School Activities To Which The External Team Was Requested To Direct Comments
1. The
School's Instructional Activities
2. The School's Assessment Activities
3. The School's Communication Activities
4. The School's Overall Improvement Process
Improvement of Instruction
Bee
Randolph
Kathy
Muller
Summary/Review of Processes/Actions Taken:
The school has been involved with continuing staff
development, implementation, and monitoring of HPL Strategies.
The school has completed K-12 Reading/Language Arts Assessments that are aligned
with their Standards (Summer 2000)
The school provided Six-Trait Evaluator Training for teachers in February of
2001. Student papers were scored and evaluated in February and March of 2001.
Language Arts Portfolios were established.
The school has been involved in continuing training and utilization of HAL (High
Ability Learner) Plan to improve reading instruction
The school purchased Test-Mate Clarity from Terra Nova to help interpret achievement
data for State reporting
The school is working toward tracking mastery of standards through Power-school.
Commendations
On Accomplishments:
It is apparent that all involved parties within the Laurel School District
really work very hard to provide the best possible education for students as
well as work to improve instructional aspects of their entire program.
A variety of staff in-services have been held with the purpose of improving
instruction. The school is to be highly commended for these efforts.
APL Instructional In-services appear to have been highly effective as the training
has been positively accepted and implemented by staff and observed and evaluated
by the administration.
AR Reading Data provides very strong documentation and support for staff regarding
reading progress of students.
Plans are in place to evaluate curriculum annually.
Further Considerations:
1. Continue to conduct annual evaluations of your curriculum (as planned)
and make appropriate changes as necessary and appropriate to meet the needs
of your particular students.
2. Use all assessment results to guide instruction. It may be helpful for your
Assessment Committee and Instructional Committee members to meet after test
results are received to discuss results to be shared with all teachers. Some
type of systematic process to achieve this should be established.
3. Areas of strength could be celebrated and plans made to address areas where
improvement may be needed. In time, you may wish to consider using teacher-made
tests to help measure student growth as these tests most closely match instruction.
4. Continue to develop writing portfolios including rubrics as student guides
to writing, as well as for teacher/student evaluation purposes and guides to
focus future instruction. Consider charting these writing results to ensure
growth over time.
5. Continue to seek the input of staff volunteers as well as the Instructional
Committee regarding your on-line lesson plan project.
Summary/Review Of Processes/Actions Taken:
The Action Plan for the Reading & Language Arts Assessment includes:
· Strategies
· Classroom Management Systems
· Norm-Referenced and Criterion Referenced Testing
· Reading Renaissance
· Six Trait Writing Program
Commendations On Accomplishments:
1. The strategies chosen (Classroom Management Systems, Norm-Referenced
and Criterion- Referenced Testing, Reading Renaissance, Six-Trait Writing Program)
to implement the "Reading and Language Arts Assessment Plan" fully cover the
action plan.
2. The school district has a long-term vision that showcases assessment in its
ongoing improvement process.
3. Only one action plan was chosen. This allows the school district to ooncentrate
efforts in achieving this action plan.
4. The co-chairpersons for Assessment have been trained are very well versed
in the process.
Further Considerations
1. Consider expanding the assessment beyond Norm Referenced Tests (NRT).
Possibly a bank of Criterion Referenced Test (CRT) questions or Performance
Based Assessments to cross- validate the NRTs which are currently being used.
(I believe it is still the responsibility of the teacher the assess their students
with CRTs and use NRTs as a check to see if the standard has been met.)
2. Great job by the Board, administration, teaching staff, and support staff.
Keep up the good work.
Commendations
On Accomplishments:
1. The attitude towards school improvement is positive and productive. It
is obvious that Laurel- Concord took the recommendations from our last visit
seriously and worked to address these positively.
2. The school improvement process is a shared venture by the Board of Education,
administration, staff, and community. Ownership in the success or failure of
school improvement appears to be shared by all of the stakeholders.
3. The process is focused, but flexible enough to address issues as they arise.
(Example: the steering committee had the ability to address school safety and
develop a school safety plan and emergency packet.)
4. The underlying target of all school improvement effort is increased student
achievement.
5. A program with multi-assessments is in place. The major purpose driving the
assessment program is enhancement of student leaming through improved instruction.
Further Considerations
1. Using quartiles in the assessment process seems to work well when percentiles
are used. When the switch is made to percent, the quartile process breaks down.
The assessment committee may wish to revisit cut-scores that call for 25%, 50%
and 75% to define quartiles.
2. The use of the CMS software program should be an improvement in the assessment
of reading- speaking-listening standards as required by the state. To follow
through and put the CMS program in place in the classrooms will enhance this
piece of the assessment program.
3. The organization of the school's work into Instruction, Assessment, and Communication
committees seems to be effective and productive. The success with on-line communication
is outstanding. The work that is unfolding with the lesson plan project is also
exceptional. Keep up your efforts and continue to provide release time to help
staff manage the workload.
Communications
Committee
Jesse
Wolf
Summary/Review
Of Processes/Actions Taken:
I have enjoyed my visits to Laurel-Concord School. It seems to me that
they approach education and the problems that arise from a pragmatic point
of view. They simply want to know what works and how they can all have a part
or role in the way their school is run. It is always invigorating for me to
see what they have accomplished since our last visit.
I am also impressed because I believe they believe in site-based decision-making.
I do not believe this means they let anyone be a slacker when it comes to
their education system. Yet, they also embrace the person(s) with vision.
It has become a rather mutual admiration society. They are not afraid to expect
a lot from everyone (administrators, teachers, students, parents, board or
education members, or people of the community), and they dole out the praise
and thanks whenever someone goes beyond the initial expectations.
They obviously have committed themselves to involving technology in their
school improvement process. They have invested a lot of money and trained
a lot of people to use the technology. Then they tie their school improvement
process in to the increased use of that technology.
They put everything on their server and open it to public inspection. In fact,
it goes beyond public inspection. They basically open it to worldwide inspection.
This is really a healthy sign. They know what they want to achieve and they
go after it. Then they are willing to accept viewing from both the inside
and the outside, and (I suspect) they are willing to move forward if someone
else has a better idea.
They are also not afraid to share their work with others. It is really a very
unselfish approach to doing things. If it can be helpful to someone else,
then so be it.
Commendations On Accomplishments
1. I had the opportunity to meet with the "Communication" committee chairs.
They were very positive and wanted to be the best at communicating as possible.
The baseline data they have collected seems reasonable and gives them some
good insight into where they can go from here. Some of their indicators ranked
a little low on surveys, but they were trying to deal with those concerns.
It is a very open process.
2. Their approach is more of, "How can we solve these problems?" rather than,
"How can we explain the low rankings?" They also take a, "Why not?" approach
to suggestions for solving concerns rather than a defeatist attitude.
Further
Considerations
1. The school needs to concentrate some efforts into dealing with the
concerns expressed on their ratings of indicators, especially among the staff.
I believe the committee is concerned about some of the lower rankings.
2. Apparently some staff members require additional information to get them
on board with the processes. I do not believe this means falling into a lock
step approach to educational reform.
3. The "Laurel System" seems to work very well for them. Being from a neighboring
community, I know that the majority of their patrons are appreciative of what
they have accomplished. The tie-ins and buy-ins with the community are very
strong.
4. The next step from my perspective is to continue what they are doing. Keep
seeking input from all members of the community and keep trying to bring everyone
up to speed. Sometimes it's easy for the visionaries to get way out front,
but you need to allow the regular members the opportunity to catch up. If
there are people who have not bought into the approach, give them time to
express their concerns and make suggestions for change. The school has come
too far to let small matters bankrupt the whole system.
5. I want to commend the Laurel community, administrators, staff, patrons,
and students for being such a good example of positive expectations. I think
their system works for them because they try not to leave anyone out of the
process. The school has been a good role model for many of the rest of us
who operate under different visions of school improvement.
Communications
Committee
Dr.
Brad Conner
Summary/Review Of Processes/Actions Taken:
The Communication Co-Chairs provided an overview of the ACTION PLAN developed
for improvement of school-community communication. Seven individual strategies
were outlined in this Action Plan. Discussion with the Co-Chairs of this subcommittee
focused on the areas of the School Homepage, Power-School software, parent
access to school facilities and school information and communication channels
among the school staff, administrators, board members and community members.
A rating scale was also shared in which the school staff had conducted a self-rating
of their progress toward achievement of the NCA goal in the area of Communication,
using a 4-point matrix.
Commendations On Accomplishments
Scores on the rating scale were generally quite high, reflecting a high
level of satisfaction with goal achievement among the staff. Comments from
staff members, and other evidence of success shared with the NCA External
Visitation Team during this visit consistently confirmed the high marks being
represented on this self-rating scale. Numerous activities and procedures
are in place to encourage open communication among all parties in the district
and it appears that parents and staff are taking advantage of these opportunities
to interact, express concerns, and ask pertinent questions about the academic
progress of Laurel-Concord students.
Four areas on
the rating scale reflected the possibilfty of a need to improve.. - However,
neither the external team members conducting the interview nor the two cochairpersons
could pinpoint the reasons that these areas might have been rated lower than
the others. Two areas seemed to deal with how the district was using data
to accomplish its goal:
1.) Data Collection
2.) Analysis and Use of Profile Data.
It was suggested that further discussion with staff might be helpful to clarify
why these areas were rated low. It is possible that staff and parent survey
data may be examined more closely to determine if areas of weakness could
be identified. Continued monitoring of the access and frequency of use of
both Power School and the district's Homepage may also be helpful. It may
be too early to collect enough data regarding parent and community use, but
in time this data will become more valuable in confirming the use of these
methods of communication. On first glance, it would appear that these communication
methods are being received well by staff and parents. This needs to be confirmed.
As data becomes more available, efforts need to focus on using this information
to pinpoint areas where communication channels can be improved. Simply knowing
the number of times parents are accessing the information is only the first
step in determining how to make the communication system even better.
3.) Understanding of Process and Commitment
4.) Goal Selection and Rationale
Again, staff and reviewers were a bit puzzled as to why these were not rated
higher. The cochairs indicated that some staff might still be confused about
where the whole NCA School Improvement process is headed. However, when questioned
about the district's leadership, ability of staff to accept the task, make
a commitment and share in the vision, it became clear that these components
were very strong. Staff were highly complimentary of the work of their superintendent
and the leadership displayed by their administrators. They also expressed
a belief that their school board was very supportive of the process, has been
willing to allocate necessary funds and release time for staff training and
is willing to take some risks in allowing their staff to determine the future
directions for school improvement activities.
While the self-rating scores would suggest some continued areas needing improvement,
the amount of effort and involvement among staff being shown by this district
toward open communication is commendable. Staff comments seem to confirm a
high level of trust and respect for the leadership being shown in the district
and a commitment to keeping lines of communication open at all levels. Their
goals to continue to increase parental access to student information support
this level of trust and honest desire to work as a partner with parents to
help their children improve.
Further Considerations
1. Overall, the steps being taken in the Action Plan to improve communication
appear to be appropriate and seem to be right on schedule toward success.
Distrio't staff should be commended for their efforts to open the doors of
their school in nearly every way possible to their community.
2. Continued review and clarification to staff of the purpose and ultimate
goal in mind for this Target Area may be helpful, as well as the path being
forged to reach that goal.
3. As additional data becomes available to quantify the use of the communication
methods being made available, this data should be carefully analyzed in order
to more precisely target the needs of the community, staff, students and parents
in keeping everyone on the same page toward success. Once done, it is quite
likely that other areas of improvement will become a greater concern and both
the school staff and community members can feel secure that a positive, effective
system of mutual trust, respect and communication is in place.
School
Improvement Process
Dr.
Jack Gilsdorf
Summary/Review Of Processes/Actions Taken:
Brief History for the North Central Association Review: In the early to
mid 1990's LaurelConcord was one of the first school districts in the State
of Nebraska to engage in pursuit of the HPL (High-Performance Learning) designation
that was then being promoted by the Department of Education. This three-sided
model (an equilateral triangle) was focused on three dimensions of schooling:
equity, quality learning, and accountability. Schools were encouraged to do
a selfanalysis and to begin efforts on any side of the triangle on any issues
of local concern, but to recognize that all three aspects needed to be considered
in the planning and implementation of the school improvement process. The messages
then given schools were that the process of school improvement was continuous,
that schools could change their goals as they accomplished them by their own
measures and their own judgments, and then schools could move on to other goals.
External teams would validate the school's efforts through their periodic visitations.
At that time Laurel-Concord chose to focus on three goals: improvement of
staff relations, student management issues, and classroom management issues.
At the time of the last external team visit in April of 1999, the school had
changed its goals to focus on improving instruction, development of an assessment
system that would inform curricular and instructional decision-making, and immovement
of staff-teacher-student communications. At this time the North Central
Association was strongly encouraging schools to select at least one goal that
focused on improvement of student performance. At the same time, the Department
of Education was forecasting implementation of the STARS (School-based Teacher-
led Assessment and Reporting System) Accountability System and encouraging school
districts to adopt state standards, do curricular alignment with state standards,
and to develop student assessments for both formative and surnmative purposes.
The formative purpose was to guide curricular and instructional decision-making
by teachers and principals throughout the year; the surnmative purpose was to
provide documentation at least once a year to the local community and the state
that student achievement was meeting state content standards and local achievement
standards.
Despite these divergent external pressures and requirements (should schools
focus school improvement activities on student outcomes or system improvement?)
the leadership of the Laurel- Concord schools has maintained a consistent and
steady course moving toward a most appropriate and long-range visionary goal:
the development of an information "system" that will inform all decision-makers
(students, teachers, parents, administrators, board of education, and community)
of what each needs to know in a timely and appropriate manner so as to enhance
the probability of the decisions they make based on that infon-nation being
as efficacious as possible in bringing about improved school performance directed
to enhanced student perfonnance. The goals articulated in 1999, however,
remained 'hiput" goals as defined by the North Central Association school-improvement
process or "management goals" as defined by the state accreditation process.
In the
intervening years, the North Central Association has moved to requiring its
schools to
have at least one "student outcome" goal. Further, the Association is moving
toward the time in
the near future when its schools will be required to show improvement in at
least one of two
areas:
1) either improvement in developing its capacities as measured pre and post
by the
Capacities Assessment Instrument
2) or improvement in actual student performance in some selected area.
In either case, the schools will be asked to demonstrate their improvement by
providing "growth scores." The growth scores will be documented by showing "baseline"
data at the onset or in the early phases of the school improvement cycle and
comparing those "pre-intervention" scores with "summative" or end-of-cycle data
on identical measures. This should provide schools with a means to evaluate
the strength and success of the interventions or the changes teachers have made
in what or how students have been taught.
Current Status of the School Improvement Process
For the current five-year (1999-2004) improvement cycle, the Laurel-Concord
Schools have chosen new goals that meet the criteria of the North Central Association
for school improvement goals. These goals are:
1. All students will improve in reading.
2. All students will improve in writing and language arts.
The school has also completed the following:
I . The school currently has base-line data on multiple measures in each of
those two areas at multiple grade levels.
2. The school has trained its teachers in a variety of new instructional methods.
3. The school has purchased and put in place software packages that permit extensive
documentation of student achievement throughout the year and timely feedback
to students and teachers of what efforts are still needed to be successful.
4. The software program permits the school to track which daily lessons are
aligned with which of the state standards, so time on task and identification
of instructional strategies used can be linked with student achievement results.
5. Further, the information system permits teachers and parents to have daily
communication on the performance of students and expectations for what needs
to be done (e.g. homework assigm-nents) either via computer or telephone messages.
6. The information system in place is extensive and complete, and is even capable
of monitoring how often it is utilized and by whom.
Commendations On Accomplishments
1. The school information system that has been developed and put into place
is exemplary. It provides for "virtually" every element of the schooling process.
It provides a framework for documentation of all that occurs. The author knows
of numerous schools that have one or more of the elements of the Laurel-Concord
system, but no other Nebraska school that currently has such a complete system.
The schools' system provides a framework to support research, self-improvement
of staff and students, documentation for legal issues that might arise, accountability
to students, parents, the local community and the state. When it is fully
implemented it should provide the structure to give feedback to teachers
and students that can enable them both to improve their performances. Teachers
should be able to teach better and students should be able to learn better.
2. A unified and integrated model of instructional practice has been put into
place. Only time will tell to what extent all teachers will fully internalize
and utilize these instructional methods and strategies. However, it gives the
school a common vocabulary, sets common expectations, and provides the basis
for systematic analysis of practice that can focus on improvement.
3. Providing support personnel both to input data for teachers and to facilitate
communications among the various audiences is exemplary. It does not solve all
the problems of this being a time-intensive process for teachers, but it helps.
After the initial stages of development, with practice, both input and extraction
of useful data should promise to be easier, but it will never be easy.
4. Both the administration and the Board of Education should be complemented
for having a vision of what they could build and the tenacity to stick to their
vision. This is exemplary leadership. None of this "systems" investment has
a guarantee of direct payoff in terms of improved student achievement or improved
teacher performance. However, once it is fully developed and implemented it
promises to be a great support to teachers, students and parents in raising
the capacity and improving the odds for improved performance of all students.
It is a tribute to their belief in teachers and students that given the proper
support they can be more productive and successful.
5. What is being built is also a tribute to the dedication and hard work of
the LaurelConcord teachers and support staff. It is also a tribute to their
courage and professional dedication to be willing to become more transparent
and accountable to virtually everyone. Few schools would attempt what Laurel-Concord
has begun. The school has become a model district for the rest of the state
in demonstrating how it can work.
Further Considerations
I . Like a new and improved model airplane that still needs a talented and
skillful pilot to get maximum results in terms of performance, the school information
system presents only the possibility of higher performance. The school has built
a "system" that can communicate among its many parts, quickly and effectively.
However, if it is not utilized or under-utilized, or if it is utilized improperly,
or if it results in miscommunication, it can ultimately be no more successful
than untimely communication or no communication at all.
2. The school information system should be able to more clearly indicate where
problems lie. However, by itself, the system can't tell the school where solutions
lie. Teachers who have taught a unit, assessed student progress and received
quick and timely feedback only to discover that some of the students have not
learned appropriately will still need to discover how they can more effectively
re-teach those students. Both the North Central Association and the State Department
of Education are working on developing links to assist schools in finding effective
alternatives to any unsuccessful current practice.
3. In general, the school appears to have internalized well the various phases
of the NCA school improvement process, to have chosen an effective steering
committee, to have established other appropriate standing committees, to have
established the necessary timelines and assigned responsibilities, and to be
well on its way to implementation of its plans. Now there is the continuing
need to "stay the course."
4. The school is reminded that it is to have completed the NCA Capacities Assessment
early during the current five year cycle and will be asked to complete it again
prior to the visit by the External Team during the fifth or reporting year of
the cycle. While it is a decision of the school as to who all is involved in
completing the Capacities Assessment, it is generally recommended that in schools
the size of Laurel-Concord all of the teachers should be involved and an average
of their perceptions be entered as the school scores on each of the variables.
5. The school is reminded that the North Central State Committee has requested
that schools complete their Report of Results by the fall of their fifth year
(generally reporting student achievement data of the previous spring) and have
the external team visit completed before Christmas in the fall of the fifth
year and the report of the external team to the state offices by February I
of that school year. This earlier schedule is required because the external
team reports need to be reviewed by the State Committee in March of each year
prior to taking them to Chicago for review by the Commission in April of that
reporting year.
This may be perceived as speeding up the reporting cycle by many NCA schools
that assumed they would be reporting to the Commission the "end of year student
performance data" of the fifth year of the cycle. It really means that few schools
will likely have had three whole years of implementation of any new interventions
or strategies prior to completion of their first reporting cycle. Should schools
be dissatisfied with their progress and their report of results as that time,
they have the option to maintain the same goal or goals for the next cycle of
school improvement.