SASD DATA RETREAT
2013
Agenda
• Welcome
• Purpose and Outcomes of Day
• School Learning Objectives (SLO)
• Overview & Connection to Educator Effectiveness
• SLO Development Template
• SMART Goal Process
• Data Analysis
• Team Work Time
•Q&A
• Wrap-up
Purposes
&
Outcomes
1.
Provide information on how to
develop and write School
Learning Objectives (SLOs)
1.
School teams will write two
SLOs
2.
Review SMART Goal process
2.
School teams will be able to use
the SMART Goal format as part
of the SLO process
1.
School teams will be able to
access and analyze student
data
2.
School teams will productively
use time to work on their SLOs
3.
Learn about various student
data sources (state and local)
4.
Provide time and support to
school teams as they work to
develop SLOs
Today’s Resources
https://www.sheboygan.k12.wi.us/intech/plc/resources.html
SCHOOL LEARNING
OBJECTIVES
An Introduction to SLO’s
Dual Meaning of the SLO Acronym
1. Building Administrators – School Learning Objectives
Goals established by building principal and staff, but are
focused at the school level
**The Focus of Today**
2. Teachers – Student Learning Objectives
Goals established by a classroom teacher (or a team of
teachers) for an entire classroom or a targeted population
within a classroom or grade level
Definition
Student/School Learning Objectives (SLOs) are detailed,
measurable goals for student academic growth to be
achieved in a specific period of time (typically an academic
year), and based upon prior student learning data.
Key Characteristics of an SLO
Baseline Data and
Rationale
Why did you choose this SLO
and what sources of data did
you examine?
Growth Goal/Target
What is the expected
outcome of students’ level of
knowledge?
Instructional Strategies
Student Population
Who are you going to include
in this SLO?
Interval
How long will you focus on
this SLO?
What methods or
interventions will teachers
apply to support this SLO?
Evidence
How will you measure the
outcome of your SLO?
**See SLO Development Template & DPI’s SLO Selection and Approval Rubric
Developing SLOs – Step 1
Review data to understand student learning and root cause
problems and needs (baseline data and rationale)
• Existing student data could include trend data on state and district
assessments, behavioral data, attendance data, other assessment
data, etc. Disaggregation of data will be the key in determining
target population(s).
• Existing instructional practice data are important for understanding
‘root causes’ and these data may include classroom
observations/walkthroughs, unit/lesson plans, teacher created
student work tasks, teacher surveys or interviews regarding
instructional practices.
Developing SLOs – Step 2
Identify the student population to include in the SLO
Based upon the data…
• Which student group(s) is/are targeted?
Some examples:
• All students
• Students from a particular grade level
• A racial/ethnic group
• Students performing below a predetermined criteria (i.e. students
scoring below the 30%ile OR students with less than 15 credits)
Developing SLOs – Step 3
Use SMART goal format to develop growth goal/target
Specific goals are well defined and free of ambiguity
Measurable goals have appropriate and concrete evidence sources
identified for measuring progress toward achievement
Attainable goals are rigorous, yet within reach
Results-based goals are aligned with the expectations and direction
provided by the district
Time-bound goals occur within a specified and realistic timeframe
SMART Goals –
Key Question/Decision:
Are all students expected to make the same amount of
growth, regardless of where they start?
OR
Should differentiated goals be set?
Developing SLOs – Step 4
Determine instructional strategies and supports
• Identify the strategies that will be used to address root causes to
•
•
•
•
current student learning problems/needs and to achieve student
learning goals.
What instructional methods will best support student achievement?
How will instruction be differentiated for the target group?
What new or existing materials and/or resources will be used to
support student achievement?
What professional development opportunities will be needed to
support the attainment of the goal?
Major Within Organizational Levers
for Goal Achievement
Administrative
Leadership
Organizational
Context
&
Improvement
Capacities
Teaching/In
struction
Most proximal lever for improving
student learning outcomes
Gamoran, et al., 2000; 2003; Bryk et al. 2006
Student
Engagement
and Student
Learning
Outcomes
Logic Model: Teacher Learning to Impact
on Student Engagement and Learning
Teacher Learning
• Professional
Development
• Department
Collaboration
• Peer
Observation/C
oaching
• Teacher
Evaluation
Changes to
Teacher’s:
•
•
•
•
Knowledge
Attitudes
Beliefs
Desire to
practice new
skills
Changes &
Improves:
• Decisionmaking
• Planning
• Instruction
• Classroom
environment
• Curriculum
and/or
assessment
practices
Improved
Student Learning
and Engagement
Developing SLOs – Step 5
Determine evidence source – how will you measure the
outcome of the SLO?
• Need to identify sources that are most appropriate for measuring
achievement of student outcome goal – valid and reliable
• Sources need to provide data so that progress toward goal can be
monitored overtime
• Evidence for goal attainment should not overly rely on one source
of data
• Evidence sources used to measure achievement of outcome may
be different than the data sources used to develop the goal
The SLO Process – A final thought…
Student/School Learning Objectives will have the greatest
impact on student learning when teachers and
administrators:
• Examine classroom practice
• Collaborate on the goal-setting process
• Set rigorous, yet attainable goals
• Tie instructional strategies to goal attainment
• Engage in regular data analysis
DATA ANALYSIS
Sources of Data
• What data sources (state and local) can be used to
determine your school’s baseline data and rationale?
DPI DATA SOURCES
WISEdash
Data Models
The DPI uses four different data models to analyze student
performance data:
1. Achievement
1. Gain
1. Growth
1. Value-Added
Data Models
The DPI uses four different data models to analyze student
performance data:
1. Achievement – student performance compared to a
predetermined standard
2. Gain – documented change in a student’s score from
one test administration to another
3. Growth – compares student performance gain to the
gain made by students with similar starting scores
4. Value-Added – determines how the school is affecting
student growth (uses growth model + variable control)
Confidentiality
DPI’s Agreement to Protect Student Privacy
LDS users are required to agree to each of the statements below:
• I will respect and safeguard the privacy of students and the confidentiality of
student data.
• I will comply with state and federal privacy laws and all district regulations,
policies, and procedures established to maintain the confidentiality of student
data.
• I will not disclose or transmit confidential LDS data to persons not specifically
authorized access to these data by the district LDS Administrator, superintendent,
or school board.
• I will use the confidential LDS data for legitimate educational purposes only as
necessary to perform my district-assigned tasks.
• I understand that my password is as important as my signature. It is my obligation
to keep my password confidential. I will not share my password with anyone.
• I will not use other users' login names or passwords.
• I have viewed the student privacy training presentation and understand my
obligation to protect the confidentiality of the student data that I will be accessing.
24
Secure Home Access
http://dpi.wi.gov
25
School Report Cards
http://dpi.wi.gov
26
ANNUAL MEASURABLE
OBJECTIVES (AMO)
AMOs
• In the ESEA waiver request, DPI submitted ambitious but
•
•
•
•
achievable AMOs based on proficiency rates resulting from
Wisconsin’s new WKCE performance level cut scores.
Using 2011-12 data, AMOs were set to move all schools in
the state to the level of the schools that are now performing
at the 90th percentile within six years.
By 2016-17, the expectation is for all schools to have all
student groups reach 50% reading proficiency and 65%
mathematics proficiency.
Some subgroups have steeper AMO trajectories because
they are further behind in proficiency rates.
A minimum 1% of growth is expected annually. This would
apply to those schools/subgroups that are already meeting
the AMOs but for whom we expect continued growth.
Reading AMOs
Math AMOs
Meeting AMOs
• For a school’s reading and mathematics AMOs, a group’s
performance compared to its AMO is measured by the
higher of
(1) the proficiency rate in the current year; or
(2) the average proficiency rate in the current and prior
year.
• A cell size of 20 is used and a 95 percent confidence
interval is applied to determine whether or not an AMO is
met.
Confidence
Intervals
• A confidence interval (CI) is a type of
estimate used to indicate the reliability
of a statistic.
• The CI gives an estimated range of
scores (interval) within which the
school’s or group’s “true score” falls.
• The level of confidence of the CI
indicates the probability that the
confidence range captures this true
population parameter given a
distribution of samples. It does not
describe any single sample.
• The confidence interval gives us 95%
certainty of the group’s performance. If
the performance is within the
confidence interval, it is determined to
have met the AMO. We are 95%
confident that the true value is in our
confidence interval.
Meeting AMOs
Graduation AMO
• Schools also have an AMO for graduation rate. Wisconsin uses
the graduation rate goal of 85 percent. A cell size of 20 and a
95 percent confidence interval are used to determine whether
an AMO was met.
• Separate graduation rate improvement targets are used for the
four- and six-year rates. A school meets the graduation rate
AMO for graduation if:
• (1) the graduation rate for the most recent year, or for the most recent
two years combined, meets the 85 percent goal; or
• (2) the improvement in graduation rate meets the applicable target.
DPI will first evaluate whether a school met the goal or target for the
four-year rate. If it does not, the school will be evaluated using the sixyear rate.
• In 2011-12 only, the first year of this accountability system, a
five-year rate was used in place of the six-year rate because
we do not have the data to run a six-year rate until 2012-13.
Graduation AMO Improvement Targets
Meeting AMOs
IMPACT OF AMOS ON
SUBGROUPS
Subgroup AMOs
• The AMOs expect an increase of 1% or more in
proficiency rates annually. This assures that the topperforming subgroups continue to make progress.
• The six-year targets of 49.9% proficiency in reading and
65.3% proficiency in mathematics reflect dramatic
increases in performance for most subgroups.
• Dramatic increases in performance will require dramatic
effort.
Subgroup AMOs
Subgroup AMOs
AMO Performance
• AMO data is found on the last page of each school’s
Report Card
QUESTION & ANSWER
TEAM WORK TIME
Analysis of School Data & Development of SLOs