assessment,


assessment. Therefore, it is

appropriate for student achievement

goal setting.

istation Reading This on-line system is designed as a reading intervention

program. It also has an assessment component. It assesses all

areas of reading (comprehension, fluency, phonemic and

phonological awareness, vocabulary, and phonics) and then

levels students into three tiers. Lessons are geared to address

areas of identified need.44

Yes istation Reading allows for pre-




objective process.


O b j e c t i v e s



for SLOs Rationale

Qualitative

Reading Inventory

(QRI)

QRI is an informal reading inventory that measures oral reading,

silent reading, listening comprehension, fluency, and sight

vocabulary. Students receive an independent, instructional, and

frustrational reading level based on the results of the

assessment.45

Yes QRI allows for pre-assessment,


assessment. Therefore, it is


objective process.

READ 180 READ 180 is a reading program designed for use with students

reading two or more years below grade level. The program uses

adaptive technology to individualize instruction for students and

provide powerful data for differentiation to teachers.46

Yes READ 180 allows for pre-




objective process.

Running Record A running record assesses a student's oral reading. They are

used to show mastery of successively difficult text, types of

miscues made, strategies used to figure out unfamiliar words,

and comprehension. The student reads a passage at his/her

instructional reading level while the teacher scores the reading.47





objective process.

STAR Reading

Enterprise

The STAR Reading Enterprise assessment is a tool to monitor

students reading comprehension as they progress through the

year. Students take a computerized test with 20 test items. As

students answer the CLOZE formatted problems, the questions

become easier or harder depending on how the student answered

previous questions. The system provides instructional reading

levels and zones of proximal development for each

administration of the assessment.48

Yes The STAR Reading Enterprise

assessment allows for pre-




objective process.

SuccessMaker SuccessMaker (K-8) is a web-based program that provides

individualized instruction in essential reading concepts.49





objective process.

Writing Prompt Teachers administer a writing prompt at the beginning of the

year. Using a performance-based rubric, the prompt is scored

and students receive a rating for each of three domains:

composing, written expression, and mechanics/usage.





objective process.


O b j e c t i v e s


K-12 Mathematics


for SLOs Rationale

Cortez Math Cortez Math is a computer based math program. Content is

provided through computer modules, video-based tutorials assist

in reinforcement, and teachers provide directed small group

instruction.50

Yes Cortez math allows for pre-




objective process.

STAR Math The STAR mathematics assessment is a tool to monitor students

as they progress through the year. Assessments are aligned to

state standards. The on-line system provides scale scores for

each administration of the assessment.51

Yes The STAR mathematics assessment

allows for pre- assessment, progress


Therefore, it is appropriate for the


SuccessMaker SuccessMaker (K-8) is a web-based program that provides

individualized instruction in essential math concepts.





objective process.


O b j e c t i v e s


K-12 Special Education


for SLOs Rationale

Individualized

Education Plan

Goals

IEP goals are individualized to each student's needs and abilities

and apply to areas identified in the student's individualized

education plan.

Yes and No If a pre- and post-assessment

component is possible then IEP goals

can be appropriate the student

learning objective process.

K-12 Art


for SLOs Rationale

Performance

Assessments with

Accompanying

Rubrics



Yes (with

explanation)











O b j e c t i v e s


K-12 Music


for SLOs Rationale

Regional/District

Competitions

Competitions are designed to highlight musician and programs

excellence.

Yes and No If a pre- and post-assessment

component is possible than

competitions are appropriate for the


Performance

Assessments with

Accompanying

Rubrics



Yes (with

explanation)










K-12 Physical Education


for SLOs Rationale

FITNESSGRAM The FITNESSGRAM is the mandated physical fitness test for

some public school students. It tests a student's aerobic capacity;

muscle strength, endurance, and flexibility; and body

composition.52





objective process.

Performance

Assessments with

Accompanying

Rubrics



Yes (with

explanation)











O b j e c t i v e s


English - Elementary


for SLOs Rationale

Phonological

Awareness

Literacy

Screening (PALS)

PALS is a K-3 screening, diagnostic, and progress monitoring

tool for measuring the fundamental components of literacy.53





objective process.

Rigby Reading Rigby reading programs for K-5 grades are diverse and prolific.

Literacy by Design, Intervention by Design, Rigby Literacy, and

In-step Readers are just a few of the reading programs that are

available.54

Yes and No Some of the Rigby reading programs

allow for pre-assessment, progress

monitoring, and post-assessment and

are appropriate for the student

learning objective process. Others do

not.

Starfall Starfall is a computerized, phonics-based reading program

appropriate for students in pre-school through second grade.55

No There is no pre- and post-assessment

capability.

Starfall

Kindergarten

Curriculum

The Starfall Kindergarten curriculum is comprised of seven

components: motivation, phonemic awareness, phonics,

vocabulary, fluency, comprehension, and writing. It includes

entry, mid-year, and post-year assessments.56





objective process.

Voyager -

Passport

Passport is a computerized reading intervention program for

grades K-5.57





objective process.

Voyager - Ticket

to Read

Ticket to Read is a web-based reading program designed for

student reading practice.58

No There is no pre- and post-assessment

capability.

Mathematics - Elementary


for SLOs Rationale

Starfall Starfall math is a computerized series of math games students

can play. These games are used for skills reinforcement or

initial skills introduction.59

No Starfall math has no pre- and post-

assessment capability.


O b j e c t i v e s


Figure 3.5. Assessments by Subjects and Grade Levels

ENGLISH Elementary Middle High Special

Education

Achieve 3000 X X X X

Advanced Placement (AP) Exam X X

AIMSweb X X X X

Benchmark Tests X X X X

Diagnostic Spelling Assessments X X X

Edison Learning X X X

Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests X X X X

Informal Reading Inventory (IRI) X X X X

Interactive Achievement (IA) X X X X

International Baccalaureate (IB) Exam X

istation Reading X X X X

Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) X X X X

Pearson Limelight X X X X

Performance Assessments X X X X

Phonological Awareness Literacy

Screening (PALS) X

X

PLATO Test Packs X X X X

Publisher Pre- and Post-Tests X X X X

Qualitative Reading Inventory (QRI) X X X X

READ 180 X X X X

Rigby Reading X X

Running Record X X X X

State Released Tests X X X X

Stanford X X X X

STAR Reading Enterprise X X X X

Starfall Kindergarten Curriculum X X

Study Island X X X

SuccessMaker X X

Teacher Developed Pre- and Post-Tests X X X X

Voyager - Passport X X X

Writing Prompt X X X X


O b j e c t i v e s


MATHEMATICS Elementary Middle High Special

Education


AIMSweb X X X X


Cortez Math X X X X

Edison Learning X X X


International Baccalaureate (IB) Exam X X


Pearson Limelight X X X X


PLATO Test Packs X X X X



STAR Math X X X X

Study Island X X X X

SuccessMaker X X X


SCIENCE Elementary Middle High Special

Education








PLATO Test Packs X X X



Study Island X X X


SOCIAL STUDIES Elementary Middle High Special

Education








O b j e c t i v e s


SOCIAL STUDIES Elementary Middle High Special

Education

PLATO Test Packs X X X



Study Island X X X


SPECIAL EDUCATION

Advanced Placement Test X X


Individualized Education Plan Goals X X X X


Skills Checklist X X X X


ART Elementary Middle High Special

Education






MUSIC Elementary Middle High Special

Education



Regional/District Competitions X X X X


Student Performances X X X X


PHYSICAL EDUCATION Elementary Middle High Special

Education


FITNESSGRAM X X X X




TECHNICAL EDUCATION Elementary Middle High Special

Education

Benchmark Tests X X X

Performance Assessments X X X

Skills Checklist X X X

Teacher Developed Pre- and Post-Tests X X X

Technical Certification X X


O b j e c t i v e s


FOREIGN LANGUAGE Elementary Middle High

Special

Educat

ion


Benchmark Tests X X X

Performance Assessments X X X

Publisher Pre- and Post-Tests X X X

Skills Checklist X X X

Teacher Developed Pre- and Post-Tests X X X

4 8 P a r t I V - E x a m p l e S t u d e n t L e a r n i n g O b j e c t i v e s


Part IV - Sample Student Learning Objectives Part IV is a compilation of samples of objectives. The section is organized by elementary,

middle, and high school levels. Multiple subjects are included. Most of the objectives were developed by

teachers in the field and evaluated by their administrators. Further, they were evaluated by Stronge and

Associates team members. All are deemed SMART.

A list of schools districts is included and their contributions are gratefully acknowledged.

Accomack County Public Schools

Fluvanna County Public Schools

Franklin City Public Schools

Greensville County Public Schools

Hopewell City Public Schools

Orange County Public Schools

Roanoke City Public Schools

Richmond City Public Schools

Salem City Public Schools

The objectives are classified into two categories: achievement objective or progress objectives. In

some cases objectives can be a combination of both. Each type is identified.



Elementary School Student Learning Objective Examples

SLO Responsible

Teacher Subject Grade Level

Assessment

Measure Objective Type

English/Language Arts

1 Classroom

Teacher Reading Kindergarten

Phonological

Awareness

Literacy Screening

Progress

Mathematics

2 Classroom

Teacher Math Third

District

Simulation Test Progress

Science

3 Classroom

Teacher Science Fifth

Teacher-created

Performance

Assessment

Achievement and

Progress

50 P a r t I V - E x a m p l e S t u d e n t L e a r n i n g O b j e c t i v e s


ES English/Language Arts Goal #1 (Progress Objective)


Teacher's Name:

Evaluator's Name:

Subject/Grade: Literacy/Kindergarten School Year: 2011-2012

Initial Objective Submission (due 9/30 to the evaluator)

I. Setting (Describe the

population and special

learning circumstances)

I have 22 students in my class: 13 males and nine females. Seven

students are African American, six are Caucasian, eight are

Latino, and one is a Pacific Islander. Five students pay full price

for meals, one student pays reduced price, and 16 students receive

free meals. Three students are special education inclusion

students. Five students receive speech services. Seven students

receive ESL services. Three students receive PALS tutoring.

II. Content/Subject/Field

Area (The area/topic

addressed based on learner

achievement, data analysis, or

observational data)

Reading–Using all components of basic early literacy skills is

critical at the Kindergarten Level to help students learn to read.

III. Baseline Data (What is

shown by the current data?) According to the fall PALS test 19/22 students made the

benchmark cutoff score of 37/114. 3/22 students did not make the

37 benchmark score. These three students require intensive

instruction in the areas of Phonemic Awareness, Phonics,

Spelling, Concept of Word, and High Frequency Word

recognition. IV. Objective Statement

(Describe what you want learners/program to accomplish)

By June, 100% of my students will show measurable growth on

the PALS test. Fifty percent will surpass the spring benchmark of

112/144. Forty percent will meet the spring benchmark score of

112/144. Ten percent will show significant growth (score 50%

better) on the spring PALS test as compared to the fall PALS test. V. Means for Attaining Objective (Strategies used to accomplish the objective)

Strategy

Evidence

Target Date

1. Phonemic Awareness –

Phonemic awareness

instruction lessons, whole

group and small group

Phonemic Awareness Work

Station

Pals Quick check and reading midpoints. Daily, beginning in

October and ending

in May in both

whole group and

small group

Weekly, beginning

in October and

ending in May



2. Phonics instruction-

Letter Recognition - -

Differentiated small group

and whole group lessons

-Phonics practice -

a. ABC/Word workstation

b. Leapster workstation

c. Listening station

d. Computer lab

3. Phonics instruction-

Focus on letter sounds

Differentiated small groups

and whole group direct

instruction.

- Letter Sound practice -

a. Listening workstation

b. ABC/word workstation

c. Leapster workstation

d. Computer Lab

Pals Quick check and reading midpoints



Daily

Weekly

Daily

Weekly

52 E x a m p l e S t u d e n t L e a r n i n g O b j e c t i v e s


ES Math Goal #2 (Progress Objective)


Teacher’s Name:

Evaluator’s Name:

Subject/Grade: Math/Third-Grade School Year: 2011-2012

Initial Objective Submission (due by 9/30 to the evaluator)


and special learning circumstances) I teach third grade math in an urban school with 618

students. There is an 87% free and reduced lunch rate. I

have 46 students in my three classrooms. Five out of 46

receive special education services.


area/topic addressed based on

learner achievement, data analysis,

or observational data)

Math

III. Baseline Data (What is shown by

the current data?) In September the pre-assessment (third grade District

Simulation test) indicated that 1 student met the

benchmark on grade level with at least a 70%, 8

students are within 20 points of meeting the third grade

benchmark, requiring strategic interventions, and 37

students are greater than 20 points from meeting the

third grade benchmark needing intensive interventions.

Data attached


what you want learners/program to

accomplish)

For the current school year all students will make

measureable progress as measured by the third grade

District Simulation test given in March. The 1 student

that met the benchmark will score at least an 80% or

higher. The 8 students requiring strategic interventions

will increase by at least 20% to meet or exceed the

benchmark and the 37 students requiring intensive

intervention will increase by at least 30% to make

noticeable gains towards meeting the benchmark. V. Means for Attaining Objective (Strategies used to accomplish the objective)


Targeted small-group instruction

based on student needs

Formative Assessment December 2011 and

May 2012

(monitored bi-

weekly)

Standards checklist with standards

numbers to check for mastery

Data Reports December 2011 and

May 2012

(monitored bi-

53 E x a m p l e S t u d e n t L e a r n i n g O b j e c t i v e s


weekly)

Mini assessments on IA to check

for mastery in standards areas

IA Reports

December 2011 and

May 2012 (as

needed)

After school instructional

program

IA scores December 2011 and

May 2012



ES Science Objective #3 (Achievement and Progress Objective)


Teacher’s Name: ______________

Evaluator’s Name: _______________

Subject/Grade: Science/Fifth-Grade School Year: 2011-2012

Directions: This form is a tool to assist teachers in setting an objective that results in measurable learner

progress. NOTE: When applicable, learner achievement/progress should be the focus of the objective.

Enter information electronically (the boxes will expand to fit text).


I. Setting (Describe the population and

special learning circumstances) There are 48 students in two science classes. I have

twenty girls and twenty-eight boys in my classes.

Eighty one percent are African American, 10% are

white, and nine percent are classified as ELL. Five

students have IEPs. II. Content/Subject/Field Area (The

area/topic addressed based on learner


observational date)

Science - scientific investigation

III. Baseline Data (What is shown by the

current data?) As a pretest, the students in my science classes

evaluated an experiment. I scored their performance

using a 4-level scientific investigation rubric. A score

of three signifies proficient.

Question/

Hypothesis

Invest.

Design

Data

Collect.

Data

Analysis

Level

4 0 0 0 0

Level

3

7

(15%)

8

(17%)

8

(17%)

5

(10%)

Level

2

35

(73%)

31

(65%)

29

(60%)

28

(58%)

Level

1

6

(13%)

9

(19%)

11

(23%)

15

(31%)

IV. Objective Statement (Describe what

you want learners/program to

accomplish)

For the current school year, all of my students will

improve by one performance level in each domain.

Additionally, 85% (41) or more will score at a three

level or higher on each of the four domains.



Lab experiments Lab report form December and May

Monitor bi-weekly

Interactive note-taking Student notebooks December and May



Monitor bi-weekly

Flexible grouping Assessment results December and May

Monitor weekly

Remediation/Reteaching Testing Results December and May

Monitor bi-weekly



Middle School Student Learning Objective Examples

SLO Responsible

Teacher Subject Grade Level

Assessment



1 Classroom

Teacher Reading Seventh

Flannigan

Grade 7

Reading

Assessment

Progress

Science

2 Classroom

Teacher

Earth

Science Eighth

Interactive

Achievement Achievement

Social Studies

3 Classroom

Teacher History Sixth

Released State

Test

Achievement

and Progress



MS English/Language Arts Objective #1 (Achievement Objective)


Teacher:

Evaluator:

Subject/Grade: English/Seventh-Grade School Year: 2011-2012

Directions: This form is a tool to assist teachers in setting an objective that results in measurable

learner progress. NOTE: When applicable, learner achievement/progress should be the focus of

the objective. Enter information electronically into the cells (the boxes will expand to fit the text)



special learning circumstances) I teach three blocks of grade 7 English. In Block I, I teach

19 TAG students. In Block 3, I teach 20 lower/mid level

general education students. In Block 4, I teach 20

upper/mid level general education students.




observational data)

Reading Comprehension


current data?) I pre-tested all 59 students using the Flannigan Grade 7

Reading Assessment. I scored each assessment to establish

a numerical percentage:

All Students

Below 60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100

33 (56%) 9 (15%) 8 (14%) 7 (12%) 2 (3%)

TAG Students

Below 60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100

1 (6%) 4 (22%) 7 (39%) 5 (28%) 2 (11%)

General Education Students

Below 60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100

32 (78%) 5 (12%) 1 (2%) 2 (5%) 0



accomplish)

For the current school year, 100% of students will show

improvement in an individually targeted area of weakness

identified by the baseline data. By the end of the school

year, all of my general level students will achieve a score

of 75% or better on the post-test and all students identified

talented/gifted will achieve a score of 86% or better on the

post-test.





Use modified pacing to accommodate

student needs.

Copies of modified pacing December

May

Monitor weekly

Differentiate instruction as needed Copies of lesson plans December

May

Monitor weekly

Use frequent formative assessment to

provide feedback and modify

instruction

Copies of lesson plans

Anecdotal notes

Student SMART SLO folders

December

May

Monitor weekly



MS Earth Science Objective #2 (Achievement Objective)



Evaluator’s Name: _______________

Subject/Grade: Earth Science/Eighth-Grade School Year: _2011-2012



the objective. Enter information electronically (the boxes will expand to fit text).



special learning circumstances) There are 68 students in three sections of Earth

Science. Thirty are male and thirty-eight are female.

This group has 35 African-Americans, 23 Caucasians,

4 Asians, and 6 Hispanics. Four students have limited

English proficiency. Ten students have special

education IEPs. II. Content/Subject/Field Area (The



observational date)

Earth Science


current data?) I used Interactive Achievement to give a pre-test.

Class averages were as follows.

Section 1 - 48%

Section 2 - 59%

Section 3 - 52% IV. Objective Statement (Describe what


accomplish)

All of my students will demonstrate measurable

progress by passing the IA post-test. Additionally,

those who made 70% (9 students) or above on the pre-

test will improve by at least 10 points.



Interactive note-taking Student notebooks December/May

Monitor bi-weekly

Differentiated instruction Lesson Plans

December /May

Monitor weekly

Flexible grouping Assessment results December/May

Monitor bi-weekly

Remediation/Reteaching Testing Results December

Monitor bi-weekly



MS History Objective #3 (Achievement and Progress Objective)



Evaluator’s Name: ________________

Subject/Grade: History/Sixth-Grade School Year: 2011 - 2012



and special learning circumstances) I teach three sections of history (1865-Present) to 62

sixth grade students. Forty students are white, 15

students are black, and seven students are Hispanic.

Thirty-seven are female and 26 are male. Two students

have IEPs. II. Content/Subject/Field Area (The




U.S. History (1865-Present)


the current data?) I administered a released state test to all 62 students in

September. Only four earned a passing score of 70% or

higher. These are the results:

200-300 300-399 400 and above

11 (18%) 48 (77%) 3 (5%)

Data attached IV. Objective Statement (Describe


accomplish)

For the 2011-2012 school year, 100% of my students

will make measureable progress in U.S. History.

Furthermore, all will pass the EOC test. Those who

scored 400 or higher on the pre-test will complete

special projects going deeper into the history

curriculum. V. Means for Attaining Objective (Strategies used to accomplish the objective)


Interactive notes Student notebooks -December and June

-Monitor bi-weekly

Differentiated instruction as

necessary

Lesson plans -December and June

-Monitor monthly

Vocabulary focus Lesson plans

Student quizzes

-December and June

-Monitor bi-weekly

Inquiry-based learning units Unit packets

Student projects

-December and June

-Monitor weekly

during unit work



High School Student Learning Objective Examples

SLO Responsible

Teacher Subject

Grade

Level

Assessment



1 English 11

Teacher English 11 Eleventh

End of Course

Released State

Test

Progress

Mathematics

2 Algebra 1 Teacher Algebra 1 Ninth

Algebra

Readiness

Diagnostic Test

(ARDT)

Achievement and

Progress

Science

3 Chemistry

Teacher Chemistry

Tenth -

Twelfth

Teacher Created

Test Progress



HS English 11 Objective #1 (Progress Objective)


Teacher’s Name: ___________________

Evaluator’s Name: __________________

Subject/Grade: English 11 School Year: _2011-2012



the goal. Enter information electronically (the boxes will expand to fit text).



special learning circumstances) There are 27 students in my English 11 class. I have

16 males and 11 females.. Ten are black, 11 are white,

and six are other ethnicities. Three students receive

special education services and one student has a 504

plan. II. Content/Subject/Field Area (The



observational date)

English 11


current data?) According to the fall pretest (state released test), 37%

of the students (10/27) scored at 50% or above, 44%

(12/27) scored between 40-50%, and 20% (5/27)

scored below 40%. None of the students scored above

65% and none scored below 32%.

50% and above 40% - 50% Below 40%

10/27 (37%) 12/27 (44%) 5/27 (19%)



accomplish)

All students will show measureable progress. Of those

scoring at or above 50%, all will show growth of at

least 20 points. Of those scoring between 40-50%, all

will show growth of at least 30 points. Of those

scoring below 40%, all will show growth of at least 35

points. V. Means for Attaining Objective (Strategies used to accomplish the objective)


Individual and small group instruction

as needed

Lesson plans

Quizzes

December

May

Monitor weekly

After school tutoring Weekly quizzes

December

May

Monitor weekly



Differentiated instruction Quizzes December

May

Monitor bi-

weekly



HS Algebra 1 Objective #2 (Achievement and Progress Objective)


Teacher’s Name: _________________

Evaluator’s Name: _________________

Subject/Grade: Algebra 1/Ninth-Grade School Year: _2011-2012

Directions: This form is a tool to assist teachers in setting a goal that results in measurable


the goal. Enter information electronically (the boxes will expand to fit text).



special learning circumstances) There are 22 students in my 9th grade Algebra 1 class.

These students have not passed the EOC test and are

re-taking the course. Fourteen are male and eight are

female. There are 11 African-Americans, seven

Caucasians, four Hispanics. Two students have limited

English proficiency. One student has an IEP and two

students have 504 special education plans. II. Content/Subject/Field Area (The



observational date)

Algebra 1


current data?) A pre-test ARDT was given. The results are as

follows:

1500-1599 1600-1699 1700-1799

4 (18%) 11 (50%) 7 (32%)



accomplish)

All of the students in the top two groups will meet the

state’s recommended benchmark of 1850 by the end of

the year. The lowest group will improve by at least

250 points.



Individual and small group instruction

as needed

Lesson plans

Quizzes

December

May

Monitor weekly

Mathematics vocabulary focus Lesson plans

December

May

Monitor weekly



Remediation/reteaching Strand test results

Quizzes

December

May

Monitor bi-

weekly

After school tutoring Testing results December

May

Monitor weekly



HS Chemistry Goal #3 (Progress Objective)


Teacher’s Name:

Evaluator’s Name: ______________

Subject/Grade: Chemistry/Tenth-, Eleventh-, and Twelfth-Grade School Year: 2011 – 2012




circumstances)

I teach four classes of grades 10-12 Chemistry. I have a

total of 80 students. Ten percent of my students have IEPs.

Seventy-five percent of my students do not have at least

one of the following available to them after school:

computer, printer, or internet. Ninety-three percent (74/80)

of my students take the school bus to school.

II. Content/Subject/Field Area

(The area/topic addressed based

on learner achievement, data

analysis, or observational data)

Chemistry (scientific method and experimental design;

and applying mathematical concepts of literal equations

for Chemistry).


by the current data?) I administered Scientific Method/Experimental Design

and Literal Equation pre-assessments with all students.

Here are the results:

Sci. Meth/Exp. Design Literal Equations

1st

Qtr

2nd

Qtr

3rd

Qtr

4th

Qtr

1st

Qtr

2nd

Qtr

3rd

Qtr

4th

Qtr

90% 5% 5% 0% 100%

Data attached



to accomplish)

For the 2011-2012 school year, 100% of my students will

make measurable progress in both Scientific

Method/Experimental Design and Literal Equations. By

the end of the school year, all (72/80) will score at least

two quartiles above their pre-assessment in both areas. V. Means for Attaining Objective (Strategies used to accomplish the objective)


Incorporate focused instruction in

key content areas as prescribed

by the state standards

-Lesson plans

-Standard Progress Matrix

-"Catch Up" workstation with

designated videos and online

resources based on scaffolded CH

topics

-December and May

-Monitor monthly



Use formative assessment to

provide feedback and modify

instruction

-Lesson plans

-Copies of teacher-made


-Standard Progress Matrix

-Students' interactive notebooks -

self-charting section

-December and May

-Monitor bi-weekly

Use peer and self-charting

assessment

-Lesson plans

-Copies of teacher-made


-Students' interactive notebooks

-Students' Self-Progress Charts

-December and May

-Monitor bi-weekly

Use innovative techniques

gleaned from Yale National

Institute, NSTA Conference, and

the Supercomputing Conference

to assist with objective

achievement

-Lesson plans

-"3 NEW" interactive

methodology models

implemented

-December and May

-Monitor monthly

Use remediation services for

students in the lowest tier

-Tutor coordination plan

-Tutor scaffolding chart

-Individualized remediation plans

coordinated with tutors

-Chart of progress

-December and May

-Monitor bi-weekly



Educational Specialists Learning Objective Examples

SLO Responsible

Teacher Subject

Grade

Level

Assessment

Measure

Objective

Type

School Psychologist

1 School

Psychologist

Measureable

Data K-5 Survey Achievement

School Counselor

2 School Counselor Graduation

Requirements Ninth

Counselor

Created

Inquiry

Achievement



School Psychologist Objective #1 (Achievement Objective)


Teacher’s Name:

Evaluator’s Name:

Subject/Grade: School Year: 2011 -2012

Initial Objective Submission (due by 9/30 to the evaluator) I. Setting (Describe the population

and special learning circumstances) The elementary schools include students in grades

K-5. Of those four elementary schools, two are

considered Title I schools. The middle school

includes students in grades 6th-8th. The focus

population within these schools is classroom

teachers, specialists, administration, guidance

counselors, special education teachers, and related

staff. II. Content/Subject/Field Area (The




The use of measurable data versus the use of

objective data during SST, Child Study, and IEP

meetings is the subject of this goal.


the current data?) Baseline data was based on a staff self-report through a

survey (see attached). Of the total data collected from

school staff regarding information presented during

SST, Child Study, and IEP meetings, 50 percent was

considered measureable data and 50 percent was

considered anecdotal data.



accomplish)

The goal of this program growth objective is to increase

the amount of measureable data reported by staff to at

least 75 percent of the total data reported. This increase

will be accomplished by changing some of the anecdotal

data reported to measureable data. (25 percent increase) V. Means for Attaining Objective (Strategies used to accomplish the objective)


Reference to district-wide initiative focused

on measureable student growth in

consultation

Meeting minutes May 2012 (ongoing)



Reference to measureable data will be

encouraged in a coaching format with

school

staff


Relevant forms of measurable data will be

requested by the school psychologist during

meetings


Provide praise to staff when measureable

data is used in meetings and consultation


Share information with staff via Special

Education Monthly Meetings

Meeting minutes May 2012 (monthly

monitoring)

Implement updated IEP and meeting forms

that foster use of measurable data

Updated forms May 2012 (ongoing)



School Counselor Goal #2 (Achievement Objective)


Teacher’s Name:

Evaluator’s Name: __________________________________________

Subject/Grade: School Counselor School Year: 2011 -2012

Initial Objective Submission (due by 9/30 to the evaluator) I. Setting (Describe the population

and special learning circumstances) Freshmen (Class of 2015)





Requirements for graduation for standard/

advanced studies diploma;

number of verified credits required for each

diploma III. Baseline Data (What is shown by

the current data?) Current data shows 0 percent of freshmen know both

credit and verified credit requirements they need for the

diplomas the students are seeking to earn.

(October 2011)



accomplish)

During the 2011-12 school year, 50 percent of my

freshmen students whose last names begin with the

letters J-P will know the credits and verified credit

requirements for the diploma type they are seeking. V. Means for Attaining Objective (Strategies used to accomplish the objective)


Ninth grade team teachers and

teachers of chemistry pre-IB and

English 9 pre-IB will reinforce this

information through do now’s, class

discussions, and Quia.

I will check with teachers. March 2012

72 E n d N o t e s


End Notes

1 Sanders, W. L. & Rivers, J. C. (1996, November). Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future student

achievement. Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Value-Added Research and Assessment Center

Sander, W. L., Saxton, A. M., & Horn, S. P. (1997). The Tennessee Value-Added Accountability System: A

quantitative, outcomes-based approach to educational assessment. In J. Millman (Ed.), Grading teachers, grading

schools: Is student achievement a valid evaluation measure? (pp. 137-162). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. 2 Stronge, J. H. (2010). Effective teachers = student achievement: What the research says. Larchmont, NY: Eye on

Education. 3 Stronge, J. H. and Grant, L. H. (2009). Student achievement goal setting: Using data to improve teacher and

learning. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education. 4 Tucker, P. S. & Stronge, J. H. (2005). Linking teacher evaluation and student achievement. Alexandria, VA:

Association for supervision and curriculum development. pp. 158-159. 5 Bloom, B. S. (1984). The 2 Sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one

tutoring. Educational Researcher, 13(6), 4-16. 6 See, for example, Cawelti, G. (Ed.). (2004). Handbook of research on improving student achievement (3rd ed.).

Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service; Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom

instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association

for Supervision and Curriculum Development; Snipes, J., Doolittle, F., Herlihy, C. (2002). Foundations for success:

Case studies of how urban school systems improve student achievement. New York: MDRC; Walberg, H. J. (1984).

Improving the productivity of America’s schools. Educational Leadership, 41(8), 19-27. 7 Good, T. L., & Brophy, J. E. (1997). Looking in classrooms (7th ed.). New York: Addison-Wesley.

8 Martinez, P. (2001). Great expectations: Setting targets for students. London: Learning and Skills Development

Agency. 9 Black, P. J. & William, D. (1998) Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy

& Practice, 5(1), 7–73. 10

Bloom, B. S. (1984). 11

Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2003). What is scientifically-based research on progress monitoring? Washington, DC:

National Center on Student Progress Monitoring. 12

Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). 13

Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001), pages 94-95. 14

Community Training and Assistance Center. (2011). Teacher evaluation: Student learning objectives in the

spotlight. Retrieved from http://www.ctacusa.com/slos.html. 15

Stronge, J. H., & Tucker, P. D. (2000). Teacher evaluation and student achievement. Washington, DC: National

Education Association. 16

Togneri, W., & Anderson, W. E. (2003). Beyond islands of excellence: What districts can do to improve

instruction and achievement in all schools. Alexandria, VA: Learning Alliance First. 17

Snipes, J., Doolittle, F., Herlihy, C. (2002). 18

Cawelti, G. (2004). 19

Community Training and Assistance Center. (2011). 20

Good, T. L. & Brophy, J. E. (1997); Martinez, P. (2001). 21

Adapted from WestEd (n.d.). Measuring student growth for teachers in non-tested grades and subjects: A primer.

Retrieved from http://www.swcompcenter.org/educator_effectiveness2/NTS__PRIMER_FINAL.pdf 22

Stronge, J. H. & Grant, L. H. (2009). 23

Pressley, M. (2006). Reading instruction that works (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press. 24

Pressley, M. (2006), page 439. 25

Stronge, J. H. & Grant, L. H. (2009). 26

Gareis, C. R. & Grant, L. W. (2008). Teacher-made assessments: How to connect curriculum, instruction, and

student learning. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education. 27

Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based

strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum

Development. 28

Stronge, J. H. & Grant, L. W. (2009). Student achievement goal setting: Using data to improve teaching and

learning. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.

73 E n d N o t e s


29

Stronge, J. H. & Grant, L. W. (2009). 30

Pearson, AIMSweb. Retrieved from http://www.aimsweb.com/ 31

Edison Learning, Learning force. Retrieved from http://edisonlearning.com/learning-force 32

Interactive Achievement, Interactive achievement. Retrieved from http://www.interactiveachievement.com/ 33

Northwest Evaluation Association. Measures of academic progress. Retrieved from http://www.nwea.org/ 34

Pearson School Systems. Pearson inform. Retrieved from

http://www.pearsonschoolsystems.com/products/inform/ 35

Pearson School Systems. Pearson limelight. Retrieved from http://www.pearsoned.com/pearsons-assessment-for-

learning-group-launches-limelight-to-connect-teachers-more-closely-with-students/ 36

PLATO Learning. PLATO test packs. Retrieved from http://www.plato.com/assessments/test-packs-rx 37

Pearson. Qualitative reading inventory. Retrieved from

http://ptgmedia.pearsoncmg.com/images/9780137019236/downloads/9780137019236ch3.pdf 38

Virginia Department of Education. Standards of learning released tests. Retrieved from

http://www.doe.virginia.gov/testing/sol/released_tests/index.shtml 39

Pearson. Stanford tests. Retrieved from http://www.pearsonassessments.com/HAIWEB/Cultures/en-

us/Productdetail.htm?Pid=SAT10 40

Achieve 300-:The Power of One. Achieve 3000 solutions. Retrieved from

http://www.achieve3000.com/article/a3k/?c=2 41

Ganske, K. (2000). Word journeys: Assessment-guided phonics, spelling and vocabulary instruction. New York,

NY: Guilford Press.

Bear, D. R., Invernizzi, M., Templeton, S., & Johnston, F. (2008). Words their way: Word study for phonics,

vocabulary, and spelling instruction (4th ed.).Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. 42

Riverside Publishing. Gates-MacGinitie reading tests. Retrieved from

http://www.riversidepublishing.com/products/gmrt/index.html 43

Johns, J. L. (2008). Basic reading inventory (10th ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt Publishing. 44

Imagination Station. istation. Retrieved from http://www.istation.com/ 45

Pearson. Qualitative reading inventory. Retrieved from

http://www.pearsonhighered.com/product?ISBN=0137019238 46

Scholastic. READ 180. Retrieved from http://read180.scholastic.com/reading-intervention-program 47

Gillet, J. W., Temple, C., Crawford, A. (2008). Understanding reading problems: Assessment and instruction.

Boston, MA: Pearson. 48

Renaissance Learning. STAR reading enterprise. Retrieved from http://www.renlearn.com/sr/ 49

Pearson. SuccessMaker. Retrieved from http://www.pearsonschool.com/index.cfm?locator=PSZkAg 50

Cortez Management Corporation. Cortez math program. Retrieved from http://www.cortezmgmt.com/math.html 51

Renaissance Learning. STAR math. Retrieved from http://www.renlearn.com/sm/ 52

Cooper Institute. Fitness gram. Retrieved from http://www.fitnessgram.net/home/ 53

Phonological Awareness Literacy Screening (PALS). Retrieved from http://pals.virginia.edu/ 54

Houghton, Mifflin, Harcourt. Rigby reading. Retrieved from http://rigby.hmhco.com/en/rigby.htm 55

Starfall Education. Starfall.com Retrieved from http://www.starfall.com/ 56

Starfall Education. Starfall kindergarten curriculum. Retrieved from http://www.starfall.com/n/N-

info/curriculum.htm?n=more 57

Cambium Learning Group. Voyager passport. Retrieved from

http://www.voyagerlearning.com/passport/assessment.jsp 58

Cambium Learning Group. Ticket to read. Retrieved from http://www.voyagerlearning.com/ttr/index.jsp 59

Starfall Education. Starfall math. Retrieved from http://more.starfall.com/

Documents

Learning Objectives Guidebook Guidebook.pdfthe pre-assessment data to create a student learning goal. Once the goal is created, instructional strategies are selected that will be most