|
|
IDR Assessment of Schoolwide Achievement in Looking at Student Work and Data
Implementation of Essential 2:
Relation to the Citywide Learning Standards
Explanation: The second essential element for Whole School Improvement is to look at student work and data in relation to the Citywide Learning Standards in order to identify student's needs, to improve assignments and instruction, to assess student progress, and to inform professional development.
The school's level of accomplishment in looking at student work and data will be assessed in the following indicators (areas):
1. Instructional Improvement The degree to which school-based staff (including the principal) are trained in LASW and interpreting assessment data and are effectively using both to improve instruction.
2. Impact on School Culture - The degree to which LASW sessions and student achievement data are used to identify the content and types of professional development and revision of curriculum and instructional practices.
3. Student & Parental Awareness/Communication The degree to which the criteria for assessing the students' work are used throughout the school, and understood by students and parents.
4. Achievement Equity: The degree to which student achievement has increased and the improvement is equitably distributed among racial/ethnic groups, gender, income levels, language proficiency of students, and disabilities.
Accomplishment in each indicator will be scored as follows:
|
Level 1 = Little or No Accomplishment |
Level 2 = Some Accomplishment |
|
Level 3 = Substantial Accomplishment |
Level 4 = Outstanding Accomplishment |
(cllick on each indicator below for more information)
Expectations for Planning in Looking at Student Work
- Planning includes agreed-upon research and standards-based protocols to be used consistently throughout the school to look at student work that have been agreed upon by the Principal/Headmaster and ILT.
- Planning includes protected structured time for ILTs, including special education, bilingual, and specialist teachers, to meet on a regular basis exclusively to look at student work.
.
Expectations for Implementation in Looking at Student Work
- Teachers regularly reflect on and improve instructional practices informed by on-going LASW documentation.
- Principal/Headmaster and all staff including poarents and community representatives are trained, participate in, and ensure adequate protected structured time for looking at student work regularly.
- Teachers facilitate LASW sessions regularly.
- ILT regularly looks at student work across all grades and subject areas("regularly" means 60 minutes or more that twice a month.
- Teachers look at a full range of student work including written work, standardized tests, and classroom based assessments to inform their instruction.
The following evidence must be included in each school's portfolio addressing their accomplishment in Essential 2:
- LASW sessions: Meeting times, scheduling, minutes, and agenda
- Samples of student work
- Documentation of work as impacting instruction (provides examples of what is meant here)
- Professional Development Plan and Budget
- Information to families and community
- Documentation of students meeting important goals and identifying specific strategies
- A description of the different ways in which students are assessed in literacy, writing and numeracy &emdash; include a description of formative assessment procedures as well
Instructional Improvement The degree to which school-based staff (including the principal) are trained in LASW and interpreting assessment data and are effectively using both to improve instruction.
Questions to Answer for the Visiting Team
The following are questions each school should be prepared to answer for the Visiting Teams addressing accomplishment of this area of Essential 2:
1. How does the school ensure that 90-minute blocks of LASW time are provided for its staff? 2. Who are the active participants in the LASW teams?
3. Are teachers from all programmatic areas on the ILT?
4. Does the ILT look at student work across grade levels and programmatic areas?
5. How many LASW teams are there in the school and how are they organized (grade level, content area, cluster, etc)?
6. To what degree are teachers from all programmatic areas part of the LASW teams with teachers on the same grade level?
7. To what degree is the principal/headmaster involved in the LASW sessions?
8. What are the LASW discussions like? Do the discussions focus on the scoring of the work? Has the conversation moved to instruction?
9. How do teachers look at student work during common planning time, in addition to designated LASW time?
10. How do the staff use multiple sources of data including both formative and summative assessments to plan and improve instruction?
11. What evidence is there that the school can use data in detailed and specific ways?
Outcome Rubrics for Ranking School Accomplishment
Visiting Teams will use the following rubric to assess the accomplishment in this area of Essential 2:
|
Accomplishment (Level 1) |
(Level 2) |
Accomplishment (Level 3) |
Accomplishment (Level 4) |
|
Few school-based staff are trained in LASW |
Although critical mass of school-based staff have been trained in LASW, few are effectively using LASW to improve instruction. |
Critical mass of school-based staff (including the principal) are trained in LASW and interpreting assessment data and are effectively using both to improve instruction. |
Almost all of the staff (including the principal) are trained in LASW and interpreting assessment data and are effectively using both to improve instruction |
Questions to Answer for the Visiting Team
The following are questions each school should be prepared to answer for the Visiting Teams addressing accomplishment of this area of Essential 2:
1. What evidence is there to show to how the data has informed instructional planning throughout the school? 2. What evidence is there that this plan is being implemented? In other words, has instruction changed as a result of the sessions?
3. In what ways have the school data been used as input to the allocation of resources in the school planning process?
4. In what ways if any, has the school linkede the analysis on student performance with the plan to improve student performance?
Outcome Rubrics for Ranking School Accomplishment
Visiting Teams will use the following rubric to assess the accomplishment in this area of Essential 2:
|
Accomplishment (Level 1) |
(Level 2) |
Accomplishment (Level 3) |
Accomplishment (Level 4) |
|
LASW sessions are conducted at the school but have not been used effectively to inform professional development for the staff and curriculum and instructional practices. |
LASW sessions are used to identify the content and types of some professional development for staff and revision of curriculum and instructional practices. |
LASW sessions and student achievement data are used to identify the content and types of professional development and revision of curriculum and instructional practices. |
There is a "seamless" use of both LASW sessions and student achievement data to identify the content and types of professional development and revision of curriculum and instructional practices. |
Questions to Answer for the Visiting Team
The following are questions each school should be prepared to answer for the Visiting Teams addressing accomplishment of this area of Essential 2:
1. To what degree do students understand the rubrics and use them to evaluate their own work? 2. To what extent has the school displayed student work in the classrooms and all the walls of corridors? Is the rubric displayed alongside with the work to show what criteria are used to judge the quality of student work and level of student performance?
3. How is student work displayed to show stages and development of the work or are only final products displayed?
4. To what degree do students get written feedback from teachers that enables them to improve their work?
5. To what extent is peer-editing work encouraged in the school?
6. To what degree do teachers hold individual conferences with students about their work?
Outcome Rubrics for Ranking School Accomplishment
Visiting Teams will use the following rubric to assess the accomplishment in this area of Essential 2:
|
Accomplishment (Level 1) |
(Level 2) |
Accomplishment (Level 3) |
Accomplishment (Level 4) |
|
Criteria for assessing students' work are used infrequently throughout the school, and the understanding by parents and students is generally vague. |
Criteria for assessing the students' work are used sporadically throughout the school, and relatively few parents and students understand the process |
Criteria for assessing the students' work are used consistently throughout the school, and generally understood by students and parents. |
Criteria for assessing the students' work are used consistently throughout the school, and well known to students and parents. |
Questions to Answer for the Visiting Team
The following are questions each school should be prepared to answer for the Visiting Teams addressing accomplishment of this area of Essential 2:
1. What is the evidence that performance gaps are increasing or decreasing, i.e., is there differential performance among different racial/ethnic groups, disability, and bilingual program language groups? 2. To what degree have the school staff members analyzed the data closely and are they clearly aware of the severity of the achievement gaps that exist?
3. What is the evidence that the school has a clear plan for monitoring progress toward reducing the achievement gaps?
4. What evidence is there that the performance gaps among racial/ethnic, disability, bilingual language and gender groups are decreasing over time?
5. Are there systems in place to ensure that racial/ethnic gaps are reduced or eliminated?
Outcome Rubrics for Ranking School Accomplishment
Visiting Teams will use the following rubric to assess the accomplishment in this area of Essential 2:
|
Accomplishment (Level 1) |
(Level 2) |
Accomplishment (Level 3) |
Accomplishment (Level 4) |
|
There is only minimal evidence of improved instruction from LASW and student data, but this has not resulted in clear student achievement increases and only slightly and the improvement, if any, is not equitably distributed among racial/ethnic groups, gender, income levels, language proficiency of students, and disabilities. |
As a result of improved instruction from LASW and student data, student achievement is increasing only slightly and the improvement is still not equitably distributed among racial/ethnic groups, gender, income levels, language proficiency of students, and disabilities. |
As a result of improved instruction from LASW and student data, student achievement is shown to increase and the improvement is equitably distributed among racial/ethnic groups, gender, income levels, language proficiency of students, and disabilities |
As a result of improved instruction from LASW and student data, student achievement is shown to increase significantly and the improvement is equitably distributed among racial/ethnic groups, gender, income levels, language proficiency of students, and disabilities |
Essential 3
