Assessment for Learning - Educator Effectiveness

Report
Student Learning Objectives
Pilot Test
Overview and Identifying
Learning Goals
Aurora Public Schools
Fall 2013
Introductions

Center for Transforming Learning and Teaching

Catalyzing and co-creating the transformation of learning
environments through the use of assessment so that all are
engaged in learning and empowered to positively
contribute in a global society.

www.ctlt.org
Facilitator/Trainer:
Julie Oxenford O’Brian
Coach/Trainer:
Mary Beth Romke
[email protected]
[email protected]
Purpose
Introduce the major components of
and context for the Student
Learning Objective (SLO) Pilot Test.
Begin to identify SLO Learning
Goals.
Introductions

Capture on a Sticky Note: One burning question
you have about our work together.

Discuss at your table group


Name, role, teaching assignment

Why you agreed to participate in this pilot test.

Your question about our work together
Group share out: reasons for participating
Materials
Norms
The standards of behavior
by which we agree to
operate while we are
engaged in learning
together.
Overview Tools, p. 1
Learning Targets
Engage in
learning
activity during
this session
Complete online selfassessment
Complete
follow-up
tasks.

Describe the purpose of Student Learning
Objectives (SLOs) as part of teacher
evaluation.

Understand the purpose and major
components of the student learning objective
pilot test.

Describe the process involved in identifying
an SLO Learning Goal.

Explain cognitive complexity using the Webb
Depth of Knowledge framework.

Evaluate the cognitive complexity of learning
goals/objectives.

Describe and exemplify success criteria for
SLO Learning Goals.
Activity: Monitoring your learning

Turn to Progress Monitoring (Note catcher, p. 3-4)

Re-write today’s learning targets in language that has
meaning for you.

Create a bar graph which describes where you currently
believe you are in relationship to each learning target.

Leave the “reflections” column blank for now.
Learning Target
Describe the purpose of Student Learning Objectives (SLOs)
as part of teacher evaluation.
In my words:
I know how student learning objectives will be
incorporated into my evaluation.
I don’t
know
what this
Is
I need
more
practice
I’ve
got It
I can
apply it
in a new
way
Reflections
SLO Session One Agenda
Background
and Purpose of
SLOs
Purpose and
Components of
Pilot Test
SLO Template
and
Process
SLO Learning
Goals
Determining
Depth of
Knowledge
Success
Criteria
Colorado State Context

SB10-191: Ensuring Quality Instruction
through Educator Effectiveness

Evaluating the effectiveness of educators
is crucial to improving the quality of
education in Colorado.

Educators are evaluated in significant part
based on the impact they have on the
learning growth of their students.
SB 10-191 Teacher Evaluation Requirements

50% Professional Practices (Observational Rubric)

50% measures of teacher contribution to student
learning growth:

At least one individually attributable measure.

At least one collectively attributable measure.

When available, state summative assessment
results (TCAP).

When available, Colorado Growth Model results.

Other local measures (e.g. pre- post- assessment,
student learning objectives).
Student Learning Objectives

One approach districts may use to develop measures
of student academic growth attributable to individual
educators.

Definition: A participatory method of setting
measurable goals, or objectives for a specific
assignment or class, in a manner aligned with the
subject matter taught, and in a manner that allows for
the evaluation of the baseline performance of students
and the measureable gain in student performance
during the course of instruction.
Teacher Evaluation Components
Student Growth
(individual
attribution)
Student Growth
(collective
attribution)
Professional
Practice
(observation)
Academy District 20
Collective Attribute
TCAP
Administrative/Teacher-defined assessments of individual attribution
(38% for those without an individual TCAP attribution)
Professional Practices
12%
13%
50%
25%
Harrison School District
Collective Attribute
District Assessment
TCAP/MGP
National Assessments
Professional Practices
5%
5%
25%
50%
15%
*Harrison has identified 97 different
roles in the district. Each role’s pie
chart is weighted differently. All the
scales are based on the 4-5 grade core
teacher shown above.
APS Individually Attributable Measures



Teacher Evaluation Revision Committee (TERC)

Members

Process
Options

Pre-Post

SLOs
Why SLOs?
Suggestion 1 from 8/27/13 TERC subcommittee
meeting
Collective Attribute
TCAP
SLOs
Rubric (Professional Practices)
30%
50%
10%
10%
Suggestion 2 from 8/27/13 TERC subcommittee
meeting
Collective Attribute
TCAP
SLOs
Rubric (Professional Practices)
10%
20%
50%
20%
Suggestion 3 from 8/27/13 TERC subcommittee
meeting
Collective School/District
SLOs
Rubric (Professional Practices)
0%
15%
50%
35%
Suggestion 4 from 8/27/13 TERC subcommittee
meeting
Collective Attribute
SLOs
Rubric (Professional Practices)
10%
50%
40%
Where are SLOs being used?
Districts and States across the US

Denver Public Schools

New Hampshire

Austin

Hawaii

Rhode Island

North Carolina

New York

Ohio

Georgia

Massachusetts

Utah

Pennsylvania

Wyoming

Maine
Why take an SLO approach?
Documented to:

Have high levels of credibility with educators –
expectations situated directly within the classroom
context and space

Be Adaptable to new assessments

Be Adaptable to all teaching assignments

Have Face validity – developed by teachers
Most qualities above are not applicable to evaluating
teacher impact on student learning growth using other
common approaches
What SLOs are not. . .

Simple computation of pre- and postassessment score differences

Representative of output measures

Results based on one measure/assessment
instrument

An “add-on” for teachers engaged in effective
teaching practices
SLO Session One Agenda
Background
and Purpose of
SLOs
SLO Learning
Goals
Purpose and
Components of
Pilot Test
SLO Template
and
Process
Determining
Depth of
Knowledge
Success
Criteria
Purpose of the SLO Pilot Test

Develop an approach that can be used in
Aurora to measure student learning growth that
can be attributed to an individual educator.

Ensure this approach focuses educators on
instructional practices that are likely to improve
student learning results at the same time.

Learn from “trying it out” in real schools in APS.

Determine how to integrate SLOs with related
APS initiatives.

Build the plane while flying it!
Project Basics

Select a partner and take out the SLO Pilot Test
Overview (Overview Tools, p. 3)

Discuss these questions with your partner:

What will be the focus of this pilot test?

What does participating in the project mean to me?

What am I concerned about? (capture on sticky
notes)
Integration with other Initiatives

SLOs are context dependent.

Critical outcomes of the pilot test:
 Determine
how SLO efforts can be integrated
with other district initiatives.
 Determine
how SLO efforts can support and
accelerate related reforms.
 Ensure
relevant district resources are utilized
in support of SLOs.
Design

Today: Project Overview and SLO Learning Goals

Follow-up: Identify “candidate” SLO Learning Goals

Four additional learning sessions (in person, about four
weeks apart):
 Introduce/explore practices (identifying and tracking student
progress towards SLOs).
 De-Brief how it went “trying-out” developing SLOs and
associated practices in your classroom since the last learning
session.

Between Learning Sessions:



Follow-up
Try out new practices in your classroom
On-site support (local instructional leaders)
SLO Session One Agenda
Background
and Purpose of
SLOs
Purpose and
Components of
Pilot Test
SLO Template
and
Process
SLO Learning
Goals
Determining
Depth of
Knowledge
Success
Criteria
SLO Process
10.
Determine
Teacher
Rating
1. Identify
the SLO
learning
goal
9.Analyze
assessment
results
2. Select
measures of
student learning
in relationship to
the Learning
Goal
3. Establish
performance
targets using
baseline data
8.Revise SLO if
necessary
7. Monitor student
progress towards SLO
Learning Goal
6.
Implement
SLOrelated
instruction
4. Plan instruction
5.
Receive
approval
of SLO
SLO Terminology

Take out Student Learning Objectives Terminology
(Overview Tools, p.5).

Work with a partner to answer the following questions:

How long is an “instructional interval” in the context of SLOs?

What is the difference between a “Big Idea” and a “Learning
Goal” (for an SLO)?

Is there a difference between a “learning goal” and a “learning
objective”? If so, what is the difference?

What are “success criteria”? How are they related to “learning
goals or objectives”?

What is the relationship between an “assessment instrument”
and a “measure”?
Student Learning Objectives Form

Take out Student Learning Objectives Form (Overview
Tools, p.9)

How are Student Population and Instructional Interval
determined?

SLO components:
1.
Student Learning Goal
2.
Measures (of student learning growth in relationship to the student
learning goal)
3.
Performance Targets (for student performance groups)
4.
Progress Monitoring
5.
Results (student performance and teacher performance)
SLO Components
Learning Goal
Learning Goal
Standards Reference
Rationale
Measures
Success Criteria
Evidence Sources
Alignment of Evidence
Performance
Targets
Day One
Collection and Scoring
Baseline Data
Day Two
Day Three and Four
Performance Groups
Performance Targets
Progress
Monitoring
Rationale for Targets
Check Points
Progress Monitoring Evidence Sources
Instructional Strategies
SLO Results
Student Performance Results
Targets Met
Teacher Performance
Day Five
Activity: Exploring SLO Components

SLO Component Descriptions (Tools, p.11).

Consider the components of an SLO Learning Goal.
Independently (silently) read the first row. When you
have finished reading, look at your partner and “say
something”. The something could be:

A summary

A connection

A new idea

Continue until you have considered all of the
components of a Student Learning Objective

Full Group considers questions. . .
SLO Session One Agenda
Background
and Purpose of
SLOs
SLO Learning
Goals
Purpose and
Components of
Pilot Test
SLO Template
and
Process
Determining
Depth of
Knowledge
Success
Criteria
SLO Learning Goals

A description of what students will be able
to do at the end of the instructional period.

Based on the intended standards and
curriculum that are being taught and
learned.

Reflective of the most critical content
taught and learned during the instructional
interval (the Big Ideas).
Levels of Objectives
Level of Objective
Scope
Time needed to
learn
Purpose or
function
Example of use
Global
Educational
Instructional
Broad
Moderate
Narrow
Two or more
years (often
many)
Weeks, months,
or academic
year
Hours or days
Provide vision
Design
curriculum
Prepare lesson
plans
Plan units of
instruction
Plan daily lessons,
activities,
experiences and
exercises
Plan a multi-year
curriculum (e.g.,
elementary
reading)
A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives, 2001
Overview Tools, p. 1
Statements of Intended Learning
Learning Goals, Learning Objectives,
Learning Targets include:

A verb that describes a cognitive process
or processes.

The content or knowledge to which the
cognitive process(s) applies.
SLO Learning Goal Components

Learning Goal

Standards/Benchmarks

Rationale

Success Criteria
How SLO Learning Goal Components are
Related

SLO Learning Goal is based on:

The big ideas for the content area/grade level, and

Relevant content standards.

The Learning Goal Rationale explains why the
learning goal is appropriate.

Success Criteria are guidelines, rules, or
principles by which student performance is
evaluated. They describe what level of
performance constitutes having met the
Learning Goal.
SLO Learning Goal Process
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Identify the “big ideas” for the grade level and content area.
Identify learning goals associated with at least one “big idea” that
would be achieved across several units, and/or which have related
goals in prior or subsequent grade levels. These become candidates
to be an SLO Learning Goal.
Determine which standards are associated with each candidate SLO
Learning Goal.
Prioritize possible Learning Goals based on the learning needs of
the student population (identifying two or three top priorities).
Determine the cognitive complexity (depth of knowledge) of the
priority SLO Learning Goal candidates. Eliminate candidate SLO
learning goals with a depth of knowledge less than 2 for primary
(grades K-2) and less than 3 for upper elementary and secondary.
Select the SLO Learning Goal.
Describe the rationale for your selection.
Process for determining SLO Learning
Goals

Turn to the Process for Determining SLO
Learning Goals (Tools, p. 3).

Independently, review each step and make
notes about your concerns regarding each step.

Discuss at your table:

How is this similar to other work in which you have
engaged?

How is it different?

What concerns do you have about the process?
The “Big Ideas”
What are “big ideas”?

Declarative statements that describe
concepts that transcend grade levels.

Frame or context for identifying the SLO
learning goal.

Should not be the “focus” of learning goal
development.
Learning Goals vs. Big Ideas

Different format:
 Learning
goals describe what students should
know, understand and be able to do.
 Big

ideas are declarative statements.
Different purpose:
 Big
Ideas create context for learning goals.
 SLO
Learning Goals focus instruction and
learning activity.
Resources for determining “Big Ideas”

APS Pacing Guides

CCSS ELA:


Anchor Standards

Portraits of students who are college ready
CCSS Math:



Colorado Academic Standards:

Graduate Competencies

Grade Level Expectations (that cut across grade levels)
CDE Sample Curriculum Unit Overviews:


Grade Level Descriptions
Generalizations
Your ideas?
Content Standards

Learning Goals must reference statements of intended
learning from relevant standards documents.

Statements of intended learning:



Example:



Colorado Academic Standards (CAS): Evidence Outcomes
Common Core State Standards: Standard
CAS: Identify place value from ten-thousandths to millions.
Common Core State Standard: Use place value understanding
to round multi-digit whole numbers to any place.
Capture the full language from the standard statement (not
just a numerical reference)
Identifying a Learning Goal
(example)

Big idea: Writing from sources requires
using evidence from texts to present
careful analysis, well defended claims, and
clear information.
Example Standards
Write arguments to support claims with clear reasons and relevant
evidence:

Introduce claims, acknowledge alternative or opposing claims, and
organize the reasons and evidence logically.

Support claim(s) with logical reasoning and relevant evidence, using
accurate credible sources and demonstrating an understanding of
the topic or text.

Use words, phrases, and clauses to create cohesion and clarify the
relationships among claim(s), reasons, and evidence.

Establish and maintain a formal style.

Provide concluding statement or section that follows from and
supports the argument presented.
Example Learning Goal

Students gather relevant evidence from
multiple sources to make and support
strong written arguments.
SLO Learning Goal Process
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Identify the “big ideas” for the grade level and content area.
Identify learning goals associated with at least one “big idea” that
would be achieved across several units, and/or which have related
goals in prior or subsequent grade levels. These become candidates
to be the SLO Learning Goal.
Determine which standards are associated with each candidate SLO
Learning Goal.
Prioritize possible Learning Goals based on the learning needs of
the student population (identifying two or three top priorities).
Determine the cognitive complexity (depth of knowledge) of the
priority SLO Learning Goals. Eliminate candidate SLO learning
goals with a depth of knowledge less than 3 for secondary and less
than 2 for elementary.
Select the SLO Learning Goal.
Describe the rationale for your selection.
Practice Developing an SLO Learning Goal: Step
one through three
 Find a partner(s) who has a similar content area
focus (stay with same partner(s)).

Turn to the note catcher, p. 10

Step one: Describe the “big ideas” for your focus
grade level and content area.

Step two: Identify several “candidate” Learning
Goals for at least two different “big ideas”.

Step three: Identify standards associated with your
big idea and candidate learning goals.
Step four: Prioritize based on
learning data

Review student performance data in your
content area/grade level.

Identify challenges for your student
population.

Prioritize learning goals based on these
areas of challenge.

Your follow-up from today. . . we won’t
practice this now.
SLO Session One Agenda
Background
and Purpose of
SLOs
SLO Learning
Goals
Purpose and
Components of
Pilot Test
SLO Template
and
Process
Determining
Depth of
Knowledge
Success
Criteria
SLO Learning Goal Process
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Identify the “big ideas” for the grade level and content area.
Identify learning goals associated with at least one “big idea” that
would be achieved across several units, and/or which have related
goals in prior or subsequent grade levels. These become candidates
to be the SLO Learning Goal.
Determine which standards are associated with each candidate SLO
Learning Goal.
Prioritize possible Learning Goals based on the learning needs of
the student population (identifying two or three top priorities).
Determine the cognitive complexity (depth of knowledge (DOK)) of
the candidate SLO Learning Goals. Eliminate candidate SLO
learning goals with a depth of knowledge less than 2 for primary and
less than 3 for grades 3-12.
Select the SLO Learning Goal.
Describe the rationale for your selection.
Depth of Knowledge (DOK) and SLOs

The DOK level reflected in the SLO
Learning Goal should target the DOK level
reflected in the associated standards.

The DOK level reflected in the learning
goal sets an expectation for how you want
students to demonstrate learning.

Assessments used for SLOs will also need
to target the same DOK level reflected in
the learning goal.
What is cognitive rigor?

The kind and level of thinking required of students
to successfully engage with and solve a task.

Ways in which students interact with content.

Focuses on complexity of content standards and
assessment items or task.

“Measures the degree to which the knowledge
elicited from students on assessments and
performance indicators or through questioning is
as complex as what students are expected to
know and do as stated in the state standards.”Norman Webb
57
Cognitive Rigor Models
Different states/schools/teachers use different
models to describe cognitive rigor. Each
addresses something different.

Bloom – What type of thinking (cognitive
process) is needed to complete a task?

Webb – How deeply do you have to understand
the content to successfully interact with it? How
complex is the content?
Bloom’s Taxonomy Original [1956] vs. Revised Cognitive
Dimension [2001] - Tools, p. 5
Original
Revised Cognitive Dimension
Knowledge -- Define, duplicate, label, list, name,
order, recognize, relate, recall
Remember -- Retrieve knowledge from long-term
memory, recognize, recall, locate, identify
Comprehension -- Classify, describe, discuss,
explain, express, identify, indicate, locate,
recognize, report, review, select, translate
Understand -- Construct meaning, clarify,
paraphrase, represent, translate, illustrate, give
examples, classify, categorize, summarize,
generalize, predict…
Application -- Apply, choose, demonstrate,
dramatize, employ, illustrate, interpret, practice,
write
Apply -- Carry out or use a procedure in a given
situation; carry out or use /apply to an unfamiliar
task
Analysis -- Analyze, appraise, explain calculate,
categorize, compare, criticize, discriminate,
examine
Analyze -- Break into constituent parts, determine
how parts relate
Synthesis -- Rearrange, assemble, collect,
compose, create, design, develop, formulate,
manage, write
Evaluate -- Make judgments based on criteria,
check, detect inconsistencies/fallacies, critique
Evaluation -- Appraise, argue, assess, choose,
compare, defend, estimate, explain, judge, predict,
rate, core, select, support, value
Create -- Put elements together to form a coherent
whole, reorganize elements into new patterns/
structures
Explore Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy

Work with a partner to review the Cognitive
Dimension of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy
(Tools, p. 7).

Consider:


How is the Cognitive dimension organized?

What is the difference between different types of
thinking or cognitive processes?

How do the examples clarify the taxonomy?
Identify questions for full group discussion.
Explore DOK Levels

Take out: Webb’s Depth of Knowledge
Framework Level Definitions (Tools, p. 9) and
Depth of Knowledge Levels Chart (Tools, p.11).

Work with a partner to consider:


How are DOK levels described?

What is the difference between each DOK level?

How do the examples clarify the levels?
Identify questions for full group discussion.
DOK Level 1 Examples
Locate or recall facts found in text
Apply a well-known formula
Orally read words in connected text with fluency and
accuracy
State an opinion without support
Name the notes of the C Major scale
Represent math relationships in words, pictures, or
symbols
Perform a simple science process or a set of procedures
DOK Level 2 Examples
Identify and summarize the major events, problem,
solution, conflicts in literary text
Explain the cause-effect of historical events
Retrieve information from a table, graph, or figure and use
it to solve a problem requiring multiple steps
Develop a brief text that may be limited to one paragraph
Make a puzzle or game about the topic
Create a questionnaire or survey to answer a question
Write a diary/blog entry for a character or historical figure
63
DOK Level 3 Examples
Compare consumer actions and analyze how these
actions impact the environment
Analyze or evaluate the effectiveness of literary elements
Solve a multi-step problem and provide support with a
mathematical explanation that justifies the answer
Write a letter to the editor after evaluating a product
Use reasoning and evidence to generate criteria for
making and supporting an argument of judgment
Prepare a speech to support your perspective about global
climate change
Make a booklet or brochure about a topic or an
organization
64
DOK Level 4 Examples
Gather, analyze, organize, and synthesize information
from multiple sources to draft a reasoned report
Analyze and explain multiple perspectives or issues with
or across time periods, events, or cultures
Conduct a project that specifies a problem, identify
solution paths, solve the problem, and report the results
Write and produce an original play
Critique the historical impact of policy, writings, and
discoveries
Illustrate how multiple themes (historical, geographic,
social) may be interrelated
Relate mathematical or scientific concepts to other content
areas, other domains, or other concepts
65
Some things to consider. . .

Extended time alone is not the distinguishing
factor for a learning goal with a DOK Level 4.

DOK is not hierarchical.

DOK and Bloom’s Taxonomy are different - the
DOK Level is NOT determined by the verb, but
rather the context in which the verb is used and
the depth of thinking required.
DOK is about complexity—not difficulty!

The intended student learning outcome determines the DOK level.
What mental processing must occur?

While verbs may appear to point to a DOK level, it is what comes
after the verb that is the best indicator of the rigor/DOK level.

DOK 1 - Describe three characteristics of metamorphic rocks.
(Simple recall)

DOK 2 - Describe the difference between metamorphic and
igneous rocks. (Requires cognitive processing to determine the
differences in the two rock types)

DOK 3 - Describe a model that you might use to represent the
relationships that exist within the rock cycle. Provide evidence to
support your decision. (Requires deep understanding of the rock
cycle and a determination of how best to represent it by providing
evidence)
67
Combining Blooms and DOK

Cognitive Rigor Matrix combines Blooms Revised
Taxonomy and Depth of Knowledge in one table.

Not a crosswalk between these two classification
tools.

Not to be used as a rubric.

Available in a variety of content areas:

English Language Arts

Social Studies

Math

Science

Writing
The Cognitive Rigor Matrix:
Applies Webb’s DOK to Bloom Cognitive Process Dimensions
Depth +
thinking
Level 1
Recall &
Reproduction
Remember
- Recall, locate basic
facts, details, events
Understand
Level 2
Skills &
Concepts
Level 3
- Select appropriate
words to use when
intended meaning is
clearly evident
- Specify, explain
relationships
- summarize
– identify main ideas
- Explain, generalize, or
connect ideas using
supporting evidence
(quote, example…)
- Explain how concepts
or ideas specifically
relate to other content
domains or concepts
Apply
- Use language
structure (pre/suffix)
or word relationships
(synonym/antonym) to
determine meaning
– Use context to
identify meaning of
word
- Obtain and interpret
information using text
features
- Use concepts to solve
non-routine problems
- Devise an approach
among many
alternatives to
research a novel
problem
Analyze
- Identify whether
information is
contained in a graph,
table, etc.
– Compare literary
elements, terms, facts,
events
– analyze format,
organization, & text
structures
- Analyze or interpret
author’s craft (literary
devices, viewpoint, or
potential bias) to
critique a text
– Analyze multiple
sources
- Analyze
complex/abstract
themes
– Cite evidence and
develop a logical
argument for
conjectures
- Evaluate relevancy,
accuracy, &
completeness of
information
- Synthesize
information within one
source or text
- Synthesize
information across
multiple sources or
texts
Evaluate
Create
- Brainstorm ideas
about a topic
- Generate conjectures
based on observations
or prior knowledge
Strategic
Thinking/
Reasoning
Level 4
Extended
Thinking
Cognitive Rigor Matrices

Considering both classification systems
together, deepens understanding of
learning goals.

Examples:
 English
Language Arts and Social Studies
(Tools, p. 13)
 Math and Science (Tools, p. 15)
 Writing (Tools p. 17)

Select one to explore further.
Definition of “deconstructing”
When we deconstruct a statement of
intended learning, we break it into its
component parts.
Stiggins, 2004
Deconstructing means to determine…

What students need to know - the
knowledge, concepts or content?

In what cognitive processes students need
to engage?
© CTLT 2008
We deconstruct to…

Clarify the type of thinking (or skills)
required of learners to meet the learning
goal;

Determine what knowledge students will
require to meet the learning goal; and

Classify the cognitive rigor of the learning
goal.
How to deconstruct

Think of the verbs in our learning goal as
the cognitive processes and/or types of
thinking that are being required.

Think of the nouns in our learning goal as
clues to the knowledge (concepts or
content).

Use Bloom’s Taxonomy and Webb’s DOK
framework to classify the rigor of the
learning goal.
How to Deconstruct
1. Circle the cognitive processes or skills—
the verbs.
2. Underline the key concepts or
knowledge—the important nouns and
noun phrases.
3.
Use the Cognitive Rigor Matrix to:

Characterize the type of thinking based on
Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy.

Assign a DOK level.
Example

Deconstruct the instructional objective:
Recognize that different forms of writing have
different patterns of organization.

Cognitive Process (Blooms): Remember

Depth of Knowledge Level: One
Practice

Turn to Deconstruction Practice (note
catcher, p. 14).

Work with a partner to deconstruct and
categorize the example instructional
objectives.

Share your ideas with the full group.
Applied to your Learning Goals

Go back to your candidate learning goals.

Deconstruct them identifying the cognitive process (Blooms)
and Depth of Knowledge, capture in your note catcher.

What is the cognitive rigor of your candidate learning goals?

A good SLO learning goal is cognitively complex (as
measured by Depth of Knowledge) with a DOK >= 3 for
secondary and upper elementary and a DOK >= 2 for
primary (K-2).

Have you identified an SLO learning goal with sufficient
cognitive rigor?
Deconstructing

A tool for your “toolkit.”

Used to get at the meaning of statements of
intended learning:

Used in determining the cognitive rigor of SLO
Learning Goals.

Collaborative process used to determine meaning of
learning objectives (including grade level expectations
and evidence outcomes).

First step towards ensuring accuracy in assessment.

Used in the process of critiquing/selecting
assessment items.
SLO Session One Agenda
Background
and Purpose of
SLOs
SLO Learning
Goals
Purpose and
Components of
Pilot Test
SLO Template
and
Process
Determining
Depth of
Knowledge
Success
Criteria
Success Criteria
Guidelines, rules, or principles by which
student responses, products or performances
are evaluated. They describe what to look for
in student products or performances to judge
quality. They are also used to determine if
the learning goal(s)/target(s) was/were met.
Success Criteria
We use success criteria to:

Define student competency, mastery,
performance, knowledge on tasks,
assessments, courses, etc.
We also need to use success criteria to:

Help define and justify what each
performance level means on the SLO
learning goal.
How good is “good enough”?
Talk to your neighbor about. . .

What evidence do teachers use to decide
students are learning?

How have we traditionally answered that
question?

Why is this question important?

Why is it important for students to understand how
good is good enough?
What is good enough (traditionally)?


Behavior:

Attendance

Participation

Compliance
Grades:


In terms of the learning, what is the difference in
learning between an F and A, between B+ and A- ?
Percentages:

In terms of the learning, what is the difference
between 89 and 90?
In a standards-based system
Success Criteria:

Define the nature of quality, how good is good
enough as the basis for judging student learning
progress.

Define levels of performance on the SLO
Learning Goals and instructional level targets.

May also be called:

Proficiency Descriptions

Performance Criteria
Background Reading Discussion

Work with a partner.

Each partner reads one of the following:


Clarke (2001) Developing a “learning culture” in the
school (Toolkit, p. 21).

Moss & Brookhart (2009). What does it mean to share
learning targets and criteria for success? (Toolkit, p.
23).
Discuss:

What are success criteria/performance criteria/
proficiency descriptors?

Why is it important to identify success criteria?
What are good success criteria?
Success Criteria. . .

Reflect what “quality is” in the product,
performance, or task.

Do not. . .
 Leave
important things out
 Include
the trivial (e.g. neatness)
Video: Student Benefits
John
McKinney, Grade 8, Science
What did you hear students say about the
benefits of success criteria, or knowing what
proficiency looks like?
Rubrics

A tool for:
 Clarifying
instructional goals (for teachers).
 Communicating
 Scoring
success criteria (to students).
assignments and assessments.

Includes descriptions of more than one
level of performance.

More on rubrics later today.
Posting Exemplars
Engaging Learners in Describing
Success Criteria
Hearing the learner perspective
Video: Emily’s Story

Take a few minutes to read Emily’s papers
(Tools, p. 35).

Take notes as you watch the video:
 How
were learners involved in defining and
interpreting success criteria?
 How
did this enhance student motivation and
learning?
Stiggins, R. J., Arter, J. A., Chappuis, J., & Chappuis, S. (2004).
Classroom assessment for student learning: Doing it right – using
it well.
Commonly used methods of sharing success
criteria with students include:
1.
Provide students with lists of attributes.
2.
Provide students with a scoring guide or rubric.
3.
Provide examples of work that demonstrates mastery and engage
students in determining why the work demonstrates mastery.
4.
Share work that does not demonstrate mastery with students and
have them describe what it would take for the work to demonstrate
mastery.
5.
Facilitate student evaluation of different work examples using rubrics
or scoring guides.
6.
Facilitate student development of rubrics or scoring guides after
analyzing examples of work.
7.
Other?
(Tools, p. 39)
Success Criteria Teacher Considerations for
the SLO learning goal

What performance label would you use to describe
student success on (having met) the SLO learning
goal?

What expectations do you have to define “success”
on the learning goal?

Which assessments, tasks, or data sources would
give you the best information about student
performance on the learning goal?

How would you weigh the body of evidence collected
about student performance on the learning goal?
Taking it into practice

Practice developing an SLO Learning Goal:

Identify candidate SLO Learning Goals (starting with “big ideas”).

Specify associated standards.

Determine which represent learning needs for your students.

Determine the cognitive complexity of the candidate SLO Learning
Goals.

Select one, write as an “objective statement”.

Describe success criteria for your SLO Learning Goal.

Practice engaging learners with success criteria.

Bring a draft SLO Learning Goal (note catcher) and
artifacts from your experience engaging learners in
understanding success criteria to our next in-person
learning session.
Give us Feedback!!

Written: Use sticky notes
 + the aspects of this session that you liked or worked
for you.

The things you will change in your practice or that
you would change about this session.

? Question that you still have about the topics we
addressed today.


Ideas, ah-has, innovations
Oral: Share out one ah ha!
References

Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R., Eds. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning Teaching and
Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York, NY:
Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Bloom, B. (1984). The search for methods of group instruction as effective as on to one
tutoring. Educational Leadership, 41(8): 4-17.

Bransford, J, Brown, A & Cocking, R. (Eds). (1999). How People Learn: Brain, Mind,
Experience, and School. Washington DC: National Academy Press

Hess, K., Carlock, D., Jones, B., & Walkup, J. (2011). What exactly do “fewer, clearer, and
higher standards” really look like in the classroom? Using a cognitive rigor matrix to
analyze curriculum, plan lessons, and implement assessments. National Center for the
Improvement of Educational Assessment, Accessed on-line at:
http://www.nciea.org/publication_PDFs/cognitiverigorpaper_KH12.pdf

Stiggins, R. J., Arter, J. A., Chappuis, J., & Chappuis, S. (2004). Classroom assessment for
student learning: Doing it right – using it well.

Webb, N. L. (1997).Criteria for alignment of expectations and assessments in mathematics
and science education. Council of Chief State School Officers and National Institute for
Science Education Research Monograph No. 6. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin.

similar documents