BACKGROUND The Laurel-Concord Public Schools started the school improvement process by surveying the staff during the 1991-92 school year. Using the A+chieving Excellence Survey, the team discovered the areas of strategic analysis, design, and empowerment, and revealed issues relating to staff concerns. Based on those concerns, the steering committee investigated and received training in using McREL tactics and questionnaire. Use of this particular format was consistent with the High Performance Learning Model and researched-based inquiry. The school improvement plan identified three areas of concentration which included: 1) Staff Relations, 2) Student Management, 3) Classroom Management. On November 22-23, 1992 an external visitation team conducted an on-site visit to review the school improvement plan and make recommendations about its effective implementation. The external visitation team consisted of the following members:
STAFF RELATIONS The questionnaire was administered to all certificated staff members at the start of the 1992-93 school year. Upon reviewing the results, the committee discovered and validated the concerns in the areas of cultural diversity, a positive and secure working environment, effective incentives for staff, team building, professionalism, staff development, peer coaching and sharing of staff expertise. Based on the identified concerns, the team developed an action plan and recommendations for the future. ACTION PLAN Based on the data collected, the committee identified eight areas of need. The writers of this report listed each area of concern and reported on what the committee was doing to address the perceived needs. 1.Awareness of and respect for cultural diversity:To address this concern, the committee decided to redesign the positive action committee, increase staff input into the decision making process, provide input for the annual school calendar and develop a check list for future decision making. Upon interviewing the steering committee and subcommittee chairs we discovered that discussions have occurred to reactivate the positive action committee. The staff is now providing input into facility usage and they have prepared a cultural diversity checklist for future decision making. The committee's best hopes would include a better understanding among the staff regarding cultural differences and a stronger awareness of what other departments and staff were doing. 2.A positive and secure working environment that promotes staff effectiveness: The committee addressed this area by identifying a need to increase public relations, staff and community participation in the HPL model, and encouraging community involvement in the schools. The committee also decided to look into the process of handling conflict. Members of the committee reported that they have increased public relations through open houses, use of the school newsletter, and the involvement of the partners in education parent group. The committee is addressing the issue of conflict by reviewing district policy and procedures. The committee's best hopes for this goal were to include more community members in the process and develop a greater level of community trust in the schools. 3.Effective incentives for staff: The committee addressed this area by prioritizing staff incentives, contacting other districts to identify other effective incentive plans and addressing incentives for non-certificated staff. The subcommittee chairs reported that at the present time the main incentive is an all-staff appreciation dinner given annually. The chairs also reported that from time to time the administration gave longevity plaques to employees who should have been recognized. The chairs also reported that informal recognition occurs on a regular basis. The committee's best hopes would include a system of monetary incentives, a system to reward educational achievement and excellence as long as consistent and fair, and greater awareness of the need for informal recognition. 4.Team building: The committee addressed this area by involving staff in the decision making process, providing training in the area of team building and identifying location for a K-12 staff workroom. The team also set a goal of increasing the number of K-12 meetings throughout the school year. The subcommittee chairs reported that staff are becoming more involved in decision making and are searching for training and materials in the area of team building. The chairs addressed their concerns regarding the joint staff room. They believe there is not total agreement on what the staff room should be. The committee's best hopes for this area include a more professional environment and unity throughout the staff. If a room for all the faculty is developed, they would like to have a phone and privacy for staff members. 5.Professionalism:The committee addressed this area by developing a plan to videotape staff meetings to demonstrate professional and nonprofessional behavior. The committee is also searching for ways to increase sensitivity and group participation among staff members. At the present time, the committee is starting to address this area and is planning to use best practices and research data to improve staff awareness. The committee's best hopes include a system to provide verbal, emotional and financial support to take reasonable risks. 6.Staff Development: The committee addressed this area by asking to have a voice in the selection of in-service topics, developing a process of following up on in-service sessions, and establishing self-directed sharing and in-service. The committee is developing a plan to evaluate the effectiveness of the current in-service training provided. The chairs stated that the present practice of in-service training is still directed by ESU offerings for the whole unit. Some staff sharing sessions are starting to occur and staff are providing some input for future in-service sessions. The best hopes for this area include the need to share with each other what was learned during the in-service and they would like opportunities both to observe teachers and to team teach. 7.Peer Coaching: The committee addressed this area by bringing about an awareness of the concept of peer coaching. The committee is locating materials on peer coaching and examining ways to incorporate peer coaching into the school day. At the present time, the committee's best hopes would include nurturing the staff to a point in which they would feel secure in asking for help from their peers. 8.Sharing of staff expertise: This area was established by identifying existing knowledge, skills and talents and establishing an expertise development committee to establish topical areas of expertise within the faculty. During our interviews, the writers did not get to address this area in detail with the committee. However, the committee members indicated the need to recognize that consultants and experts did not need to live at least 50 miles away. RECOMMENDATIONS Based upon our review of the documentation presented, observations, and interviews with staff, the following recommendations are offered: 1.The committee needs to survey the staff again to determine whether perceptions are that progress is being made in each of the eight areas. 2.The committee needs to celebrate their successes when they complete a task and share these successes with the whole staff. 3.The committee does not need to feel pressured to move on to other areas if they believe work is still needed in the eight goal areas identified. 4.The committee needs to reassess what they actually mean by a joint staff workroom. There seems to be some discrepancy regarding what is the purpose of the joint staff workroom. The writers would suggest that the committee look at creating a staff lounge in the secondary building similar to the elementary lounge. The writers would also suggest that a joint staff workroom would be beneficial if it were centrally located, accessible to all staff, contain K-12 professional library materials, contain a staff phone with privacy, and equipment such as a copy machine, computers and office supplies which would enhance collaboration among K-12 staff. 5.The writers would suggest that the steering committee, subcommittee chairs, administration, and board of education review the best hopes expressed and work towards implementation. STUDENT MANAGEMENT The Effective Schools Model, the High Performance Learning Model, and the Laurel-Concord Mission Statement all address the issue of learning climate in some fashion. The visitation team's observation is that the focus area of Student Management as presented in the Laurel-Concord report is a learning climate issue and worthy of investigation by the school improvement team. The Student Management Committee was able to identify a student management problem in areas of the school rather than the classroom, develop strategies to address the problem, and coordinate a total staff effort to implement these strategies. The visitation team believes the following feedback will be of value to the school improvement team: 1.The ability to identify a real problem within the school and to coordinate a total staff (elementary and secondary) effort to address the problem with a good measure of success is seen as a strength of the team's work and should be celebrated. 2.The ability to develop a teacher driven plan that allows the staff to focus on the issues of lack of consistency and lack of consequences in disciplinary matters at the school is seen as a strength of the team's efforts. The lack of consistency and lack of consequences issues appear to be in two areas: teacher - student and principal - teacher. The school improvement efforts are allowing for these issues to be addressed and resolved at this time. Future support and attention by the administration to these issues will be necessary to maintain a level of performance acceptable to the staff. 3.The present system of evaluation for this focus area has an objective data collection component but lacks an objective standard to measure success or failure. The committee needs to choose and define the levels of behavior that are acceptable. Measurement and comparison of the actual to the acceptable levels will define success/failure. 4.The area of student management may be viewed as an extension of classroom management and therefore, should use strategies, expectations, rules, and consequences from a research based behavioral model developed for such situations. (Example: The Boys Town Model) The successful work of the school improvement committee in the area of school management issues may allow efforts to move into instructional based issues in the very near future. The High Performance Learning Model provides several domains in the instructional arena for your consideration: 1. Basic skills and literacies 2.Problem solving 3.Creative thinking and expression 4.Higher order thinking skills 5.Life-long learning 6.Work-entry skills 7.Motivation/disposition to learn 8.Citizenship/social/democratic values and skills The working relationship of the staff members at Laurel-Concord appears to be especially positive at this time and a direct result of the success the staff members have experienced through the school improvement efforts. CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT Laurel-Concord Public Schools have identified classroom management as an area of investigation in their school improvement plan. They have selected the High Performance Learning Model which has integral parts of its model, both research based practices/interventions and data driven issues and solutions. Research Process: The committee used a "Beginning the School Year Checklist" from the Mid-Continent Regional Educational Laboratory (McREL) to create a survey instrument. The checklist identified over eighty teacher routines and was used as a probe to see if teachers had procedures for each of the routines. The routines have research to support their use. A reference to this research would be helpful. It would also be helpful if additional information indicated how these routines would facilitate among students the learning desired in order to achieve Laurel-Concord's mission statement. Data Collection Process: The survey was sent to all faculty to be completed. The data collected was inadequate and the results were inconclusive. A second survey was completed and the data was used to identify five areas of concern. The committee expressed concern about the difficulty to collect meaningful data from the entire faculty. The committee expressed a very strong commitment for continual improvement of classroom management for the benefit of all students. Discussion among the committee members centered on the need to identify graduation outcomes for students at Laurel-Concord. The identification of these outcomes would allow the faculty to use them to make decisions in their everyday classroom management. The identification of these outcomes would also enable the faculty to begin discussion about classroom management and instructional issues. This discussion could move toward identification of best management and instructional practices to facilitate students' achievement of identified outcomes. Once these best practices are identified, the entire faculty will be able to choose what practices could be used in their classrooms, try them, and discuss their results. Areas of Need: Classroom interruptions in the high school and elementary school was one area of concern identified. The faculty and administration have gone through a process of identifying possible solutions and implementing procedures to reduce interruptions. Committee members and administrators have commented favorably on the openness of communication of all involved to reduce this problem. Each strategy for implementation was discussed with committee members and administrators. They expressed satisfaction with the results of their implementation. They also commented about on-going discussions to maintain a reduction of interruptions. Attendance and admit slips in the high school was another area of concern identified. The faculty and administration also went through a process of identifying possible solutions and implementing procedures to address this area of concern. Committee members and administrators worked to reduce this problem. Each strategy for implementation was discussed with committee members and administrators. They expressed satisfaction with this result, also. Respect for property, student courtesy, and student responsibility were areas of concern which were also identified. Committee members and administrators discussed the difficulty in identifying what different people meant by respect, courtesy, and responsibility. The committee suggested that a definition be written for each of these words and then use the definition to assess if there is a concern according to this definition. DISCUSSION The External Team believes that the Laurel-Concord mission statement should be the driving force for change. The decisions which are made for improvement of classroom management should be determined by how an individual decision would enable students to achieve the outcomes described by the Laurel-Concord Mission Statement. Research on best practices of classroom management to facilitate student achievement of these outcomes should be found. The research found will help support the best practices which teachers in Laurel-Concord are currently using, identify other possible practices, and enhance the dialog among the faculty about classroom management and how to continue to create the best possible environment for students to achieve the outcomes. This work can be done with input from community members and from external resource people. Community members can provide information on their perceptions of the school and can give support to the decisions which are being made. External resource people can be sought from other school districts, the state department, ESU, McREL, and state colleges. POSTSCRIPT The visitation team would like to commend all those who have worked so hard on the school improvement activities for the Laurel-Concord District. Through looking at the documentation of the community's efforts, and through conversations with many of the school's constituents, it is apparent to the visitation team members that the school community has been struggling both to understand the requirements of the new school improvement processes and to do the very best job of which they are capable to improve the school. The team applauds what you have accomplished. Yet, the team would be remiss if they failed to bring some other observations to the attention of the board, administration, and community leaders. It is clear that the district has not yet reached that point in the school improvement process where the focus is on the establishment of clear criteria for school success expressed in terms of improvement of student performances. For example, what specific improvement in student performance(s) is to be expected by the establishment of a centralized teachers' workroom/lounge available to all the faculty? Granted, it might be helpful for teacher morale; it might be helpful in providing the opportunity for more teacher communication; it might be helpful in providing the opportunity for clearer articulation of K-12 learning experiences among teachers; it might be helpful for a variety of reasons to establish a centralized teacher workroom. All of these intended "outcomes" are still in the domain of improvement of the delivery system; a better articulated, more consistent, more integrated curriculum; or a happier, more productive group of teachers. All well and good. Granted, the intent of this as in most school improvement activities is probably that students will ultimately benefit. But how do the students directly benefit? How are the intervention strategies you planned, and will plan, going to improve the actual performance of students? How do you know that? Is it based upon research findings or some unproven theory? Will the students, in fact, learn more, learn better, develop additional skills, become more sensitive, more alert, more initiating, more self-directing, more civic-minded, etc., etc. One of the essential elements of the new school improvement process is that all, or at least the majority, of the recommendations for intervention, need to be "tied" to improvement in student outcomes or student performances. Does this mean that one could not include some aspect of staff development as an intervention strategy? No, but it does require the school to clearly indicate what specific improvement in student performance is anticipated by the staff development activities. For example, if you discovered that your students do not work well together in small groups (by some type of assessment process/instrument), and you have established that skill as one of the desirable outcomes for your students, then you might choose to have as a focus of staff development for your district the topic of how do teachers facilitate the development of this skill. That means that district would no longer be choosing topics for staff development simply because it's "what is hot," or "what is current" or simply "what is being offered at the ESU, " but they would be choosing such activities based upon a particularly identified need at their school. A well developed intervention strategy will indicate how long the teacher training component will take, when direct influences or interventions in the classroom are to be implemented, when results in terms of improvement in student performances are to be expected, and how they are to be measured, reported and addressed. This brings us to the second comment about the new process for school improvement. A particular weakness of the former school improvement process was all to often the efforts of school districts were directed to the fulfillment of someone's whim or very subjective needs. A requirement of this process is that needs are genuine as established by at least two criteria: research can show a reasonable connection between the recommended changes or strategies for implementation and actual improvement of student performances; and the identified need must be validated by the collection, disaggregation and analysis of data. A genuine need therefore is one that was identified by the collection of actual data and not merely hunches, feelings, intuitions, or whatever data that is as "hard" as the particular problem permits it to be; and generally data that will permit assessment in both a "pre" and "post" mode so that one is able to ascertain whether or not the interventions have indeed worked and students have benefited. The visitation team will be happy to look at any subsequent plans and to return at such time as the steering committee feels it would be helpful to them. Best wishes for continued success. Jack Gilsdorf, Team Chair MISSION STATEMENT Following the visitation, a survey was given to administration and certified staff on December 9, 1992, which included a description of a mission statement and a sample one from McREL. Staff members were given the opportunity to suggest changes in the sample statement or write a totally new one. They were also asked if they were interested in serving on a committee to write the mission statement. A committee was then formed from these volunteers. The Mission Statement Committee began by making a checklist of important indicators to cross-check items included in the statement. The committee met several times during the next five months with large and small groups to reach consensus of the staff and community. The finalized statement was presented to the faculty on May 26, 1993, and later adopted by the Laurel-Concord Board of Education on June 14, 1993. OUR MISSION "ALL WILL LEARN" Purpose: To educate and challenge all students academically, socially, physically, and emotionally by working with families and community to provide a safe, nurturing environment for learning. Students will experience a sense of community within the school and acquire a solid foundation essential for achieving individual success and making positive contributions to society. This foundation includes: • Being responsible, flexible, and accountable for learning as a life-long skill • Acquiring skills in and an appreciation of the arts and sciences • Exploring and developing vocational and/or career opportunities • Displaying attitudes and actions that exhibit a sense of care, health and respect for self and others and the environment • Acquiring communication skills and recognizing differences in human relations and other cultures •Demonstrating responsible local and national citizenship and global responsibilities DEVELOPMENT OF COMMITTEES Following the completion of the Mission Statement, the certified staff completed a survey to prioritize the eight identified concerns. These concerns were then divided into two major K-12 categories, 1) School Climate and, 2) Curriculum. In the area of school climate, the following items received the highest priority: 1) Student Management, 2) Classroom Management, 3) Staff Relations. Curriculum Integration and Development of Outcome Based Education were identified as areas of greatest concern in the area of curriculum development. Below is a summary of the committees' activities for the 1993-94 and 1994-95 school years. SCHOOL CLIMATE: Student Management: The student management committee directed their attention to increase appropriate and acceptable student behavior outside of the classroom. The areas identified of greatest concern included hallways, bathrooms, before and after school, pep rallies & assemblies, and secondary lunchroom. A list of expectations and timelines were indentified for each area, strategies and resources developed, and persons designated as responsible for carrying out expectations. Classroom Management: The areas identified in the classroom management included reducing classroom interruptions (K-12), student courtesy (K-6), student responsibility (K-6), respect for property (K-6), and attendance/admit slips (7-12). The committee again developed objectives, strategies, and timelines, identified resources and personnel responsible for carrying out expectations. Staff Relations: The staff relations committee set their goal to enhance climate for students by improving staff relations. Awareness of and respect for cultural diversity, promotion of a positive and secure working environment, elective incentives for staff, team building, professionalism, staff development, peer coaching and sharing of staff expertise headed the list of identified needs. The committee also completed the process of identifying objectives and strategies, set timelines, and identified resources and personnel responsible. CURRICULUM: The curriculum committee conducted a review and study of the concerns identified in the area of curriculum. These concerns centered around curriculum integration and defining expectations/outcomes for students. These concerns included increased parent/community participation, identification of outcomes, assessments, data collection, and reporting. Below is a brief summary of the action plans and timelines established by the curriculum committees. Integration: The committee compared ideal and present practices of curriculum integration. In conjunction with the technology advisory board, they developed timelines and expectations for curriculum and technology integration. Outcomes Based Education: Through study and discussion, the staff agreed on the importance of developing clearly identified, relevant expectations for students. Over the course of the next two years, the staff reviewed curriculum and developed curriculum guides/course level/grade level expectations (GLE's/CLE's) for all courses. SHIFT IN SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES In August of 1995, with a change of administration, the staff was involved in a comprehensive review of the school improvement plan. During the reviews, each committee was asked to report on their committee's progress and their perception of how the process was facilitating increased student achievement. On the positive side, the staff commented on their appreciation for the process of shared decision making responsibilities. They demonstrated a high level of commitment and satisfaction in the writing and completion of the GLE's and CLE's in all classes. It was evident that the process had made an impact on this staff and was the driving force behind their commitment to improving student achievement through the HPL Model. Through the process of interviewing the staff and committees, several common concerns and shared frustrations were expressed. The major concerns identified included: inconsistencies in support of committee recommendations; increased time commitments; lack of direction; lack of ownership by staff, administration, and board of education; lack of data collection, assessment, and reporting procedures which they believed impacted the learning environment and staff morale. In addition to the group and individual discussions, the steering committee developed several assessment instruments to gather information, improve communication, and provide clarity and direction to the school improvement process. The following value statements precipitated the shift in the school improvement process: 1.Professional development and modeling of a commitment to lifelong learning 2.Parents/community involvement is an important factor in student achievement 3.Alignment of curriculum, assessment identification and accountability are critical to increased student achievement 4.Trust and ownership are developed through open communication processes 5.Effective staff development and planning are vital to overall system performance 6.Fairness differs from treating all the same |