You are here

Measures of Student Learning/Outcomes for 2021-22

Educator evaluations for the 2021-22 school year resume full implementation of all components of educator effectiveness required by state statute and rule.  The following is offered as an overview of the requirements, guidance, and considerations for successful implementation and re-engagement with both professional practices and measures of student learning/outcomes (MSL/Os) within educator evaluations.

For educator evaluations during the 2021-22 school year, Colorado Growth Model results, School Performance Framework (SPF), and District Performance Framework (DPF) will not be available.  School districts and BOCES should proceed with using other assessment data within their MSL/O portion of their licensed educators' evaluations for the 2021-22 school year.

The lack of state summative data and school or district performance frameworks should not prohibit the creation of robust and meaningful MSL/Os. Districts can consider local and vendor-based assessments when determining MSLs for the 2021-22 school year. These may include, and are not limited to, NWEA, ACCESS, DIBELS, and classroom-based assessments.

Districts may use their CMAS data in MSL/Os, although they are not required to do so for the 2021-22 school year. Use of CMAS data in a district’s/BOCES MSL/Os should be an intentional decision with numerous considerations explored prior to using the data. To aide in this exploration please see the “Considerations” section below. 

For added clarification, information, and/or side-by-side support contact your EE Regional Specialist.


For educator evaluations during the 2021-22 school year, Colorado Growth Model results, School Performance Framework (SPF), and District Performance Framework (DPF) will not be available.  School districts and BOCES should proceed with using other assessment data within their MSL/O portion of their licensed educators' evaluations for the 2021-22 school year.

The following are requirements for the inclusion of measures of student learning/outcomes (MSL/Os) associated with Educator Effectiveness as defined by state statute and rule:

  • Evaluations of licensed personnel are based on 50% professional practices and 50% measures of student learning/outcomes (MSL/Os).
  • MSL requirements for teachers:
    • A measure of individually attributed student growth.
    • A measure of collectively attributed student growth.
    • When available, state summative assessment results.*
    • For subjects with statewide summative assessment results in two consecutive grades, results from the Colorado Growth Model.*
  • MSO requirements for Special Services Providers (SSPs):
    • Minimum of two (2) measures aligned to the specific role and duties of the individual SSP.
    • Data used in evaluating SSPs shall be collected from the site(s), or a representative sample of the sites, at which the SSP provides services.
  • MSL requirements for principals:
    • Data that is included within the school performance framework.*  School districts and BOCES may choose to weight specific components differently than they are weighted in the school performance framework, so long as student longitudinal growth carries the greatest weight.
    • Minimum of one measure of student academic growth that is aligned with the measures used in the teacher evaluations for the principal's school.
    • Measures reflect subjects beyond those in state assessments and shall reflect the growth of students in all subject areas and grades.


*NOTE: House Bill 15-1323 states that "If a local board does not receive the results of state assessments in time to use them in written evaluation report prepared for the school year in which the assessments are administered, the local board shall use the results of the state assessments as measures of student academic growth for educator evaluations and professional development in the school year following the school year in which the assessments are administered." (C.R.S. 22-9-106).  In addition, State Board rule (C.C.R. 5.01(D)(7)(c)) provides the relief from the required use of statewide summative assessment in teacher's evaluations by stating is must be used "if available".


Aligned with the primary goal of Educator Effectiveness to provide meaningful feedback that enables educators to continually grow as professionals, the following guidance is offered for inclusion of MSL/Os in educator evaluations.

  • Measuring Student Learning, a Step by Step Process - These steps detail a sample process of steps for identifying and determining the measures of student learning that may be included in a district’s educator evaluation system.

  • Provide an overview and orientation for all staff regarding educator evaluations for the 2021-22 school year and ensure that all staff are aware of what will be included in their evaluations.  A template orientation slide deck is available and your EE Regional Specialist can assist in customizing to specific district/BOCES needs.

  • Districts/BOCES using the Colorado Performance Management System (COPMS) in RANDA can utilize the tools within the system for building MSL/O templates as well as to leverage opportunities for collaborative input from educators in the creation of their own MSL/O measures.  Additional questions regarding COPMS/RANDA can be directed to

  • Remain consistent (when possible) to established timelines and processes for creating MSL/Os, conducting observations, providing feedback, and fostering open communication between observers/evaluators and educators.  The following is an overview of the process recommended by CDE:

Districts and BOCES are encouraged to explore the following considerations related to the effective use of MSL/Os in educator evaluations:
  • In general, how do you know your students are learning?
    • From whatever role you are in, e.g. teacher, building leader, or district leader, what indicators and/or measurements/data let you know that your students are learning?
    • Although SPF and DPF data is not available for inclusion in MSL/Os for the 2021-22 school year, it presents an opportunity to use other sources of data that may have previously been overlooked, and yet you are already using to provide you with information regarding students' learning.
    • How could you leverage existing/available data for use in MSL/Os?
  • How are the values of your district/BOCES reflected in the creation of the MSL/Os for your educators?
  • How are the needs/context of your district/BOCES taken into consideration when creating MSL/Os?
  • Which stakeholders are involved in decision-making related to educator evaluations?  (e.g. Advisory Personnel Performance Evaluation Council (1338 Committee), admin team(s), and educators.)
  • Key considerations when thinking about using CMAS data for 2021-22 MSL/Os:
    • The key factor when considering using the spring 2021 CMAS data or not is if the participation rate is a reflection of their typical participation in state assessments as well as a representation of their student population.
    • For a school/district that saw little to no change in participation rates from previous years and may not have experienced significant disruption to instruction last year, the CMAS data may be a solid piece of data to include in this year’s MSLs.
    • However, if the participation in CMAS this past spring does not align with past participation or student population, other measures would be better to use in this year’s MSLs.
    • Districts are encouraged to consider the variations across participation as well as distribution across districts/schools and grades related to the spring 2021 CMAS, and in the end, they may use that CMAS data within their MSL/Os, and they are not required to for the 2021-22 school year.

Additional support and information

The following are additional resources and supports to districts and BOCES related to MSL/Os:

  • For side-by-side support and added clarification and/or information contact your Educator Effectiveness Regional Specialist
  • Webinar MSL and MSOs for the 2021-22 School Year: Thinking Through District and School Measures
  • For insights and suggestions for maximizing MSL/Os within the Colorado Performance Management System (COMPS) in RANDA contact
  • Examples of local flexibilities and ideas for Maximizing Measures of Student Learning and Outcomes
  • Measures of Student Learning: Local Examples and Analysis from the Field - The purpose of this document is to highlight examples of specific measures used by districts/BOCES for the Measures of Student Learning (MSL) portion of educator evaluations. These examples were gathered from participants and utilized in a gallery walk activity for the January 2016 EE Leaders’ Retreat. The Educator Effectiveness Unit has compiled these examples, and the corresponding analysis, in response to feedback from the field that example measures of student learning would be beneficial as districts/BOCES continue to revisit and modify their MSL systems.
  • Colorado Education Initiative's Measures of Student Learning Report - The Colorado Education Initiative invited school districts to share information on their measures of student learning systems for inclusion in a statewide study of trends. Fifty-three Colorado districts, ranging from small rural to large urban, participated in the study. Guiding questions for measures of student learning are available in addition to the full report on trends and patterns in measures of student learning systems across the state.
  • Measures of Student Learning Tool - This Microsoft Excel tool was designed to help Colorado educators input the measures that will be used in their evaluations, see the impact of the weighting decisions for each measure, input the desired learning targets that are expected as a result of their instruction, and synthesize the evidence from multiple measures into one score that will be used in educator evaluation. It includes the requirements included in S.B. 10-191, the rationale for decisions made, and creates sample graphics for various groups of teachers.