As state Regents Assessments for subject areas besides ELA and Math are slowly phased out of the New York State Department of Education, a new set of guidelines for assessment are introduced and these are known as the Student Learning Objectives. SLOs are not only utilized to assess a students’ “growth rate” in learning but they are also used to track how much progress the educator has in accomplishing a set goal. SLOs are based on a goal system in which the educators in the same grade and subject area establish attainable goals based on the criteria and the knowledge of the learners in a certain subject, at the beginning of the school year. At the end of the year, when the learners are assessed on their growth rate, their results along with the Annual Professional Performance Reviews (APPR) will also dictate the employment decision of the educator. These articles helped me understand more about teaching and learning through inquiry because I was aware of the phasing out of Regents exams but didn’t know much about the new CORE curriculum. Additionally, I now have an understanding of what SLO and APPR stands for and the responsibilities they entail for the educator. SLOs may be an improvement from Regents exams however, I am anxious to see how they pan out in the 2012-2013 school year as they make their debut.
I think that this system of assessment for teachers isn't fair or holistic but at this point they are already enacted so we can either challenge it or just live with it. However, if we are good facilitators in our subjects, I think things will fall into place.
1. the Student Learning Objective Road Map and the Student Learning Objective Guidance Document will be the new way teachers and students will be assess. 2. As a benefit, Student Learning Objective process will lead to higher academic performance by students. 3. The specific details that will impact me as an educators will be provided by my District leaders 4.SLO's fundamentally changes the way teachers and principals are evaluated. 5.A student learning objective is an academic goal for a teacher’s students that is set at the start of a course. Teachers’ scores are based upon the degree to which their goals were attained. This five key points taken from the article taught me the new road map for NY education system. As a future educator it is important that i fully understand how my students will be assess as well as how i will be assess as a teacher.
After reading the articles I am unsure about whether the SLO's will be a better strategy for teachers. While I understand that currently many teachers are teaching toward a test...the regents...I feel that this will be no different because teachers will set “objectives” and teach only the “objectives” that students will be tested on. Teachers will have similar objectives as before…get kids to pass the test or "assessment" at the end of the year otherwise their job may be on the line. This could also lead to teachers falsifying there test scores in order to save their jobs. While having assessments is important for teachers to identify if their students understand the material, I’m not sure if a teachers’ job should be on the line if their students are not doing “20%” better on the finals assessments in comparison to the pre-assessment at the start of the year. It will be interesting to see how these SLO’s are incorporated into schools and if they really “leads to higher academic performance by students.”
Outstanding opinion and expression of it. Your conclusion of questioning how the impact will or will not lead to higher academic performance is the real question and an appropriate concern.
This document is extremely informative for new teachers, even already well-established teachers. This new form of assessment seems as if it is going to be around for a while, if even just for a trial period. This document describes the new assessment for teachers. It describes what is expected of teachers and how teacher goals should be accomplished. The state has created guidelines so that districts can make fair and equal assessments of all teachers. It is by these guidelines that a teacher’s, or a principle’s, fate will be determined, whether it is tenure, salary increases, retention, or even firing. While I think it is completely necessary to have some way to evaluate teachers, I think it is sort of impossible to have one set of guidelines and assume that it can apply to every single teacher in a state; it probably couldn’t even apply to every single teacher in a district, or even one school. There are so many other factors that can come into account that are completely out of a teacher’s control. Any teacher can tell you about some of their students’ home lives, a father in jail, an alcoholic mother; it’s a wonder they even show up to school at all. How can teachers be held responsible for students’ learning outcomes when there are students who really don’t even have time for school work at home? I think there has to be some sort of case by case basis, or at least some way to account for these differences in students’ backgrounds. This being said, there needs to be a way to assess teachers. There are many teachers out there getting away with murder every day. They don’t care about students’ learning outcomes, just about the paycheck at the end of the day. They teach with no passion, no care for student understanding. I think it is important to be able to weed out these teachers to make room for new teachers that want to teach, and want to make a difference.
Your idea of a trial period is an interesting one when we are dealing with education...remind me to share the idea of building a plane in the air, as so many others have been referring to this process.
I think that having student learning objectives implemented in schools is a good idea. This is a good way to keep teachers organized and focused on what they have to do. It’s a good idea because from the beginning of the school year you know what you will be starting with, and based on that you can determine where you want your students to be at the end of the school year and all you have to do is plan accordingly to meet your goal on time. I see this as the good side for teachers because it would help them keep track of where they are in the curriculum and whether or not they are being effective. On the other hand, what if the results don’t turn out to be what was expected? According to the article, “The results of the evaluations shall be a significant factor in employment decisions, including but not limited to, promotion, retention, tenure determination, termination, and supplemental compensation…” This will not be the same if you were to compare a school in Garden City with a school in Brooklyn. The factors that you would have to look at would be completely different!
Your focus and goal oriented notion are commendable and hopefully accurate. But why would the factors in Gc be different for those in Brooklyn, isn't learning... learning?
Student Learning Objective are the structure to the school system. My understanding of SLOs is that they are the basic mapped out goals for the teachers to teach their students. There must be more than one and there is no limit to the number of SLOs a teacher can have. Although there are many different SLOs established, i believe the most important thing is that just teaching the SLO to students is not efficient. In other words there are things that can not be measured, or tested that have to be taught to the students. Honesty, integrity, and determination can not be documented as an SLO but still must be taught to the students to achieve the highest stature of success.
That sounds all fine, but the SLO is not about the student...it is about the teacher. So understanding that, how do you consider them to play a role in "Honesty, integrity, and determination."
How is it fair that teachers who teach classes that are concluded by a state examination, such as a regents or state assessment even be on the same playing field as the teachers who only have to worry about SLOs. 40% of the teachers APPR is reflective of how well their students perform on the end of the course exams. However, I feel there is a very strong difference between SLOs and state provided assessments. The state will guide the school and district on how to properly evaluate their students, however it is unfair that the school and district will know what appears on these examinations. This is because they are the ones creating it, while following state guidelines.
What stuck out as odd to me, was the school can actually create their own exam while following SLO protocal. Now here is where i see the problem. How are all teachers being treated fairly within their positions when you have one set of teachers that have to have their students take a regents exam and the other teachers give their students a school created examination. One set of teachers have no contol over what appears on the exam, while the other set of teachers could be a part of the tests creation. What made me even angrier is that this is how the state wants to even out the playing field. In my opinion, they cannot even be compared. I would think that the teacher who has knowlege of the test would have students that perform better on the exam. This in turn would mean he/she would have a greater APPR percentage and would do better overall. I hope I am not the only one who sees this problem.
Your initial concern is one that litters the profession, why do all teachers earn the same salary?
Excellent reflection, lets discuss this more with the group, I welcome all comments, especially considering we have math and science teachers to be... although both have Regents exams, math "is under the microscope."
Key Points: •Goal setting process •No state measures of student growth = HS special ed. Teachers •Assessment (Teacher’s scores are based upon the degree to which their goals were attained) •Allows for targeted, differentiated professional development
I feel that the whole purpose of Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) is that the teachers become more organized with what the have to teach the students and set goals to accomplish with the students by the end of the year. I feel that this is a good technique this way the teacher knows what they are trying to go for and have a set direction. However, I feel that the assessment of the teachers is unfair because each teacher is put into a different environment with different situations and they all cant be assessed the same way.
- Most important learning for that year - 4 rating system(highly effective, effective, developing, ineffective) - Encourage educators to focus instruction - Target equals expected outcome of the students’ knowledge - Teacher and principal effectiveness will be rated - By 2012-2013 school year most schools will have SLOs - Grades besides 4-8 ELA and Math will have SLOs - Student population, learning content, HEDI Criteria - Target contain percentages of how much the students –broad definitions of targets - Districts much use the state determined growth goal with the state assessment test
I like the idea of having a goal setting process to know what the students should have learned by what point in the year. But, it seemed very broad to me. The example that they gave about the Spanish class said “Target- 80% of students will demonstrate meeting of at least 75% of Spanish learning objectives as demonstrated by end-of-year district wide Spanish assessment.” I do not quite understand what those percentages would be talking about. How much is 75% of the curriculum and how would I know if my students fully know 75% of the material. I was unaware that this kind of thing would be required in most school districts by this year.
"The process of setting student learning objectives combined with the purposeful use of data through both formal (interim) and informal (formative) assessments, leads to higher academic performance by students."
"There is evidence that setting rigorous and ambitious learning goals, combined with the purposeful use of data through both formal (interim) and informal (formative) assessments, leads to higher academic performance by students."
"HEDI Criteria: how will evaluators determine what range of student performance “meets” the goal (effective), versus “well‐below”,” (ineffective), “below” (developing), and “well‐above” (highly effective)."
"Obtaining all possible data on students to best inform baseline data"
These are the main sections that jumped out to me. I find it interesting that the first two sentences are found in the same document only with slight variation. NYS finds it very important to set goals and that only by combining them with 'purposeful' use of data analysis will it effectively help the performance of students. This in theory sounds like a great idea; it can be used to alter student assessment, determine effective goals; yet it's main goal seems to be assessing the teacher. What I find most interesting is that this will become a state requirement yet the goals are set by a specific district. If goals are set low enough, like the example that if 86% of the class receives higher than 75% grade the teacher was 'highly effective', then how does this relate to "setting rigorous and ambitious learning goals". Lastly, what does "obtain all possible data on students" mean? Even though I will be a mathematics teacher I will find it very important to know a students ability in reading and writing. Will data like the students previous schooling(changing schools) and absences be viable data?
I like your assessment of how the goals may be set purposefully low... does that have benefits and what will the implications of a bell curve for the four categories have on that?
As state Regents Assessments for subject areas besides ELA and Math are slowly phased out of the New York State Department of Education, a new set of guidelines for assessment are introduced and these are known as the Student Learning Objectives. SLOs are not only utilized to assess a students’ “growth rate” in learning but they are also used to track how much progress the educator has in accomplishing a set goal. SLOs are based on a goal system in which the educators in the same grade and subject area establish attainable goals based on the criteria and the knowledge of the learners in a certain subject, at the beginning of the school year. At the end of the year, when the learners are assessed on their growth rate, their results along with the Annual Professional Performance Reviews (APPR) will also dictate the employment decision of the educator.
ReplyDeleteThese articles helped me understand more about teaching and learning through inquiry because I was aware of the phasing out of Regents exams but didn’t know much about the new CORE curriculum. Additionally, I now have an understanding of what SLO and APPR stands for and the responsibilities they entail for the educator. SLOs may be an improvement from Regents exams however, I am anxious to see how they pan out in the 2012-2013 school year as they make their debut.
Very nicely reviewed...but what is your thought on how YOU will be assessed under this new paradigm?
DeleteI think that this system of assessment for teachers isn't fair or holistic but at this point they are already enacted so we can either challenge it or just live with it. However, if we are good facilitators in our subjects, I think things will fall into place.
Delete1. the Student Learning Objective Road Map and the Student Learning Objective Guidance Document will be the new way teachers and students will be assess.
ReplyDelete2. As a benefit, Student Learning Objective process will lead to higher academic performance by students.
3. The specific details that will impact me as an educators will be provided by my District leaders
4.SLO's fundamentally changes the way teachers and principals are evaluated.
5.A student learning objective is an academic goal for a teacher’s students that is set at the start of a course. Teachers’ scores are based upon the degree to which their goals were attained.
This five key points taken from the article taught me the new road map for NY education system. As a future educator it is important that i fully understand how my students will be assess as well as how i will be assess as a teacher.
How do you come to the conclusion of statement #2...especially after having read Tinkering Toward Utopia?
DeleteAdditionally, excellent final statement about the reasoning for developing an understanding, for both you and the students.
DeleteAfter reading the articles I am unsure about whether the SLO's will be a better strategy for teachers. While I understand that currently many teachers are teaching toward a test...the regents...I feel that this will be no different because teachers will set “objectives” and teach only the “objectives” that students will be tested on. Teachers will have similar objectives as before…get kids to pass the test or "assessment" at the end of the year otherwise their job may be on the line. This could also lead to teachers falsifying there test scores in order to save their jobs. While having assessments is important for teachers to identify if their students understand the material, I’m not sure if a teachers’ job should be on the line if their students are not doing “20%” better on the finals assessments in comparison to the pre-assessment at the start of the year. It will be interesting to see how these SLO’s are incorporated into schools and if they really “leads to higher academic performance by students.”
ReplyDeleteOutstanding opinion and expression of it. Your conclusion of questioning how the impact will or will not lead to higher academic performance is the real question and an appropriate concern.
DeleteThis document is extremely informative for new teachers, even already well-established teachers. This new form of assessment seems as if it is going to be around for a while, if even just for a trial period. This document describes the new assessment for teachers. It describes what is expected of teachers and how teacher goals should be accomplished. The state has created guidelines so that districts can make fair and equal assessments of all teachers. It is by these guidelines that a teacher’s, or a principle’s, fate will be determined, whether it is tenure, salary increases, retention, or even firing.
ReplyDeleteWhile I think it is completely necessary to have some way to evaluate teachers, I think it is sort of impossible to have one set of guidelines and assume that it can apply to every single teacher in a state; it probably couldn’t even apply to every single teacher in a district, or even one school. There are so many other factors that can come into account that are completely out of a teacher’s control. Any teacher can tell you about some of their students’ home lives, a father in jail, an alcoholic mother; it’s a wonder they even show up to school at all. How can teachers be held responsible for students’ learning outcomes when there are students who really don’t even have time for school work at home? I think there has to be some sort of case by case basis, or at least some way to account for these differences in students’ backgrounds.
This being said, there needs to be a way to assess teachers. There are many teachers out there getting away with murder every day. They don’t care about students’ learning outcomes, just about the paycheck at the end of the day. They teach with no passion, no care for student understanding. I think it is important to be able to weed out these teachers to make room for new teachers that want to teach, and want to make a difference.
Your idea of a trial period is an interesting one when we are dealing with education...remind me to share the idea of building a plane in the air, as so many others have been referring to this process.
DeleteSLO-Teacher Overview
ReplyDeleteI think that having student learning objectives implemented in schools is a good idea. This is a good way to keep teachers organized and focused on what they have to do. It’s a good idea because from the beginning of the school year you know what you will be starting with, and based on that you can determine where you want your students to be at the end of the school year and all you have to do is plan accordingly to meet your goal on time. I see this as the good side for teachers because it would help them keep track of where they are in the curriculum and whether or not they are being effective.
On the other hand, what if the results don’t turn out to be what was expected? According to the article, “The results of the evaluations shall be a significant factor in employment decisions, including but not limited to, promotion, retention, tenure determination, termination, and supplemental compensation…” This will not be the same if you were to compare a school in Garden City with a school in Brooklyn. The factors that you would have to look at would be completely different!
Your focus and goal oriented notion are commendable and hopefully accurate. But why would the factors in Gc be different for those in Brooklyn, isn't learning... learning?
DeleteStudent Learning Objective are the structure to the school system. My understanding of SLOs is that they are the basic mapped out goals for the teachers to teach their students. There must be more than one and there is no limit to the number of SLOs a teacher can have. Although there are many different SLOs established, i believe the most important thing is that just teaching the SLO to students is not efficient. In other words there are things that can not be measured, or tested that have to be taught to the students. Honesty, integrity, and determination can not be documented as an SLO but still must be taught to the students to achieve the highest stature of success.
ReplyDeleteThat sounds all fine, but the SLO is not about the student...it is about the teacher. So understanding that, how do you consider them to play a role in "Honesty, integrity, and determination."
DeleteHow is it fair that teachers who teach classes that are concluded by a state examination, such as a regents or state assessment even be on the same playing field as the teachers who only have to worry about SLOs. 40% of the teachers APPR is reflective of how well their students perform on the end of the course exams. However, I feel there is a very strong difference between SLOs and state provided assessments. The state will guide the school and district on how to properly evaluate their students, however it is unfair that the school and district will know what appears on these examinations. This is because they are the ones creating it, while following state guidelines.
ReplyDeleteWhat stuck out as odd to me, was the school can actually create their own exam while following SLO protocal. Now here is where i see the problem. How are all teachers being treated fairly within their positions when you have one set of teachers that have to have their students take a regents exam and the other teachers give their students a school created examination. One set of teachers have no contol over what appears on the exam, while the other set of teachers could be a part of the tests creation. What made me even angrier is that this is how the state wants to even out the playing field. In my opinion, they cannot even be compared. I would think that the teacher who has knowlege of the test would have students that perform better on the exam. This in turn would mean he/she would have a greater APPR percentage and would do better overall. I hope I am not the only one who sees this problem.
Your initial concern is one that litters the profession, why do all teachers earn the same salary?
DeleteExcellent reflection, lets discuss this more with the group, I welcome all comments, especially considering we have math and science teachers to be... although both have Regents exams, math "is under the microscope."
Key Points:
ReplyDelete•Goal setting process
•No state measures of student growth = HS special ed. Teachers
•Assessment (Teacher’s scores are based upon the degree to which their goals were attained)
•Allows for targeted, differentiated professional development
I feel that the whole purpose of Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) is that the teachers become more organized with what the have to teach the students and set goals to accomplish with the students by the end of the year. I feel that this is a good technique this way the teacher knows what they are trying to go for and have a set direction. However, I feel that the assessment of the teachers is unfair because each teacher is put into a different environment with different situations and they all cant be assessed the same way.
I wholeheartedly agree with your conclusions, how can we compare the situations plus the childrens lives so statistically!
DeleteStudent Learning Objectives (SLOs)
ReplyDelete- Most important learning for that year
- 4 rating system(highly effective, effective, developing, ineffective)
- Encourage educators to focus instruction
- Target equals expected outcome of the students’ knowledge
- Teacher and principal effectiveness will be rated
- By 2012-2013 school year most schools will have SLOs
- Grades besides 4-8 ELA and Math will have SLOs
- Student population, learning content, HEDI Criteria
- Target contain percentages of how much the students –broad definitions of targets
- Districts much use the state determined growth goal with the state assessment test
I like the idea of having a goal setting process to know what the students should have learned by what point in the year. But, it seemed very broad to me. The example that they gave about the Spanish class said “Target- 80% of students will demonstrate meeting of at least 75% of Spanish learning objectives as demonstrated by end-of-year district wide Spanish assessment.” I do not quite understand what those percentages would be talking about. How much is 75% of the curriculum and how would I know if my students fully know 75% of the material. I was unaware that this kind of thing would be required in most school districts by this year.
What are your thoughts about how these things should be played out with veteran successful staff? Does that even matter?
Delete"The process of setting student learning objectives combined with the purposeful use of data through both formal (interim) and informal (formative) assessments, leads to higher academic performance by students."
ReplyDelete"There is evidence that setting rigorous and ambitious learning goals, combined with the purposeful use of data through both formal (interim) and informal (formative) assessments, leads to higher academic performance by students."
"HEDI Criteria: how will evaluators determine what range of student performance “meets” the goal (effective), versus “well‐below”,” (ineffective), “below” (developing), and “well‐above” (highly effective)."
"Obtaining all possible data on students to best inform baseline data"
These are the main sections that jumped out to me. I find it interesting that the first two sentences are found in the same document only with slight variation. NYS finds it very important to set goals and that only by combining them with 'purposeful' use of data analysis will it effectively help the performance of students. This in theory sounds like a great idea; it can be used to alter student assessment, determine effective goals; yet it's main goal seems to be assessing the teacher. What I find most interesting is that this will become a state requirement yet the goals are set by a specific district. If goals are set low enough, like the example that if 86% of the class receives higher than 75% grade the teacher was 'highly effective', then how does this relate to "setting rigorous and ambitious learning goals". Lastly, what does "obtain all possible data on students" mean? Even though I will be a mathematics teacher I will find it very important to know a students ability in reading and writing. Will data like the students previous schooling(changing schools) and absences be viable data?
I like your assessment of how the goals may be set purposefully low... does that have benefits and what will the implications of a bell curve for the four categories have on that?
Delete