The SLO Process or Cycle

In October, 2016, MDE released their guidance for MI Decision Makers regarding the implementation of SLOs, found below.  MDE's continues to build their Ed Eval Webpage with additional resources. 
One decision that seems to be left off:  How might districts utilize Observation Platforms to simplify the SLO and PGP process?

Several districts across Ottawa and Muskegon ISD studied state law to create a Simple, Meaningful, and Compliant Growth Plan. The basic conclusion was to utilize the Observation Platform (primarily the platforms associated with Marzano and 5D+) to meet the requirements of a professional goal and at least two student impact goals.  The resources created our housed on the Growth Plan page.  
NOTE:  There is a great amount of variance across our nation about how much support and how stringent the requirements are for developing SLOs.  The pendulum swings from one extreme (teachers set SLO based on their own assessments) to the other extreme of where the district or county adopts common assessments aligned to the state standards (prioritized) and provide a baseline for common growth targets expected for various groups of students.

View quality samples used in Michigan:Most of the samples above were written on this  Blank SLO Template PDF (or MS Word) or one similar, download the MS Word version to create your own following the samples and make reference to the SLO Writing Guidance page on this site.

MI is developing recommendations with the guidance of the American Institute of Research (AIR).   The 18 Race to the Top (RTT) states have also utilized the SLO process and several offer online resources such as: Ohio, Wisconsin, Indiana, Georgia, Maryland, New York, Rhode Island, and Louisiana.

Phases I through V

I. SLO Development Process 
There are 5 steps according to AIR, in this first phase, SLO Development Process:
  • Identify core content and standards
  • Gather and analyze student data 
  • Determine the focus of the SLO
  • Select or develop assessment(s)
  • Develop a growth target and rationale
This is the most involved portion of the process, requiring  the most training.
II.  SLO Approval: Often supported by a checklist or rubric (from other states) and peer review before administrator approval.

III. Mid-course Check-in (optional)
  • How are students progressing toward growth targets?
  • Which students are struggling vs exceeding expectations?
  • What additional resources do you need as you work to achieve the SLO(s)?

IV. Final review of SLO attainment and scoring
  • Data and other relevant information collected by teacher often in an eval portfolio.
  • Teacher completes a year-end reflection.
  • Evaluator scores SLO, sets up final meeting for feedback and planning next steps
Scoring SLOs can be fairly loose as seen in the first example on the AIR Sample Scoring or extremely tight based on the assessment results as also seen.  

One unique approach in MI was to use MCEE approved observation language to establish a rubric that measures both Teacher Fidelity and Student Impact, each of the 5 components were weighted 5%.
V. Discussion of Summative Rating and Impact
     on Performance.
  • Focus on the summative rating and lessons learned from the reflective process.
  • Address aspects of the educator's performance that were valuable for improving student learning as well as those aspects that could be improved.
  • Prepare to offer resources to struggling teachers while providing reinforcement and opportunity for effective teachers.
SLO Cycle provided by AIR provides three comprehensive documents:  SLO Basics, Implementation of SLOs & SLO Challenges/Solutions.
SLO Quality Control Framework by RSN 2012 is an additional guidance document similar to AIR.