Student Growth Goals: Final Revisions & Pilot Information
Thank You for Your Feedback
Thank you to the school leaders, district administrators, principal supervisors, and educational partners from across Washington who reviewed the proposed revisions to the Student Growth Goal components of the AWSP Leadership Framework.
Your thoughtful feedback strengthened this work. Following the statewide feedback period, the Student Growth Goal Workgroup reconvened to carefully review every comment received. The workgroup made additional revisions and refinements based on the feedback, resulting in the final language now available to school leaders across the state.
This collaborative process reflects AWSP’s commitment to developing resources alongside practitioners and ensuring the Leadership Framework continues to support meaningful leadership growth.
Where We Are Now
The revised Student Growth Goal language has been finalized.
The 2026–2027 school year will serve as a statewide pilot year, providing districts the opportunity to implement and become familiar with the revised language before it becomes the statewide standard.
Beginning with the 2027–2028 school year, the revised Student Growth Goal language will become the required language for principal and assistant principal evaluations throughout Washington.
At a Glance
- Status: Final revisions completed
- 2026–2027: Optional pilot year for interested districts
- 2027–2028: Required statewide implementation for all principal and assistant principal evaluations
Why the Student Growth Goals Were Revised
The revisions were designed to:
- Provide clearer expectations for school leaders and school leader supervisors
- Improve consistency across the three Student Growth Goal components.
- Better align with current leadership practice and the AWSP Leadership Framework.
- Support meaningful professional reflection and continuous improvement.
Interested in Piloting the Revised Student Growth Goals?
Districts are encouraged to participate in the 2026–2027 pilot year.
Participating districts will have the opportunity to:
- Become familiar with the revised Student Growth Goal language before statewide implementation.
- Support a smooth transition to the new language.
- Continue informing AWSP’s implementation supports and professional learning resources.
If your district is interested in participating in the pilot, please use the Pilot Interest button below or contact Jack Arend, Deputy Director, Association of Washington School Principals for additional information.
Compare Language Revisions
Click on the + to expand each section. To collapse the section, click on the x.
Component 3.5 | Provides evidence of student growth that results from the school improvement planning process:
Current Language
Components 3.5, 5.4, and 8.4 all reflect growth measures of student achievement, rather than principal actions. Component 3.5 is intended to analyze the growth of all or most of the students in the school which is an outgrowth of specific data analysis and the implementation of plans to improve student achievement, including the School Improvement Plan.
The range from Unsatisfactory to Distinguished is on a continuum from no improvement in student growth to significant improvement in student growth.
| Element | Unsatisfactory | Basic | Proficient | Distinguished |
| Growth in Student Learning | School improvement planning process results in no improvement in student academic growth. | School improvement planning process results in minimal improvement in student academic growth. | School improvement planning process results in measurable improvement in student academic growth. | School improvement planning process results in significant improvement in student academic growth. |
Proposed/Revised Language
Component 3.5 is intended to analyze the growth of all or most of the students in the school, which is an outgrowth of specific data analysis and the implementation of plans to improve student achievement, including the School Improvement Plan.
| Element | Unsatisfactory | Basic | Proficient | Distinguished |
| Growth in Student Learning | The school improvement planning process results in no or minimal improvement in student academic growth. | The school improvement planning process results in some improvement in student academic growth. | The school improvement planning process results in measurable improvement in academic growth including growth for some historically underserved student populations. | The school improvement planning process results in significant improvement in academic growth, in all/nearly all identified student groups, including growth for most historically underserved student populations. |
| Reflection | The leader does not provide evidence of taking responsibility for student growth and the connection to the school improvement planning process. | In reflection, the leader only considers the school improvement planning process generally. The reflection may be missing analysis of why students did or did not make progress. The leader has not identified clear next steps, or the identified next steps are uninformed by student progress and the school improvement planning process. | In reflection, the leader clearly describes the learning progress in relation to the school improvement planning process. The reflection includes analysis of why students did or did not make progress, and next steps for identified student groups. | In reflection, the leader clearly describes the learning progress in relation to the school improvement planning process. The reflection includes analysis of why students did or did not make progress, and next steps for identified student groups. The leader shares their school improvement planning systems, structures, and/or practices beyond their own building to support other instructional teams. |
Component 5.4 | Provides evidence of student growth of selected teachers.
Current Language
Components 3.5, 5.4, and 8.4 all reflect growth measures of student achievement, rather than principal actions. Component 5.4 is intended to analyze the growth of students assigned to a set of teachers that a principal identifies.
The range from Unsatisfactory to Distinguished is on a continuum from no improvement in student growth to significant improvement in student growth.
| Element | Unsatisfactory | Basic | Proficient | Distinguished |
| Growth in Student Learning | Multiple measures of student achievement of selected teachers show no academic growth. | Multiple measures of student achievement of selected teachers show minimal academic growth. | Multiple measures of student achievement of selected teachers show measurable academic growth. | Multiple measures of student achievement of selected teachers show significant academic growth. |
Proposed/Revised Language
Component 5.4 is intended to analyze the growth of students assigned to a set of teachers that a principal/assistant principal identifies.
| Element | Unsatisfactory | Basic | Proficient | Distinguished |
| Growth in Student Learning | Multiple measures of student achievement of selected teachers show no or minimal academic growth. | Multiple measures of student achievement of selected teachers show some academic growth. | Multiple measures of student achievement of selected teachers show measurable academic growth, including growth for some historically underserved student populations. | Multiple measures of student achievement of selected teachers show significant academic growth, including growth for most historically underserved populations. |
| Reflection | The school leader does not provide evidence of taking responsibility for analyzing the growth of students assigned to a selected group of teachers. | In reflection, the school leader provides a limited description of systems, structures, or practices they have used to support teachers to impact student achievement. | In reflection, the school leader clearly describes systems, structures, or practices they have used to support teachers to impact student achievement and describes how they will leverage that knowledge for a selected group of teachers. | In reflection, the school leader clearly describes systems, structures, or practices they have used to support teachers to impact student achievement and describes how they will leverage that knowledge for a selected group of teachers. The leader shares these systems, structures, and/or practices beyond their own building to support other instructional teams. |
Component 8.4 | Provides evidence of growth in student learning.
Current Language
As in Components 3.5 and 5.4, this component is a reflection of this criterion displayed in terms of student achievement. Component 8.4 is designed to analyze subsets of the student population that are identified for the purpose of closing opportunity and achievement gaps between these subsets and the student population as a whole.
The range from Unsatisfactory to Distinguished is on a continuum from no improvement in student growth to significant improvement in student growth.
| Element | Unsatisfactory | Basic | Proficient | Distinguished |
| Growth in Student Learning | Achievement data from multiple sources or data points show no evidence of student growth toward narrowing gaps of targeted student groups. | Achievement data from multiple sources or data points show minimum evidence of student growth toward narrowing gaps of targeted student groups. | Achievement data from multiple sources or data points show measurable evidence of student growth toward narrowing gaps of targeted student groups. | Achievement data from multiple sources or data points show consistent evidence of student growth toward narrowing gaps of targeted student groups. |
Proposed/Revised Language
Component 8.4 is designed to analyze subsets of the student population that are identified for the purpose of closing opportunity and achievement gaps between these subsets and the student population as a whole.
| Element | Unsatisfactory | Basic | Proficient | Distinguished |
| Growth in Student Learning | Achievement data from multiple sources or data points show no or minimal evidence of narrowing gaps between the student population as a whole and historically underserved student groups/subsets of students who are not demonstrating growth. | Achievement data from multiple sources or data points show some evidence of narrowing gaps between the student population as a whole and historically underserved student groups/subsets of students who are not demonstrating growth. | Achievement data from multiple sources or data points show measurable evidence of narrowing gaps between the student population as a whole and historically underserved student groups/subsets of students who are not demonstrating growth. | Achievement data from multiple sources or data points show significant evidence of narrowing gaps between the student population as a whole and historically underserved student groups/subsets of students who are not demonstrating growth. |
| Reflection | The school leader does not provide evidence of taking responsibility for analyzing the growth of historically underserved students/subsets of students not demonstrating growth compared to the student population as a whole. | In reflection, the school leader provides a limited description of systems, structures, or practices they have used to impact student achievement and close gaps for those who are historically underserved/subsets of students not demonstrating growth compared to the student population as a whole. | In reflection, the school leader clearly describes systems, structures, or practices they have used to impact student achievement and close gaps for those who are historically underserved/subsets of students not demonstrating growth compared to the student population as a whole. | In reflection, the school leader clearly describes systems, structures, or practices they have used to impact student achievement and close gaps for those who are historically underserved/subsets of students not demonstrating growth compared to the student population as a whole. The leader shares these systems, structures and/or practices beyond their own building to support other instructional teams. |
Pilot the Revised SGGs
Feedback
Thanks to those who provided feedback. The feedback window closed on April 3, 2026.
Pilot the SGGs
Interested in piloting? Reach out to learn more about the pilot process.
Questions
Do you have any questions about the process? Need help related to SGGs?
