Multiple MeasuresModels and Lessons

Learned

Student Growth and Professional Goal

Templates

District Examples Ashland Lincoln Co. North Clackamas

Similarities and Differences

Lessons Learned

Writing Student Growth Goals

Writing Professional Goals

Specialists

How are pilot districts addressing student growth goals with Specialists?

Collaborative Goal Setting Process

Student Growth Goals OEA Guidelines Lincoln Co. Checklist

Scoring/Rating Student Growth Goals

Pendleton Domain 5

Lincoln Co. Domain 5

OEA setting collaborative benchmark of 1 – 4

Lessons learned from pilot districts

Pendleton Domain 5Unsatisfactory Basic Proficient Exemplary

Formative/Summative Assessments

Less than 70% of students in the teacher’s class Met SLO goals

70% of students in the teacher’s class met SLO goals

80% of students in the teacher’s class met SLO goals

90% of students in the teacher’s class met SLO goals.

Portfolios

Less than 70% of students in the class demonstrated proficiency on standards level work or above in a student portfolio.Met SLO goals?

70% of students in the class demonstrated proficiency on standards level work or above in a student portfolio.

80% of students in the class demonstrated proficiency on standards level work or above in a student portfolio.

90% of students in the class demonstrated proficiency on standards level work or above in a student portfolio.

Standardized Assessments

Less than 65% of students achieve a grade level standard or higher on standardized or norm referenced exam.

65% of students achieve a grade level standard or higher on standardized or norm referenced exam.

75% of students achieve a grade level standard or higher on standardized or norm referenced exam.

85% of students achieve a grade level standard (2 years growth or target) or higher on standardized or norm referenced exam.

Performance Assessments

Less than 70% of students in the teacher’s class meet proficiency or make more than one year’s growth on post-assessments according to a proficiency based rubric

70% of students in the teacher’s class meet proficiency or make more than one year’s growth on post-assessments according to a proficiency based rubric

80% of students in the teacher’s class meet proficiency or make more than one year’s growth on post-assessments according to a proficiency based rubric

90% of students in the teacher’s class meet proficiency or make more than one year’s growth on post-assessments according to a proficiency based rubric

IV – SLG Scoring Options

Student Learning Student Learning GoalsGoals

The teacher and administrator/evaluator set the performance indicators when they set the goal• Analytic example

No Progress Limited Progress

Good Progress Exceptional Progress

Few students reach the SLG

Less than significant number of students reach the SLG

Significant number of students reach the SLG

Exceptional number of students reach the SLG

Less than 13 students meet their growth target on OAKS-R.

At least 13-19 students meet their growth target on OAKS-R.

At least 20-28 students meet their growth target on OAKS-R.

At least 29/33 students meet their growth target on OAKS-R.

Professional Practice and Professional

Responsibilities

How are you collecting evidence of professional practice and professional responsibilities?

Combining Measures

Matrix or Weighted Models

Medford/549-CMedford/549-C

Weighted Percentage example:Component Description of Component Rubric Rating

(A)Professional Practice

Standards 1-8____ %

Evidence of teacher’s proficiency re: Learner Development, Learning Differences &Environments Content Knowledge, Application of Content, Assessment, Planning for Instruction, Instructional Strategies

____ % x rating (1-4) =

(B) Professional

Responsibilities Standards 9-10

____ %

Evidence of teacher’s progress toward their own professional goals, contribution to school improvement goals/plan and collegial learning.

____ % x rating (1-4) =

(C)Student Learning &

Growth____ %

Evidence of teachers’ impact on student learning and growth through goal setting, planning, assessment, and instructional strategies

____ % x rating (1-4) =

(D)Summative Rating Sum of A + B + C =

Medford/549-CMedford/549-C

Weighted Percentage example:Component Description of Component Rubric Rating

(A)Professional Practice

Standards 1-8

60 %

Evidence of teacher’s proficiency re: Learner Development, Learning Differences &Environments Content Knowledge, Application of Content, Assessment, Planning for Instruction, Instructional Strategies

60 % x rating (3) =

1.8

(B) Professional

Responsibilities Standards 9-10

20 %

Evidence of teacher’s progress toward their own professional goals, contribution to school improvement goals/plan and collegial learning.

20 % x rating (4) =

.8

(C)Student Learning &

Growth

20 %

Evidence of teachers’ impact on student learning and growth through goal setting, planning, assessment, and instructional strategies

20 % x rating (3) =

.6

(D)Summative Rating Sum of A + B + C = 3.2

Weighted Model

PROFESSIONAL PRACTICEPROFESSIONAL

RESPONSIBILITIES

Domain 1 Domain 2 Domain 3 Domain 4 Prof Goal

Comp. Score Comp. Score Comp. Score Comp. Score Score

A 3 A 3 A 3 A 3 3

B 3 B 3 B 3 B 3

C 3 C 3 C 3 C 3

D 4 D 3 D 3 D 3

E 3 E 3 E 3 E 3

F 3 F 3

Total D:1 19 Total D:2 18 Total D:3 15 Total D:4 15

Weighted Model Cont.

STUDENT LEARNING & GROWTH

SLO 1 SLO 2

Component Score Component Score

A 3 A 3

B 3 B 3

C 3 C 3

Total 9 Total 9

Summative ScoreArea Score Eval Points

Professional Practice 68 Pts Possible Area Percentage Points as 58.6% of Eval

Total 52 76.47% 44.81

Professional Responsibilities 24 Pts Possible Area Percentage Points as 20.7% of Eval

Total 18 75.00% 15.53

Student Learning & Growth 24 Pts Possible Area Percentage Points as 20.7% of Eval

Total 18 75.00% 15.53

Score 0.75862069 75.86

** All scores assigned on a 1-4 scale

Key

Unsatisfactory <50Basic 50-74Proficient 75-89Distinguished 90-100

A teacher e

arning

a Level 3 on th

e

rubric and good

progress to

ward

goals will b

e on a

self-

directe

d 2

year plan

A teacher e

arning

a Level 3 on th

e

rubric and good

progress to

ward

goals will b

e on a

self-

directe

d 2

year plan

A teacher e

arning a

Level 1 on th

e

rubric and lim

ited

progress toward

goals will b

e on a

plan of

awareness

A teacher e

arning a

Level 1 on th

e

rubric and lim

ited

progress toward

goals will b

e on a

plan of

awareness

Ashland Matrix Model

Summative Ratings

Must be reported to ODE

Remember the purpose of evaluation

Pilot Districts Sharing

What process, criteria and/or lens did you use to design the multiple measures and goal setting processes?

What are the strengths and challenges of your multiple measures and goal setting element?

What are the strengths and challenges of your multiple measures and goal setting implementation process?

Questions