CAREER-READY STANDARDS VERSUS INDUSTRY STANDARD(S)
Career-Ready Standards or industry standard(s)
1. The demographics, needs, and abilities of the targeted group are: *
2. Aligned Standards
FfT Connection: Components 1a, 4a, 4b, 4c, 4d, 4e, 4f
Data Wise Connection: Steps 3 & 4
Describe the Maryland College and Career-Ready Standards or industry standard(s) to which this SLO aligns. List 2 to 3 standards/indicators including the essential knowledge and skills.
For additional support, visit MSDE’s Website.
3. Academic Goal
FfT Connection: Components 1c, 4a, 4b, 4c, 4d, 4e, 4f
Data Wise Connection: Steps 3 & 4
Additional information on SLO target setting is available on the MSDE’s Website.
• The target setting approach must be reflected on the artifact/roster.
• In Teachscape the artifact/roster will be uploaded under the Academic Goal.
• Refer to SLO tutorial videos and consult your PDLT for further support and information about goal setting approaches.
Target Setting Approach: (Select only one of the following target setting approaches) *
4. Student Learning Objective: *
5. Instructional Strategies for Attaining Objectives
FfT Connection: Components 1a, 1d, 1e, 2a, 2b, 2c, 2d, 2e, 3a, 3b, 3c, 3d, 3e, 4a, 4b, 4c, 4d, 4e, 4f
Data Wise Connection: Steps 5 & 6
List 2-4 effective instructional strategies, a description of how the strategies will be used in the classroom and demonstrates evidence of effectiveness for the instructional strategies in reaching the growth target.
To access list of content area suggestions for instructional strategies, visit the Curriculum and Instruction SLO Site.
6. Evidence of Growth
FfT Connection: Components 1f, 3d, 4a, 4b, 4c, 4d, 4e, 4f
Data Wise Connection: Steps 7 & 8
How do you plan to monitor student growth between the baseline data and the post-assessment?
Identify 2-3 measureable data sets, the frequency of administration, methods for analyzing,
how this will inform instruction, and how students are engaged in the decision making process.
The following information should be included:
• Name of assessment(s) (Examples include teacher made assessments, unit assessments, student projects, etc.)
• Frequency (How often will you assess the progress of your students towards your Academic Goal)
• Method of analyzing (For example, I will review the bi-weekly formative assessments to analyze the progress on student learning and make adjustments in my teaching as I reflect collaboratively with my colleagues.)
• Sources of information that will inform your instruction (formative/summative assessment results)
• How students will be engaged in the decision making process (Examples include, but are not limited to: student surveys, self-directed learning, student class evaluations, encouraging student voice in learning, self progress learning, peer evaluations of classroom performance)
Prince George’s County Public Schools
Student Learning Objective Handbook
Prince George’s County Public Schools
Board of Education
Segun C. Eubanks, Ed.D., Chair
Carolyn M. Boston, Vice Chair, District 6
Zabrina Epps, M.P.M., District 1
Lupi Quinteros-Grady, District 2
Dinora A. Hernandez, Esq., District 3
Patricia Eubanks, District 4
Verjeana M. Jacobs, Esq., District 5
Vacant, District 7
Edward Burroughs III, District 8
Sonya Williams, District 9
Beverly Anderson, Ph.D.
Vacant, Board Member
Curtis Valentine, M.P.P.
Ava Perry, Student Board Member
Kevin M. Maxwell, Ph.D. Chief Executive Officer
Monique Davis, Ed.D. Shawn Joseph, Ed.D.
Deputy Superintendent of Schools Deputy Superintendent of Teaching and Learning
Dr. Mary Young, Officer
Office of Employee Performance and Evaluation
Division of Human Resources
Name Role/Responsibilities Cluster Contacts
Tracey Mosley Administrative Secretary II
Edgar Batenga Project Manager (Clusters 3, 8, 15)
Bridgette Blue Laney Teacher Evaluation/ PGCEA (Clusters 2, 7, 13)
Dr. Juanita Briscoe Evaluation Data and Student Survey
Dr. Michael Brooks Local 2250, SEIU 400, ASASP III (Clusters 10, 12, 14)
Dr. Lita Kelly Administrator Evaluation/ ASASP II (Clusters 1, 4, 5)
Pamela Lee Data
Vacant Email firstname.lastname@example.org (Clusters 6, 9, 11)
Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) Program
Philip Catania Peer Assistance and Review Instructional Supervisor
Jonathan Wemple Peer Assistance and Review Instructional Specialist
Kenneth B. Haines Peer Assistance and Review Liaison
Larinda Rawlings Peer Assistance and Review Secretary II
Angela Addison-Void Peer Assistance and Review Consulting Teacher
Wendy Brown Peer Assistance and Review Consulting Teacher
Gina Byrd-Phelps Peer Assistance and Review Consulting Teacher
Lashelle Ferguson Peer Assistance and Review Consulting Teacher
Julie Hughey Peer Assistance and Review Consulting Teacher
Tawana R. Lane Peer Assistance and Review Consulting Teacher
Jennifer Lomascolo Peer Assistance and Review Consulting Teacher
Kishanna Poteat-Brown Peer Assistance and Review Consulting Teacher
Mykia Olive Peer Assistance and Review Consulting Teacher
Ivory Rosier Peer Assistance and Review Consulting Teacher
Raymund Rosales Peer Assistance and Review Consulting Teacher
Rowena Shurn Peer Assistance and Review Consulting Teacher
Ranae Stradford Peer Assistance and Review Consulting Teacher
Amanda Stelljies-Willet Peer Assistance and Review Consulting Teacher
Keyshaze Ward Peer Assistance and Review Consulting Teacher
LaTonya Wright Peer Assistance and Review Consulting Teacher
Dr. Gladys Whitehead, Executive Director
Curriculum and Instruction
Division of Teaching and Learning
Dr. Kara Libby, Director Amy Rosenkrans, Director
Academic Programs (Natural Sciences)
Judith Russ Elementary Mathematics
Michelle Dyson Secondary Mathematics
Stephanie McLeod Secondary Mathematics
Godfrey Rangasammy PRE-K through Grade 12 Science
Parfait Awono Advanced and Enriched Instruction (IB)
Dr. Diana Kendrick Advanced and Enriched Instruction (AP)
Nana Donkor Health Education
Amy Wiley Physical Education
Carmen Henniger Immersion
Academic Programs (Humanities)
Kia McDaniel English Language Learners
Altramez McQuaige Elementary Reading
Olga Cabon Secondary Reading
Corey Carter Secondary Reading
Sandra Rose Secondary Social Studies
Maria Flores World Languages
Office of Library Media Services
Shari Blohm Supervisor
College and Career Readiness and Innovative Programs
Nancy Maglorie – Advanced Accounting, Principles of Accounting and Finance, Advanced Management, Principles of Business Administration & Management, College and Career Research and Development, Office Systems Management, Computer Software Applications, NAF Ethics in Business, NAF Financial Services, NAF Principles of Accounting, NAF Principles of Finance, Computer Software Applications, Information Technology, Biomedical Science, Nursing Assistant, Academy of Health Science Program
Darlene Bruton – Publishing and Graphics, Technology Education, Project Lead the Way Pre-Engineering Program, and Gateway to Technology
Rhonda Taylor – Child Development, Human Growth and Development through Adolescence, Cosmetology and Barbering, ProStart and Culinary Arts, International Culture and Cuisine, Financial Literacy, and Construction Trades
Laura Barbee-Mathews Coordinating Supervisor
Andreia Searcy Pre-Kindergarten & Head Start
John Ceschini, Officer
Arts Integration Office
Division of Teaching and Learning
Creative Arts Programs Office
Anita Lambert Coordinating Supervisor
Temisha Kinard Dance
Barbara Liedahl Media Arts – TV Production, MS Technology Integration
Judith Hawkins Vocal and General Music
Lionel Harrell Instrumental Music
Elizabeth Stuart Visual Arts
Patricia Payne Theatre
John Ceschini Arts Integration
Dr. Joan M. Rothgeb, Executive Director
Department of Special Education
Division of Teaching and Learning
Mary Bell Academic Resource Class (Autism)
Karen Andrews Community-Reference Instruction and Regional K-12
Lydia Jones-Nunn Early Childhood Special Education
Table of Contents
About This Guidebook …………………………………………………………………………………………….6
History of Student Learning Objectives (SLOs)
Purpose of SLOs
Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR)
SLOs: The Basics …………………………………………………………………………………………………….8
Identify sources for historical/trend data
Assessment for Pre-Assessment
Create a Baseline Summary
Identify the Students Targeted
Six Target Setting Approaches
Identify Leadership Practices
Quality Rating Rubric
Creating a Review and Documentation Process ………………………………………………………..13
Evaluator Review .
Building-Level Review Process
District-Level Review Process
Frequently Asked Questions…………………………………………………………………18
Sample SLO Template Worksheet
Data Measures Chart
Community Training and Assistance Center (CTAC) Documents
Non-Disclosure Agreement Form
Sample Template for the Analysis of Student Data
Sample Baseline Data Worksheet
Sample Mid-Interval Check-In Meeting Protocol
Special Education Resource Document
About This Guidebook
This guidebook describes processes, includes needed forms, and provides examples that will support the development of high quality Student Learning Objectives (SLOs). The SLO process is about student outcomes (i.e., the ends), not about documentation of the instruction process (i.e., the means).
SLOs are “a set of goals that measure educators’ progress in achieving student growth targets.” By setting rigorous, comparable, and attainable student growth goals, SLOs provide teachers with an opportunity to demonstrate the extent of academic growth of their students through assessments that are aligned to both state standards and classroom instruction. As such, SLOs are a factor in a teacher’s evaluation rating.
Teachers set SLOs at the beginning of their unit, quarter or semester based upon alignment of the assessment calendar. Then identify the targeted amount of growth that their students will make during the SLO interval (with guidance from the content instructional supervisor and building administrator if needed). These growth targets are set by reviewing baseline data, identifying trends in student performance, selecting the key content and standards that students should know by the end of instruction, and choosing appropriate assessments that measure that content and student growth.
SLOs contain the same type of information:
? Baseline Data and Historical/Trend Data: SLO data should summarize student information (test scores from previous years and the results of pretests), identify student strengths and weaknesses, and review trend data to inform the objective and establish the amount of growth that should take place.
? Student Population: This will include students, content area, grade level, and the number of students included in the objective.
? Targeted Student Population: The specific group(s) of students to whom an SLO applies.
? Interval of Instruction: The duration of the course that an SLO will cover, including the beginning and end dates.
? Standards and Content: The content, skills, and Maryland Career and College Readiness Standards (MDCCRS) or Industry Standards to which an SLO is aligned. All SLOs should be broad enough to represent the most important learning or overarching skills but narrow enough to be measured.
? Assessment(s): The assessment(s) that will be used to measure student growth for the objective. (See the Data Measures Chart in the Resources section).
? Growth Target: The target for student growth should reflect high expectations for student learning and be developmentally appropriate. The targets should be rigorous yet attainable. The target can be tiered for specific students in the classroom to allow all students to demonstrate growth, or the target can be equally applicable to all students in a class, a grade, or a subject.
? Instructional Strategies: Instructional strategies that are intended to support student growth as specified in an SLO should be appropriate for all students or a targeted group of students. SLOs will be useful only if they are actively connected to instructional planning and strategies.
Purpose of SLO’s
SLOs are increasingly used in states and school districts across the United States as a measure of student growth. Studies suggest that SLOs, when implemented with fidelity, offer a measurement model for student growth that aligns more directly with actual classroom instruction and teacher practices than those of other growth models. By providing teachers and principals with a structured process for selecting assessments and setting goals for student learning, the SLO process builds collaboration and communication while giving teachers greater control over how the growth of their students is assessed and measured.
When coupled with strong professional development for educators for developing rigorous, valid, and high-quality assessments, the SLO process can support improved alignment between Maryland College and Career Readiness Standards (MDCCRS) and Industry Standards, curricula, and classroom assessment while promoting the professional growth of teachers. Because the SLO process provides a clear structure for setting growth goals on a multitude of assessment types (e.g., for example, teacher- or school-created assessments, performance tasks with a rubric, and student work samples), using SLOs encourages better comparability and accurate demonstration of student learning across multiple teacher types.
It should be noted that Teachers and Principals are defined in the regulation and in this Guidebook as follows:
Teachers – Any individual certificated by MDSE as defined in COMAR 13A.12.02. as a teacher who delivers instruction and is responsible for a student or group of students academic progress in a Pre-K-12 public school setting, subject to local system interpretation.
COMAR Section 13A.12.02. includes certification in early childhood (pre-kindergarten-Grade 3), certification in elementary education (Grades 1-6), Certification in middle school education (Grades 4-9), Certification in general secondary academic areas (Grades 7-12), Data Processing (Business) (Grades 7-12), Family and consumer sciences (Grades 7-12), Family and consumer sciences/career technology education (Grades 7-12), Health occupations education (Grades 7- 12), Marketing education- teacher-coordinator (Grades 7-12), Social Studies (Grades 7-12), Technology education (Grades 7-12), Trades and Industry (Grades 7-12), Work-based learning coordinator (Grades 7-12), Other academic subjects (Grades 7-12), Certification in specialty areas (Prekindergarten – Grade 12), English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) (Prekindergarten – Grade 12), Certification in special education, hearing impaired, severely and profoundly disabled, and visually impaired, Certification in American Sign Language (Prekindergarten- Grade 12); Mathematics Instructional Leader (Prekindergarten- Grade 6); Mathematics Instructional Leader (Grades 4-9); and, Specialized Professional Areas.
Specialists positions listed in COMAR 13A.12.03 which include: guidance counselors, media specialists, pupil personnel workers, reading specialists, reading teachers, pyschometrist, school psychologist, therapists (occupational therapists, physical therapists, speech-language pathologists, or audiologists), school social workers, and gifted and talented education specialists are NOT included in this regulation. The only exception would be if the individual delivers instruction, and is responsible for a group of students’ academic progress in a Pre-K-12 public school setting, subject to local school system interpretation.
SLOs: The Basics
This section addresses the planning process for teachers to develop their SLOs, including data analysis, identifying students, determining the objective statement, etc.
Identify sources for historical/ trend data
Identify if a state assessment was used to inform the data
Consider the following:
Results from prior year assessments or tests that assess knowledge and skills that are prerequisites to the current subject and/or grade.
For example: a French 2 teacher may examine data from the French 1 class data (grades, available assessments, interview with French 1 teacher) to identify the students’ prerequisite knowledge and skills.
Results from assessments in other subjects, including teacher or school generated tests, and state tests that assess pre-requisite knowledge and skills.
For example: a physics teacher may want to examine the results of students’ prior math assessments and their ability to solve complex problems OR, a Spanish I teacher may want to examine students’ general reading and writing abilities from their previous English Language Arts (ELA) classes to identify their knowledge of grammar.
Students’ performance on the work assigned in the first few weeks of the course. This information will provide a picture of students’ level of preparedness based on the pre-requisite knowledge and skills needed for the course. This information can be gathered through assignments (e.g. students ability to read complex scientific texts), surveys, observational checklists, and/or anecdotal notes.
For example: a Computer Programming teacher may administer and analyze a performance assessment to determine students’ level of preparedness.
Assess students for pre-assessment
Consider the following:
Results of beginning of the course teacher, department performance task, the first interim assessment focused on the course enduring understandings. (Based upon alignment with the Data Measures Chart).
For example: a first grade teacher may administer benchmark assessments, Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI) and Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA), in September of the current school year to determine students’ foundational skills in reading.
Create a baseline summary for the target group
Consider the following:
Examining student data to understand learning, determine starting points, and set targets
Use of Data Source #1:
The 5th grade teachers at Riverview Elementary School met to examine selected data about how students had performed on the previous year’s mathematics state assessment. The teachers examined the results on each math strand and found that most students were proficient in arithmetic. However, they struggled with geometry skills concerning shapes and measurements.
Use of Data Source #2:
End-of-Year 4th Grade Common Assessment
Using the end-of-year 4th grade common assessment on geometry, the teachers observed that the content strand in which students struggled the most was measuring perimeters of polygons. Since calculating perimeters was a matter of adding, and students had performed well on the addition strands of both the annual and unit assessments, the teachers were perplexed. They decided to collect new data on students’ geometry skills using questions from the supplemental workbooks of their standards-based math curriculum.
Use of Data Source #3: Supplemental Workbooks
When reviewing the students’ workbook responses, they noticed a pattern. Students performed well on simple perimeter problems when the shapes were drawn for them, but on word problems that required them to combine shapes before adding, they struggled. The teachers hypothesized that students’ difficulties were not with calculating perimeters, but with considering when and how to combine polygons in response to real-world problems. They further hypothesized that students would benefit from opportunities to apply basic geometry skills to novel situations.
? Identify the Student Population and the Interval of Instruction
? Identify the total number of students in a subject area/course
? Identify the students targeted / Target Value
Consider the following:
Teachers can set SLOs that best match their particular teaching responsibilities, subject areas, grade levels, or student populations. Optional student grouping for an SLO:
? Course-level SLOs are focused on the entire student population for a given course, often across multiple classes.
? Class-level SLOs are focused on the student population in a specific class.
? Targeted student SLOs are subgroups of students who need specific support in a class or across multiple classes.
There are 6 target setting approaches (See Target Setting Approaches Chart)
Growth to Mastery
Half the Gap
Note: No one target setting approach is better than the other. Teachers should use the target setting approach that he/she believes best allows you to demonstrate student growth. The following are only examples. If you have additional questions please contact the appropriate content supervisor. The goal is for teachers to create authentic and meaningful SLOs.
? The common growth approach means that all students in the target group are expected to grow at the same amount.
20 students will increase their scores by at least 20 lexile points from the pre-SRI (name the pre-assessment) to the post-SRI (name the post-assessment).
? The banded approach means that all students in the target group are grouped with each group grouping at a common amount.
20 students will increase their scores by at least (20%) in Group A, (10%) in Group B from the pre-Social Studies SLO assessment (name the pre-assessment) to the post- Social Studies SLO assessment (name the post-assessment).
? The half the gap approach means that all students in the target group are expected to grow by half of the performance gap to the identified maximum (e.g., each student achieves half of the points between their initial score and the maximum score)
20 students will increase their scores by at least half the gap to 100% from the pre-Science SLO assessment (name the pre-assessment) to the post-Science SLO assessment (name the post-assessment).
? The growth to mastery approach means that all students in the target group are expected to grow to a common level of mastery.
20 students will increase their scores to a mastery level of 70% from pre-Algebra I (name the pre-assessment) to the post-Algebra I (name the post-assessment).
? The status approach means that all students in the target group are expected to grow a specified amount on a more holistic measure (e.g., from one level to the next).
20 students will increase their scores by at least 1 status level(s) from the pre-Writing (name the pre-assessment) to the post-Writing (name the post-assessment).
? The individualized approach means that all students in the target group are expected to grow differing amounts based on teachers’ analysis and rationale.
20 students will increase their scores to at least the identified growth target from the pre-Communications (name the pre-assessment) to the post-Communications (name the post-assessment).
Target Setting Approaches
Creating a Review and Documentation Process
It is recommended that the leadership team create a standardized review and documentation process for SLOs. At a minimum, teachers should submit their SLOs in Teachscape to their administrator for review to ensure that the SLO aligns with the teacher rubric of an acceptable standard.
Teachers and administrators meet to discuss and review an SLO. Your principal may request the following such as student needs assessments, baseline and trend data, assessments used, and documentation forms. The administrator may review the materials, ask clarifying questions to ensure an SLO is appropriate, and provide suggestions for improving it.
Midpoint Check-In Meeting
Often held in conjunction with a pre- or post-observation meeting, the teacher and the administrator discuss the formative assessment results and the progress toward meeting the growth target. In rare cases, the meeting may include making mid-interval adjustments to an SLO.
SLO Close-Out Meeting
The teacher and the administrator should meet to discuss and review the final SLO results. The teacher should submit the relevant assessment data compiled in an appropriately summarized format. In addition, the administrator should consider asking the teacher to reflect on the results as well as his or her experience with the SLO process. Based on this final review, the teacher and the administrator should discuss which instructional practices produced the most evidence of student growth and which instructional practices need refinement for next year’s SLO to further improve student learning.
At the end of the SLO interval, adjustments are allowed in the following situations:
Approved Revisions to Student Learning Objectives
If a student withdraws from a given class or course, the teacher or administrator may revise the affected SLO by removing the student’s name from the target population. If the target value had been entered into Teachscape, the target value should be corrected in Teachscape as well.
If a student is absent for a given class or course for more than 20% of the days between the Student Learning Objective pre-assessment and the post-assessment, the student may be removed from the SLO impacted. The target value should be adjusted in the SLO documentation and in Teachscape, accordingly.
Teachers hired after September 30, 2015 are not required to write any SLOs. Administrators hired during the second semester are not required to write any SLOs.
Note: Students may not be removed from the SLO roster.
Timeline for SLO
ACTION ITEM DUE DATE Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) Data Review and Pre-Test Administration August 2015 – September 30, 2015 SLO Data Entered in TEACHSCAPE (Dynamic Form) October 2, 2015 Administer SLO Post Assessment January – February 19, 2016 Enter Final SLO Results Data in TEACHSCAPE March 18, 2016
Student Learning Objectives for TEACHER
QUALITY RATING RUBRIC
2 Needs Improvement
The analysis reflects baseline data and no evidence of historical/trend data review. The student population has been described by specific demographics.
The analysis reflects baseline data (Identification of assessment, limited evidence (1 source) historical/trend data review and review of state assessment). The student population has been described by identification of the subject area/course, Original target value, exception criteria and specific demographics and needs.
The analysis reflects baseline data (Identification of assessment, overview of data, multiple evidence
(2 source) historical/trend data review and review of state assessment). The student population has been described by identification of the subject area/course, original target value, exception criteria and specific demographics, needs and abilities of students. Aligned Standards
2 Needs Improvement
The content aligns to the target group’s needs.
The content aligns to the target group’s needs and Maryland College and Career-Ready Standards (or industry recognized standards).
The content aligns to the target group’s needs and Maryland College and Career-Ready Standards (or industry recognized standards) that includes essential knowledge and skills. Academic Goal
2 Needs Improvement
The Student Learning Objective growth target is unacceptable based on the baseline data and the length of the instructional interval. The target setting approach was not identified and/or does not align with the Student Learning Objective. The number of students in the Student Learning Objective matches the Student Population targeted group/Target Value.
The Student Learning Objective growth target is low based on the baseline data and the length of the instructional interval. The target setting approach was identified and aligns with the Student Learning Objective. The number of students matches the Student Population targeted group/Target Value.
The Student Learning Objective growth target is sufficient (aligned to county, state, student growth targets) based on the baseline data and the length of the instructional interval. The target setting approach was identified and aligns with the Student Learning Objective. The number of students matches the Student Population targeted group/Target Value. Instructional Strategies for Obtaining Objectives
2 Needs Improvement
Two to four instructional strategies are identified in the Student Learning Objective.
Two to four instructional strategies and a description of how the strategies will be used in the classroom are stated.
Two to four effective instructional strategies, a description of how the strategies will be used in the classroom and demonstrates evidence of effectiveness for the instructional strategies are stated. Evidence of Student Growth
2 Needs Improvement
The plan uses formative assessment from multiple ongoing measures.
The plan uses formative assessment from multiple ongoing measures and the frequency of administration.
The plan uses formative assessment from multiple ongoing measures, the frequency of administration, methods for analyzing, how this will inform instruction, and how students are engaged in the student decision making process.
Key Rubric Language
? Baseline Evidence: Provides information from the pre-assessment or other assessment(s) used to determine an initial point in time for student learning.
? Historical/Trend Data: This data includes (not limited to): early coursework, standardized test scores, interim benchmarks, authentic student portfolio, report cards, prior SLOs, interest survey, perception survey and learning preference survey.
PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH NURSING TERM PAPERS TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT