1 / 13

Crafting SMART Performance Objectives for Academic and Operational Accountability

Join Allen Mueller and Kelly Cadman as they explore the evolving landscape of performance objective development. This session will cover the changing expectations in setting objectives, identifying good vs. poor objectives, and crafting SMART goals. Learn to develop objectives that are specific, measurable, ambitious, and time-sensitive to meet educational standards and enhance academic accountability. Additionally, discover operational accountability measures including fiscal performance and stakeholder satisfaction. Gain insights into setting baseline comparisons and growth targets essential for effective goal setting in educational environments.

marlis
Download Presentation

Crafting SMART Performance Objectives for Academic and Operational Accountability

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Creating meaningful performance objectives

  2. Presenters • Allen Mueller Director of Charter Schools Atlanta Public School System amueller@atlanta.k12.ga.us • Kelly Cadman Director of Education & Training Georgia Charter Schools Association kcadman@gacharters.org

  3. Session Objectives: • How expectations in performance objective development have changed over the years…and new expectations • Types of objectives • Qualities of Good/Poor Objectives • Examples of Good/Poor Objectives

  4. Writing SMART Objectives • Specific and Tied to Standards • Measureable • Ambitious and Attainable • Reflective of Your Mission • Time-Specific with Target Dates

  5. Academic accountability (1) • Specific to SUBJECT and GRADE • Growth targets are founded on something specific – not pulled out of the air • Covers full term of the charter • Meets NCLB requirements for 100% meets and exceeds • Consider Comparisons (cohort groups, district, schools, state, etc.) • Includes a baseline • Consider leading and lagging measures

  6. Academic accountability (2) • Measures to consider: • Standardized Tests • Normed (ITBS, Standford 9, etc.) • Criterion Reference Tests (CRCT, EOCT) • Non-Standardized Tests • Benchmark tests • Graduation Rates • Attendance Rates • Unique • Usually qualitative

  7. Operational Accountability • Fiscal • Audit Results • Positive Cash flow • Student and Staff Retention Rates • Governance • Training • Qualifications • Compliance (timing, posting, accessibility, etc.) • Safety • Teacher and Student Retention • Parent, Student, Staff Satisfaction • Parental or Community Involvement • Unique

  8. The Formula General Comparative

  9. Examples: Increase the percentage of Special Needs Students scoring 80% or better on the 8th grade CRCT from: 59% 08-09 (baseline) Baseline can be district data, projected 64% 09-10 target audience, comparable charters. 69% 10-11 74% 11-12 80% 12-13 Outperform the district’s performance of Special Needs Students by 3% on the 8th grade CRCT from: 62% 08-09 (baseline) Baseline can be district data 65% 09-10 68% 10-11 71% 11-12 74% 12-13

  10. Established format • Avoid narrative-only formats/goals • Include in the format: • Goal Format should be • Baseline easy to cut/paste • Measure into charter • Measurement Tool • Timeframe (full length of charter) • Context/Rationale (i.e., comparison to self or others, location, mission, etc.) should be considered in crafting goals (and should be able to be articulated)

  11. Examples of well written goals

  12. Characteristics of Ineffective Goals • Lack of correspondence/baseline from district, state, etc. comparisons • Random in nature • Too aggressive • 100% of anything is always troubling • Too conservative • Ex. “Meets” district requirements • Measures can’t be quantified • Measures can’t be verified • Too narrow • Scope of measures • Type of measures • Too broad

  13. Poor examples • ABC Charter School will meet the district’s rate for “meet and exceed”s on the EOCT Biology Test. • ABC Charter School will have 100% parent approval rating on the yearly satisfaction survey. • ABC Charter School will beat the district’s Accelerated Reader points by 3% every year. • ABC Charter School will outperform state CRCT 7th grade math averages by 3% each year. • ABC Charter School’s red headed 5th grade Gifted girls will outperform similar populations by 5% on the ITBS NPR.

More Related