Read this: Practical ideas to implement and demonstrate the 10 Standards

Notebooks are worthwhile to organize your documentation (I've posted about that previously).  We have a school-wide Resource Notebook (communication, meetings, etc.), Curriculum Notebook (lesson plans, assessments, etc.), and a Professional Development folder (that now gives me a total of 4 notebooks and 1 folder).  But, as a reminder, you can't document your way to a 4 rating.  We use e-mail, web sites, and Remind among other means to aid in communicating with parents.  The detailed ideas listed below for the Standards are slightly edited from a colleague of mine (she gave me permission).  Read it slowly, apply it lavishly.  You should revise your lesson plan to include all of the elements listed under Standard 2 below.  Hope this information helps.  

Standard 1: Professional Knowledge

This standard focuses on your content knowledge, pedagogical skills and the extent to which you facilitate relevant learning experiences. Professional Knowledge can be gleaned from your lesson plans, but is primarily observable through instruction.

Standard 2: Instructional Planning

This standard is all about INTENTIONAL planning. The emphasis is on planning standards-based lessons, incorporating strategies to engage students and using data to address students’ differentiated learning needs.

You should have your curriculum resource notebook available for your evaluator to see your plans and student data.  Current (as well as previous lesson plans) should be in your curriculum resource notebook.

Lesson Plans should include:

• Standard(s)/Topic(s) and Essential Question(s)
• Vocabulary
• Opening, work session, and closing.
• Instructional strategies to engage students in active learning
• Reference what data is being used and how it is being used to address students’ differentiated learning needs.
• Plans to differentiate instruction and/or assessment based on students’ needs.
• Assessment strategies (informal, formative, summative)
• Consider how you are planning for higher order questions as well – these have to be intentionally planned. It helps to be specific because that is when they are used the most and relevant to the instruction.

Standard 3: Instructional Strategies

Student engagement & active learning are the keys to this standard and should be observable during the observation. Also, lesson plans should indicate that you are using a variety of instructional strategies to engage students and facilitate active learning.

Standard 4:  Differentiated Instruction

This standard focuses on the extent to which you incorporate remediation and acceleration (based on data) to address students' learning needs and readiness. Your lesson plans should include how you are differentiating as well as the data used and how it was used to differentiate. Remember: Differentiation can be by content, process, product, or learning environment. 

Standard 5: Assessment Strategies

This standard focuses on the extent to which you are assessing students -- diagnostic, informal, formal, formative, summative and whether the assessments are appropriate for the content and student population. During the observation, ongoing informal assessment is observable through questioning and other means through which you determine if students are understanding the material. Your assessment strategies should also be listed in your lesson plans.

Standard 6: Assessment Uses

This area supports differentiated instructional practices and specifically, how you are using assessment data to meet students' learning needs. The Evaluator will look at how you gather, analyze, and use data to inform instructional decisions. This standard also incorporates providing timely and constructive feedback to parents and students.

Standard 7: Positive Learning Environment

The keys to Standard 7 are rituals, routines, and procedures, which are the foundation of a well-managed, safe and orderly learning environment. In addition to rituals and routines, this standard is observable through positive interactions and mutual respect between teacher(s) and students as well as among students.

  

Standard 8: Academically Challenging Environment

This standard looks at the extent to which the learning environment is student centered, students are being challenged (for their level of readiness) and are self-directed, productive learners, all of which are observed during the observation.

Standard 9: Professionalism

This standard focuses on the extent to which you are following established local, state, and federal practices, participating in professional learning, working well with your colleagues, meeting deadlines and generally performing your duties as expected. This standard is observable through your participation in professional learning, collaborative planning, and activities beyond the classroom. Good sources of documentation would be to make sure the collaboration and meeting forms are being completed and placed in your resource binder and that you are participating in professional growth opportunities to support student learning.

Standard 10: Communication

The standard focuses on how you communicate with parents, students, colleagues and other stakeholders to support student learning.  Information to parents should go out once a week and email should be checked daily. All other communication like phone calls should be organized in your communication binder. Communication is observable through the documentation in addition to ongoing observation of  your fact-to-face interactions with students, parents and colleagues, etc.

Measuring student growth using student learning objectives

From: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/projects/project.asp?ProjectID=369
(If you haven't signed up for e-mails from ies.ed.gov, you should!)

Student learning objectives (SLOs)—classroom-specific growth targets chosen by individual teachers and approved by principals—are becoming popular as alternative measures of student growth because they can be used to evaluate teachers in any grade or subject.  Although very little of the literature on SLOs addresses their statistical properties, key findings show that:

• SLOs have the potential to better distinguish teachers based on performance than traditional evaluation metrics do, but no studies have looked at SLO reliability.  Most of the limited evidence on the statistical properties of SLOs is on the proportion of teachers achieving SLO objectives. Whether that differentiation represents true differences in teacher performance or random statistical noise is unknown.
• Little is known about whether SLOs can yield ratings that correlate with other measures of teacher performance. Only three studies have explored the relationship between SLO ratings and standardized assessment-based (value-a dded) growth measures. These studies found small but positive correlations. More research is needed as states and districts roll out SLOs as teacher evaluation measures and instructional planning tools.
• Until some of the research gaps are filled, districts that intend to use SLOs may want to roll them out for instructional planning before using them in high-stakes teacher evaluations. Several studies found teacher concerns about fairness in SLO implementation. This is no surprise, because SLOs are difficult to make valid and reliable. They are by definition customized to individual teachers and based on the professional judgments of teachers and principals. Making SLOs an important component of high-stakes evaluation could undermine their validity, because it means that teachers are in essence grading themselves.
• Studies of teacher experiences with SLOs indicate that SLOs can require substantial training and technology infrastructure and that they can be time-consuming for teachers and evaluators alike.

Student Surveys of Teacher Instructional Practices: absolutely laughable, if it weren't true

1. The use of student surveys (for middle school: 11-13 year olds) to impact teacher evaluation, TEM score, effectiveness, retention, and certificate, is absolutely laughable - if it weren't true.  Because it is true, it is horrifying and ridiculous.  Now teachers need to teach the students how to evaluate their teacher; here's what summary looks like, here's what differentiation looks like, here's what asking questions looks like, etc.  More later.
2. It seems reasonable that if a child - students - could take a survey that would impact a teachers' -professional educator's - job, why couldn't we create a survey of our students that could count toward their grade (i.e., a summative test grade).  More later.
3. A friend of mine, who has a birds eye view of many things, has the opinion that this entire TKES process was developed to create an evaluation system which has the ability to create a sense of outrage and distrust in the Georgia public education system so that public sentiment would move toward supporting Georgia's elected politician's push toward more charter schools (which was just voted on and approved), allowing for schools, teachers, and benefits to move out of the GA DOE funding into privatized companies allowing schools to function outside of the GA DOE which moved from the lack of governmental funding public schools years ago which, in its fullness, will create a disparity of high functioning charter schools and low functioning public schools creating a reinvented system of segregation--this time, between the haves and the have nots.  TKES isn't about providing an improved valid teacher evaluation, it's about creating political movement toward charter schools.  The opinion is hard to argue against; time will tell.
4. A teachers, as with all other evaluation systems, is in the hands of the interpreting evaluator.  A teacher with less than 5 years experience has seven IVs and three IIIs on his/her summative evaluation.  Another teacher with minimal experience has five IVs and five IIIs.  Another teacher with less than 5 years with experience who provides differentiated experiences for his/her students every day receives IIs.  One evaluator interprets by the letter of the rubric, another interprets: "if you could teach a class on this Standard, you should receive a IV."  ...completely different interpretations, different grades, and different summative outcomes for the teacher--connected to their certificate.  Word is that if you receive a II in any Standard, you may not be eligible for interview or hire in some counties.
5. The survey questions do not/can not apply to all subject matters; this creates validity/reliability problems (yet, we are going to evaluate and judge teachers anyway.  See #3.)

For example:  Survey Question #4: "My teacher takes time each day to summarize what we have learned."  My score: 1.95 (17% strongly agree, 37% agree, 29% disagree, 15% strongly disagree).  Clearly 12-year-old students are clueless (because they are only 12), I summarize more than one time per class period, and now it seems teachers need to teach students how to answer survey questions (in lieu of time spent on standards) to keep their jobs - or at least avoid uncomfortable summative TKES conferences regarding their student survey results.  I graduated with High Honors (high school), cum laude (college), 3.8 (masters), and a 4.0 (doctorate) in my degrees and apply what I know, and constantly use formative assessments during class so my students will learn efficiently, and now I have to figure out a way for 12 year old students to recognize and approve of my teaching strategies and methods to validate my abilities.  Something seems out of place here (see #3).

So, 44% of my students do not think I summarize the concept each day.  Hummmm.  Let's see.  Suppose I teach music.  I teach a new note, I give the location on the staff, I give the name, I give the fingering, I let the students see it and finger it, I give how to play it, I give how it is used, I show them why the note is the way it is, I have the students play the note, I double check (through formative assessments) that the students understand and can perform the note, I have them play the note, and then I have the students play the note in new music.  If that is not summarizing of the new note, I do not know what is, but 44% of my students do not think so.  The same would go for rhythms, dribble a basketball, sing pitch, sew a straight line, or draw a perspective.  In many performance-based classes (Connections classes in particular), concept is about 20% and performance/skill is 80%; therefore, playing/singing/drawing/performing the new concept is summarizing.  So, if teachers are going to improve their student survey averages and TEM score in the coming years, it appears we will need to find new ways of teaching the standards, documenting performance for evaluators, and teaching students how to answer the survey.

Steps to prepare for your observation

As I become more aware of my responsibilities for the TKES evaluation, I am trying to become more efficient (to reduce my stress!).  For my next evaluation, I followed this process:

1. I decided to make my lesson plans according to the TKES Lesson Plan design I created last year (see sample here) and make sure all drop down fields were accurate and up to date.
2. I typed up what will go on the SmartBoard for the students to know what we are doing in class that day.  I copied and pasted the student version to a new page in the same word processing document.
3. I slowly read through all 72 TAPS elements, and  as I saw an Element that may apply to my lesson that day, I inserted the outline number of the Element (say, 2.6 or 4.5) into the SmartBoard outline that I will give to the Evaluator.  
4. After reading all Elements, I have two documents that I  give to the Evaluator: a formal TKES lesson plan, and a student version of the lesson with the Elements identified.
5. I still have my TAPS notebooks with evidence in the cabinet as well as just the outlines of my evidence in my lesson plan notebook in case the Evaluator wants to see them.

What I noticed is that even some of my reminders to the students about upcoming activities or after school events can be tagged with an Element.  An after school practice, rehearsal, or event can count as 4.2, 4.3, &/or 4.6.  Reminding them about upcoming tests or units could count as 2.6, 3.2, &/or 4.6.

Sample portion of student version of lesson given to Evaluator

Give yourself a grade (1-5) on your progress today! [6.7] 6th grade: Brass: Lip Slurs [1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 4.1, 4.5, 4.6, 5.3, 6.1, 6.3, 6.6, 8.3, 8.5, 8.7]; Bells: Octave/Chromatic [1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 4.1, 4.6, 6.1, 6.3, 6.6, 8.3, 8.5, 8.7]; Flutes: Aperture control [1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 4.1, 4.5, 8.3, 8.5, 8.7]; Clarinets and Saxophones: register slurs to determine embouchure, tongue placement, amount of mouthpiece, reed quality, air stream, hand position [MMSBB.2.b, MMSBB.3.a] [1.2, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 3.2, 4.1, 4.5, 4.6, 6.1, 6.3, 6.6, 8.3, 8.5, 8.7]

These steps are also outlined in "How to pass all 10 TAPS in one lesson" and "District Walkthrough"  here.

Read This: Your TAPS Evaluation Score is up to You--Not Your Evaluator!

It is becoming apparent that my early predictions a year ago of defending your job by collecting, organizing, and updating evidence in notebooks (called paranoid back then) is becoming reality and possibly a necessity.

Your Evaluator may only look for as much evidence as they want to, take time to, or have time to - and then give you a score.  The score may not be a huge concern to them (even if it is a 2 or 1) because the score is not directly related to their certificate.  The teacher's evaluation score is up to the teacher, not the Evaluator.  Let me explain.

At the mid-year evaluation a friend of mine received a 2 on TAPS #6.  The Evaluator looked at two students' grades in the electronic grade book and out of 9 summative grades, those two students had either turned in none or one.  The Evaluator concluded that the teacher was not assessing well and summarily gave the teacher a 2.

The REAL story is that our of 30 or so students in the class, the Evaluator picked the two students who are ill-behaved, in ISS (in school suspension), frequently absent, and/or are two of the most troubled students in the school.  The Evaluator did not look at the entire class' grades, average, or completion status (which s/he was able to do), only the two "problem children."  Now, to me, that is either trying to be a "gotcha," a vendetta of some sort, ill-trained, or incompetence on the part of the Evaluator.  As people say, "That ain't right."  The TKES/TAPS process has been presented as a "totality of the evidence," but the evidence has to be reviewed first.

As a result, the teacher, in his/her defense (and anxiety) had to spend quite some time point out to the Evaluator other students in the same class.  The project turn-in rate and grades were quite high in fact.  Seeing the data, the Evaluator changed the 2 to a 3.

If you have ever been in a position where you had to regularly defend your job, you know the stress it creates, the morale it devastates, and the decrease in your effectiveness.  It creates a terrible work environment - especially mentally.  That teacher looked defeated.

However, in my mid-year conference, my Evaluator indicated that s/he had reviewed some of the evidence I had uploaded into The Platform (I think I have scanned and uploaded about 300 items).  That sounded good to my ears.  To me, that is an indication that s/he is trying to review the totality of the evidence, is doing his/her due diligence, and if there is a question, we can refer to it during the conference in The Platform.

I urge the effective teachers of this state to collect past and present evidence for the TAPS elements, organize it in some fashion that can be easily accessed, and take the evidence to meetings.  If you need suggestions on how to collect evidence, organize it, present it in notebooks, or uploading it into The Platform online, please see earlier blog posts of mine--also review my blog "How to pass all 10 TAPS in one lesson."  If you are going to the GMEA convention in January, stop by the poster presentation session or the Friday evening concert and let's talk.  We'll talk TKES.

Effectively Organizing the TLE Platform

I am very good at doing things twice: first the cumbersome way and then a better way; I've discovered that long-term "learning style" again through uploading documents into The Platform.  My initial uploads seemed precise to me, and then after reviewing them, they were overly complicated and unclear (and probably would irritate the Evaluator).  I offer this procedure:

1.  When you upload a document, you have to specify which Performance Standard with which it will be associated before you are allowed to upload the document.  In the description section on the left, I put the section and element number and the descriptor, "Section 2.3: Plans instruction effectively for content mastery, pacing, and transitions."  Under that, I put the exact titles from my table of contents from my notebook (copy and paste).  It looks like this:

Section 2.3: Plans instruction effectively for content mastery, pacing, and transitions.

Lesson Plans (dated 8/30/13) showing sequential process for section assessment

Lesson Plans (dated 9/9/13) showing integration of curriculum to long-term goals

Example of all Essential Questions for the year for each lesson with mastery items underlined

Essay: §3.4.2 Understanding the Content and Mastering the Skills Through Research-Based Instructional Strategies

Then, click the check box for Standard 2 from the right side of the window, and then click, "Done."  This will create a section on the right that has a tab, "Attach File."  Like other "attach" tabs, it will open a "choose file" where you can select the document, then click, "OK" and it uploads.  You can upload electronic documents from your computer or scanned files.  Use electronic documents if you have them.  I had many samples of handouts I created for class as well as TKES essays - that had identifying titles - and loaded those into The Platform.  The titles of the documents load into The Platform.  

This is where it gets a little odd: I have scanned many documents (300+) into my computer to upload into The Platform.  Each scan automatically gave it a scan number (Scan0235).  I did not rename each file - that would take too long.  To help organize The Platform, I attached the scanned documents in scanned order with the associated Element descriptor in order of the scanned documents.  Meaning: if the Evaluator wanted to see the, "Example of all Essential Questions for the year for each lesson with mastery items underlined," s/he would look at the third scanned document under Section 2.3.

I have documents in my computer in folders such as, "Teaching Techniques," "Handouts," "GC-Publications," and "GC-TKES."

2.  What do you do with all of those scanned documents?  I occurred to me that I file them somewhere for safe keeping.  So, I created a folder, "GC-TKES/TLE Upload Documents/TO DO."  These files were scanned in order from my notebook, so as I use my table of contents from my Word document, I can put them in the right section of The Platform.  I did not scan all of my documents; only the clear, precise ones that showed excellent evidence.

3.  What do you do with the scanned files after you upload them?  They are still located in your, "TO DO" subfolder.  I decided to create a subfolder entitled: "GC-TKES/TLE Upload Documents/Section 1" then one labeled, "Section 2," etc.  That way, if I need to go back and double check a scan/file, I can find it easily.  I know now which scans have been uploaded into what section and what scans I still have to upload.  It looks like this:

GC-TKES

TLE Upload Documents

Section 1

Section 2

etc...

TO DO

Table of Contents

You may recall that I decided to enter my entire table of contents (TOC) into each Standard to show the totality of my evidence.  (You would be correct in inferring that I have a, "preponderance of the evidence" philosophy with this new system.)  I will reload the TOC as my evidence notebook changes.

Instruction during an Observation--preview

From talking with other teachers in different schools, there is a vast difference in the amount of "intensity" for the TKES/TAPS process--for the evaluator and the teacher; this is true of any teacher evaluation system--past, present, and future.  If your schools has promoted a "be calm" atmosphere, that is fantastic; mine has not.  I know of one teacher where the school has put him/her on very close scrutiny and another school where a teacher passed all 10 TAPS Standards with a Level III and did not have to provide any additional documentation.  If you have been observed, or the climate in your school is of particular interest to others, please let me know (e-mail), and I will share your experience anonymously.

Up to now, I had been concentrating on each element in the standards to ensure the Evaluator would observe and document that I had completed the particular performance standard.  While I do not think that is a bad approach, it may not be all inclusive and there may be an easier and better way.  Instead of focusing on the details, it may be more beneficial to focus on the big picture.

The rubric for Performance Standard 3: Instructional Strategies, Level IV indicates that

In addition to meeting the requirements for Level III; The teacher continually facilitates students' engagement of metacognitive learning, higher-order thinking skills, and application of learning in current and relevant ways.  (Teachers rated as Level IV continually seek ways to serve as role models or teacher leaders.)

 and the rubric for Level III indicates

The teacher consistently promotes student learning by using research-based instructional strategies relevant to the content to engage students in active learning, and to facilitate the students' acquisition of key skills.

Now, this is my 22nd year teaching.  I had in my teaching area the elements of Standards 3 & 7 typed up so that I could address each one (as seen in post dated September 9); that was stressing me out.  I think I found a better way.

Ignore the elements.  Teach.  Check for student learning.  Specifically:

• promote student learning by using research-based instructional strategies (I do that)
• engage students in active learning (I do that)
• facilitate the students' acquisition of key skills (I do that)
• students' engagement of metacognitive learning (I found a great way to do that this year)
• higher-order thinking skills (I use my DOK questions for that)
• application of learning (I do that)

I think that this approach will keep me focused on the main thing, student learning, and less on trying to pass off the checklist of elements--hoping the students learn while I perform my teaching.  Now, if they will just stop by and observe me!

TKES/TAPS Observation: DOK, What to say

There is a fair amount of discussion about depth of knowledge (DOK) right now.  Some teachers think their curriculum is a mile wide and an inch deep, and they are still expected to ensure their students have a true depth of knowledge that is substantial and verifiable.  As part of my new TKES/TAPS lesson plan design (see: Lesson Plan), I included a Depth of Knowledge section that includes 4 areas of DOK.  My earlier iterations of the lesson plan had words only, but then it was suggested that we have actual sentences we might use during class.  To that end, I changed my DOK section and recommend that you include elements such as these in your lesson plan as well as statements to include when the observer is in your room.  I have a list that I keep at my podium where I can cite these, in some form or another, as needed.  As has been mentioned in other posts, my evaluator has indicated on more than one occasion that, "if it isn't in the lesson plan or isn't seen, it doesn't exist."  I intend to make sure it is in the lesson plan and it is observed.

Level 1: 

How do you define this?

Can you identify which one is the ___?

Tell me know you know ___.  (One of my favorites.)

Name all of the ___.

Recite all of the ___.

Level 2:

Identify patterns in the ___.

Compare between these elements.

How do you interpret that?

What observations can you make about that?

Show me that you know it.  (One of my favorites.)

Summarize those ideas for me.

How do you relate that to what we did before?  (One of my favorites.)

What cause and effect do you see?

Estimate that for yourself.

Level 3:

Compare between these elements.

What conclusions can you draw from that?

Critique this for me.  (One of my favorites.)

Cite evidence for your decision on that.

Construct and support your answer.

How would you differentiate between these?

Hypothesize: what would happen if ___?  (I like this one too.)

Formulate ___.

Level 4:

Analyze and synthesize information from multiple sources.  

Critique that for me.  (One of my favorites.)

Apply concepts to illuminate a problem or situation.

Connect that to something you learned the other day.  (One of my favorites.)

Create ___.

Prove ___.

Reasons: Teacher will ask students to use multiple levels of DOK during instruction, work session, and summary.

Respectfully,

Glenn

Pre-Evaluation Conference

Today I had my pre-evaluation conference.  I had the opportunity to have one in a group meeting or one-on-one with my Evaluation and Assessment Coordinator (EAC, a new job position for our county who is in charge of organizing the TKES process - and probably the new standardized tests).  I requested a one-on-one after our meeting because I heard in the meeting that the administrators/evaluators had actually reviewed our TKES/TAPS self-assessment and would use that information in working with us--that caught my attention, and I decided I wanted to know how my self-assessment would impact me.

After our conference, I got every impression that the self-evaluation would serve as areas of "strengths" and "weaknesses" for them to review as part of their observations.  In addition, I got every impression that the observers would be very careful to notice each and every aspect of the 72 TAPS (Teacher Assessment on Performance Standards) indicators - even though they are not a checklist!  (so they say....)  As we were discussing the impending initial observations, whether they had to printed & in a notebook or could be available on the SmartBoard when requested, it became evident that I should show my EAC what my lesson plans looked like.  She had indicated that "if it isn't in the lesson plan and isn't seen, then the observer would have to ask for further documentation" (I think there is a 24 hour window there to provide documentation).  She reviewed my lesson plan for today, I showed her the different elements, and she seemed like everything the observer would need to see was in there.  When she had a question about, "Where is the differentiation ____?" I showed her where it was, and she seemed satisfied.

I've added about 5 more documents for my notebook (today), will add the summative assessment results from tomorrow to show "data to support differentiation," and will add a couple more articles from research organizations re: 1) Does requiring more math classes each day help kids who struggle with math?  (Answer, No.), 2) Has requiring more math and science classes in the high school increased America's rank in math/science & preparation for the high-tech job market?  (Answer, No.)

Summary: take this very seriously; document everything, put a number on the back of each paper indicating which indicator(s) it will satisfy (i.e., 9.5); create or use a comprehensive lesson plan that has each TAPS element you can put in there.  If you need suggestions, look here or e-mail if you need one specifically for you....

Thanks for checking in.  If you have specific questions, please feel free to e-mail me at: gcason123@gmail.com and I'll get to you as soon as I can.

For those drowning in education acronyms, let me add this in what I believe is hierarchical form:

• TKES: Teacher Keys Effectiveness System is the entirely new evaluation system passed by the Georgia legislature that will be used for all Georgia teachers of record.  It replaces GTOI....oops, sorry: the Georgia Teacher Observation Instrument  :-)
• TAPS: Teacher Assessment on Performance Standards is the set of 10 Standards and 72 Elements/Indicators (not to be used as a checklist) that outline an effective teacher's actions.
• EAC: Evaluation and Assessment Coordinator is a new position in our county, barely similar to the "Instructional Lead Teacher" (ILT) from years ago, that helps coordinate the TKES training, SLO administration, and coordination between the administrators, county, and teachers.  If you don't have one specifically, who is helping you out?
• SLO: Student Learning Objectives is the set of concepts &/or skills (written &/or performed), written by your county teachers, given in a pre-test/post-test format to gauge the amount of student achievement under a specific teacher's direct instruction in non-standardized testing subjects (Connections, non-academic classes, non-CRCT classes, etc.)  The number and amount of student achievement gain will have a significant impact on a teacher's year end evaluation.

If you think I could be helpful to you, your teachers, or your administrators, please feel free to contact me.

Measuring Student growth using student learning objectives

Student Learning Objective (SLO)

This quote is from:
Gill, B., Bruch, J., & Booker, K. (2013). Using alternative student growth measures for evaluating teacher performance: what the literature says. (REL 2013-002). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Mid-Atlantic Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs.

"Until some of the research gaps are filled, districts that intend to use SLOs may want to roll them out for instructional planning before using them in high-stakes teacher evaluations.  Several students found teacher concerns about fairness in SLO implementation.  This is no surprise, because SLOs are difficult to make valid and reliable.  They are by definition customized to individual teachers and based on the professional judgments of teachers and principals.  Making SLOs an important component of high-stakes evaluation could undermine their validity, because it means that teachers are in essence grading themselves."  (p. ii).

Interesting....