Thoughts On SLO Implementation After RPDC Training

On November 24th I attended a workshop on Student Learning Objectives (SLO's). Here are a few reflections on the training. 

SLO's are DESE's response to the NCLB waiver, which requires student achievement data be part of teacher evaluation. Beginning in 2016 Missouri schools will be required to document, through core data, that achievement data is used in evaluation. Local districts have been given the responsibility for choosing what data will be used. This is certainly better than models which would mandate evaluations be based on state assessments. However any change to evaluation must be communicated clearly and followed by thoughtful support.  

A few bullet points on using SLO's for achievement data:

-SLO's should evaluate individual objectives/learning targets contained in the Missouri Learning Standards.

-SLO's should document achievement over two points in time.

-SLO's should incorporate "stretch." Formative and summative assessments should challenge students in appropriate ways.

-SLO's should be chosen by teachers.

-SLO's should allow teachers to communicate to administrators any unique learning challenges students have. 

-SLO's should allow teachers to set "growth targets" for individual students.

The formula for setting individual growth targets suggested by our trainers is illustrated below. Growth targets are set at half the distance between the student's baseline score and one hundred percent. This is a straightforward method, but it leaves me with a few questions. 

Thoughts, questions, and concerns:

-Using SLO's will come naturally to many teachers. Most elementary teachers already use assessment data in reading and mathematics. Secondary teachers in large departments have common assessments. Many teachers already submit results on locally created assessments to central offices. Data being tracked by assessments already in place is a perfect resource for meeting new evaluation requirements. However, for various reasons, not all teachers have had the same practice working collaboratively on data collection and evaluation. How will administrators support them? 

-What is the most efficient way to submit SLO data? Could a teacher's grade book be used to track SLO's. Administrators and teachers would need to have conversations along the way, but once the assessments have identified, could a teacher submit a printout of their grade book as part of the evaluation process?
-SLO's emphasize baseline data. How can administrators discourage teachers unfamiliar with best formative assessment practices from incorporating results of baseline assessments in a student's final grade?
-The "half the distance to the goal" strategy works on a points earned/points possible mindset, which runs counter to standards based grading. Wouldn't a rubric, with a high bar set for mastery, be a better model for incorporating both "stretch" and growth targets?

These are important questions that administrators and teachers should have sooner rather than later. I'd be interested in hearing from those who are further along in the conversation.