quality review rubric by robert raymond

Quality Review Criteria Rubric 2008-2009 Quality Statement 1 Indicators

Underdeveloped with Proficient Features (UPF)*

Proficient • School leaders and faculty in ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject to strategically synthesize and analyze a range of data (attendance, summative and formative assessments, anecdotal, student work and enrichment data) several times a year to create a picture of the individual student’s strengths and areas of needs.

Well-Developed • School leaders and faculty in all core subjects strategically and consistently (at least monthly or at end each unit) analyze a wide-range of data (attendance, summative and formative assessments, anecdotal, student work and enrichment data) to create a picture of the individual student’s strengths and areas of needs.

1.1 Collect and analyze actionable information, including assessment results and attendance data, to provide a complete view of the learning outcomes and needs of individual students and groupings of students

• School leaders and faculty in ELA and math analyze minimal data once during the year to create a picture of the individual student’s areas of needs.

1.2 Focus analysis on the learning outcomes and needs of all student subgroups

• School leaders and faculty identified 1 or 2 sub-groups represented in the student population to address their needs in ELA and math.

• School leaders and faculty identified student subgroups, special education, English language learners and gender to address their needs in ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject.

• School leaders and faculty develop a systemic way to identify and address the needs of all sub-groups using a range of data including core subjects and other information (attendance, summative and formative assessments, anecdotal, student work and enrichment data).

1.3 Engage in an open exchange of information with students and families regarding students’ learning needs and outcomes, including assessment results and attendance data

• School leaders and faculty provide students and families with feedback about the student’s progress annually.

• School leaders and faculty provide students and families with feedback about student’s progress (at the end of each marking period) that identifies their next short-term goal.

• School leaders and faculty engage students and families in reciprocal and ongoing discussions regarding student progress, including learning needs and outcomes, assessment results and attendance data.

• School leaders and faculty provide information on student progress so that students can articulate next learning steps.

• School leaders and faculty work with students to develop reflective practices to assess their own progress using criteria specified to the needs of each student so that students can articulate next learning steps.

1.4 Design or adapt tools to enable school leaders and teachers to organize and analyze student performance, identify trends, inform instructional and organizational decisions and enable families to assess and track each student’s progress

• School leaders and faculty use ELA and math data to analyze learning outcomes for individual and groups of students

• School leaders and faculty use data from ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject to analyze learning outcomes for individual and groups of students.

• School leaders provide information on student progress so that students can articulate next learning steps. •School leaders and faculty provide parents/caregivers with some opportunities (twice a year) to communicate useful information on the learning needs of their children. •School leaders and faculty collect 1 or 2 sources of data in ELA and math to analyze student performance to identify trends in individual students and some sub-groups. • School leaders and faculty collect 1 or 2 sources of data in ELA and math to inform instructional and organizational decisions. • School leaders use a set of tools that allow students and their families to assess and track student progress in ELA or math over time.

• School leaders and faculty provide parents/caregivers with some opportunities (at the end of each marking period) to communicate useful information on the learning needs of their children. • School leaders and faculty collect a range of data in ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject to analyze student performance to identify trends in individual students and some sub-groups: including special education, English language learners and gender. • School leaders and faculty collect a range of data in ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject to inform instructional and organizational decisions. • School leaders and faculty use a set of tools that allow students and their families to assess and track student progress in ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject over time.

• School leaders and faculty in all core subjects use a range of data (attendance, summative and formative assessments, anecdotal, student work and enrichment data) to analyze learning outcomes for individual and groups of students.

•School leaders and faculty provide parents/caregivers with multiple opportunities (at the end of every unit) to communicate useful information on the learning needs of their children. • School leaders and faculty design a process that enables them to systematically collect a range of data in all core subjects to analyze student performance to identify trends in individual students and sub-groups. • School leaders and faculty design a process that enables them to systematically collect a range of data in all core subjects to inform instructional and organizational decisions. • School leaders and faculty design and customize a set of tools that allow students and their families to assess and track student progress in all core subjects over time.

*Note: Sub-criteria will be scored Underdeveloped when the school’s practices do not meet the minimum definition of UPF.

Last Revised: September, 2008

Quality Review Criteria Rubric 2008-2009 Quality Statement 2 Indicators 2.1 Use collaborative and data-informed processes to set measurable, actionable and differentiated learning goals in core subjects for individual students and groupings of students and develop differentiated plans and timeframes for reaching these goals 2.2 Use collaborative and data-informed processes to develop the school’s Comprehensive Educational Plan (CEP)

2.3 Ensure that the achievement of learning goals, and the implementation of plans and timeframes for reaching these goals, is the central focus of school leaders, faculty, students and families 2.4 Communicate high expectations to all students and families, and involve students in developing their learning goals and plans and in taking their next learning steps

Underdeveloped with Proficient Features (UPF)* • School leaders and faculty set grade level goals for ELA and math based on the student’s previous performance. • School leaders and faculty set interim goals/benchmarks that are checked 1-2 times a year in order to target instruction in ELA and math.

Proficient • School leaders and faculty use procedures to set measurable learning goals for individual students and groups of students in ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject that build on what they know and can do, and identify a series of next steps to achieve these goals within a designated period. • School leaders and faculty set interim goals/benchmarks that are checked (at the end of each marking period) in order to target effective differentiated instruction in ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject that meet the needs of individual students’ and groups of students.

• School leaders involve teachers in some parts of school improvement planning.

•School leaders involve teachers and parents at several stages in school improvement planning.

• School leaders and faculty evaluate the goals of the previous CEP and complete an action plan.

• School leaders and faculty have data-driven procedures for evaluating the goals of the previous CEP to develop an action plan to inform the next round of goal setting.

• School leaders and faculty meet at least twice per year to discuss, review, and adjust the timeframes to reach goals for all students in ELA and math.

• School leaders and faculty meet each marking period to discuss, review, and adjust the timeframes to reach goals of all students in ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject.

•School leaders and faculty meet with students and attempt to meet with their families to communicate the goals in ELA and math and timeframes set to increase student achievement.

• School leaders and faculty meet with students and with their families to ensure that there is a clear understanding of the goals in ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject and timeframes set to increase student achievement.

• School leaders communicate expectations about attendance, behavior and academic performance to students and families.

• School leaders and faculty communicate high expectations about attendance, behavior and academic performance to students and families.

• School leaders and faculty conference with students (at least twice per year) to facilitate self assessment and help develop a plan to achieve their goals in ELA and math. • School leaders and faculty plan ways to engage parents in conversations about the school’s high expectations.

Well Developed • School leaders and faculty use procedures to regularly set measurable and rigorous learning goals for individual and groups of students in all core subjects that build on what they know and can do, and identify a series of next steps to achieve these goals in the designated period. • School leaders and faculty set interim goals/benchmarks that are checked periodically (at the end of each unit) throughout the year in order to target effective differentiated instruction in all core subjects that meets the needs of groups of students and individual students’.

•School leaders effectively involve the school community, including teachers, parents and age appropriate students, in each stage of the school improvement planning cycle. • School leaders and faculty have effective and consistent data-driven procedures for evaluating the goals of the previous CEP and develop strategic action plans to inform the next round of goal setting. • School leaders and faculty meet regularly (at least monthly) to discuss, review and adjust the timeframes to reach the goals of all students in all core subjects. • School leaders and faculty meet regularly with students (at least weekly) and periodically with their families to ensure that there is a clear understanding of the goals in all core subjects and timeframes set to increase student achievement. • School leaders and faculty effectively communicate high expectations about attendance, behavior and academic performance to students and families in ways that clearly explain how these expectations can be achieved.

• School leaders and faculty conference with students (at least monthly) to facilitate selfassessment and help develop a plan to achieve their goals in ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject.

• School leaders and faculty conference regularly with students (weekly or as needed) to facilitate selfassessment and help develop a plan to achieve their goals in all core subjects.

• School leaders, faculty and parent coordinators plan ways to engage parents in conversations about the school’s high expectations for all students.

• School leaders, faculty, parent coordinators, and other support staff work strategically to ensure that there are on-going conversations about the school’s high expectations for all students.

*Note: Sub-criteria will be scored Underdeveloped when the school’s practices do not meet the minimum definition of UPF.

Last Revised: September, 2008

Quality Review Criteria Rubric 2008-2009 Quality Statement 3 Indicators 3.1 School leaders and faculty deliver challenging and engaging curricula in core subjects, including the arts, that are aligned to state standards

3.2 Teachers plan and teach lessons that are differentiated to meet the needs of individual students and student groupings and are designed to enable all students to reach their learning goals 3.3 School leaders make strategic organizational decisions to support a coherent and rigorous instructional approach that enables students to reach their learning goals

3.4 School leaders maintain a culture of mutual trust and respect and positive attitudes toward learning that support the academic and personal growth of students and adults

Underdeveloped with Proficient Features (UPF)* • School leaders and faculty ensure that each program, or course, in ELA and math meet the general needs of students. • School leaders make purposeful decisions to emphasize key state standards and curriculum in ELA and math.

• Teachers have an assessment system in place that is used for informing their lessons in ELA and math. • Teachers make choices in how to introduce and extend lessons in ELA or math.

• School leaders utilize the budget to ensure that staffing and school organization enable students to reach their learning goals in ELA and math. • School leaders ensure that the staff has the basic resources that they need to deliver instruction. • Responses in the Learning Environment Survey indicate below average levels of trust and respect. • Some adults treat students with respect. • Adults in the school are supported by the school leadership in their learning. • Students show some interest in their learning and a desire to succeed. Students make some progress, personally or academically.

Proficient

Well Developed

• School leaders and faculty ensure that there is flexibility in each program, or course, to challenge and meet the needs of all individuals and groups of students, including the lowest and highest achieving students in ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject.

• School leaders and faculty ensure that there is flexibility in each program, or course, to challenge and meet the needs of all individuals and groups of students, including the lowest and highest achieving students in all core subjects, including the visual and performing arts.

• School leaders and faculty make purposeful decisions to emphasize key state standards and ensure alignment with curriculum in ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject • Teachers have an assessment system in place for every student that is used often (at least once a month) to inform differentiating their lessons in ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject so that each student can reach their learning goals. • Teachers make strategic choices in how to introduce and extend lessons so that students are engaged and able to demonstrate content understanding in ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject. • School leaders, in consultation with the leadership team, utilize the budget to ensure that staffing and school organization enable students to reach their learning goals in ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject. • School leaders ensure that the staff has an array of resources that they need to deliver coherent and rigorous instruction.

• School leaders and faculty make purposeful decisions to emphasize key state standards and ensure alignment with curriculum in all core subjects.

• Teachers have an assessment system in place for every student that is used regularly (at least weekly) to inform differentiating their lessons in every core subject so that each student can reach their learning goals. • Teachers are purposeful in every lesson, making strategic choices in how to introduce, deepen and extend lessons so that every student is engaged and is able to demonstrate content understanding in all core subjects.

• School leaders, in consultation with the leadership team, utilize the budget to ensure that staffing and school organization enable students to reach their learning goals in all core subjects. • School leaders ensure that the staff has the resources that they need to deliver coherent and rigorous instruction with flexibility to implement innovative approaches.

• Responses in the Learning Environment Survey indicate average levels of trust and respect.

• Responses in the Learning Environment Survey indicate above average levels of trust and respect.

• Many adults treat each other and the students with respect, resulting in the students showing reciprocated respect for adults and their peers.

• Most adults treat each other, and all students, with respect at all times, resulting in the students always showing reciprocated respect for adults and their peers.

• Adults in the school are supported by each other and the school leadership in their learning and personal growth.

• Adults in the school are supported by each other and the school leadership in their learning and personal growth, fostering a safe and supportive environment where knowledge is actively sought out.

• Students show interest and engagement in their learning and want to succeed. Students make progress, both personally and academically.

• Students show interest and engagement in their learning and want to succeed. Students make progress that is significantly above average, both personally and academically.

*Note: Sub-criteria will be scored Underdeveloped when the school’s practices do not meet the minimum definition of UPF.

Last Revised: September, 2008

Quality Review Criteria Rubric 2008-2009 Quality Statement 4 Indicators 4.1 Use their own observation of classroom teaching and the analysis of student outcomes to implement an explicit, differentiated strategy to improve each teacher’s instruction, with a special focus on new teachers 4.2 Encourage teachers to take part in Inquiry Teams and other structured professional collaborations (informed by the examination of student work, assessment outcomes and their own peer observations) and share in the instructional leadership of the school with the goal of improved student learning 4.3 Provide professional development that encourages teachers to continuously evaluate and revise their classroom practices to improve student outcomes 4.4 Utilize youth development, support services and partnerships with families and outside organizations to accelerate the academic and personal growth of students

Underdeveloped with Proficient Features (UPF)*

• School leaders refer to the school wide professional development plan and school wide goals when providing feedback to teachers and setting goals for their progress. • School leaders identify teachers who are either new to the profession or new to the school and ensure they are matched with a mentor.

Proficient

Well Developed

• School leaders refer to each teacher’s detailed professional development plan when providing feedback to teachers and setting goals for their progress. The plan is based on some of the following: classroom observations, scrutiny of student work, teacher reflections, student outcomes, and school goals.

• School leaders consistently refer to each teacher’s detailed professional development plan when providing feedback to teachers and setting goals for their progress. The plan is individualized according to each teacher’s needs and is based on classroom observations, scrutiny of student work, teacher reflections, student outcomes, and school goals.

• School leaders provide specialized support, through mentoring and other professional development opportunities, to teachers that are new to the profession and/or new to the school.

• School leaders encourage teacher participation in the inquiry process through inquiry teams and/or other collaborative groups to examine student work and assessment outcomes and improve student learning.

• School leaders provide a structure that encourages monthly teacher participation in the inquiry process through inquiry teams and/or other collaborative groups to examine student work and assessment outcomes and improve student learning.

• School leaders encourage teachers to participate in decisions that impact their work.

• School leaders provide structures that encourage teachers to participate in key decisions that impact their work.

• School leaders have created a system that allows for ELA and math teachers to participate in collaborative teams where teachers discuss their practice, look at student work and data, share resources, set up inter-visitations and engage in collaborative inquiry.

• School leaders have created a system that allows for teachers of ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject to participate in collaborative teams where teachers discuss their practice, look at student work and data, share resources, set up inter-visitations and engage in collaborative inquiry.

• School leaders offer professional learning opportunities for their faculty to discuss their practice.

• School leaders organize the professional learning for their faculty from a stance of reflection in which teachers have some opportunities to discuss their practice and visit colleagues’ classrooms with the lens on improving instruction.

• School leaders observe the performance of teachers and occasionally provide feedback.

• School leaders monitor the performance of teachers, provide evaluative feedback and provide support for improved classroom practice. • School leaders develop a plan that supports students and their families to enhance student personal and academic growth. • School leadership and staff offers support to families.

• School leaders and staff implement a guidance plan that supports students and their families to enhance student personal and academic growth. • School leadership and staff work to provide academic and personal support to families. School leaders examine the effect of support services on student personal growth.

• School leaders provide specialized support, through mentoring and other professional development opportunities, to all teachers including those that are new to the profession and/or new to the school. This results in their ability to deliver effective instruction, as evidenced by observations, student work, and student outcomes. • School leaders provide a structure that encourages consistent (at least weekly) and active teacher participation in the inquiry process through inquiry teams and/or other collaborative groups to examine student work and assessment outcomes and improve student learning. • Distributive leadership structures are embedded and ensure that teachers are part of key decisions that impact their work. • School leaders have created a system that allows for all core subject teachers and support providers to participate in collaborative teams where professionals discuss their practice, look at student work and data, share resources, set up intervisitations and engage in collaborative inquiry.

• School leaders organize the professional learning for their faculty from a stance of inquiry and reflection in which teachers have multiple opportunities to discuss their practice, visit colleagues’ classrooms and study student work with the lens on improving instruction. • School leaders regularly monitor the progress and performance of teachers to encourage continual evaluation and revision of their classroom practice which results in high student outcomes. • School leaders and staff collaboratively implement a comprehensive guidance plan that includes internal and external support services that connect with students and their families to enhance student personal and academic growth. • School leadership and staff work in partnership with families to provide consistent academic and personal support. School leaders regularly analyze the extent to which support services are effective in accelerating academic and personal growth and make timely revisions based on data.

*Note: Sub-criteria will be scored Underdeveloped when the school’s practices do not meet the minimum definition of UPF.

Last Revised: September, 2008

Quality Review Criteria Rubric 2008-2009 Quality Statement 5 Indicators 5.1 The school’s plans for improving student outcomes and its strategies for improving each teacher’s instructional practices include measurable interim goals and suitable time frames for evaluating success and making adjustments during the year

5.2 School leaders and faculty use interim checkpoints and data to inform lessons, improve curriculum, differentiate instruction and revise student learning plans throughout the year

5.3 School leaders use data to regularly evaluate the effectiveness of and modify organizational decisions, structured professional collaborations and teacher improvement strategies

5.4 School leaders and the school community have a clear vision for the future development of the school and implement procedures and systems to support academic, personal and professional growth

Underdeveloped with Proficient Features (UPF)*

• School leaders examine (at least twice per year) individual student, subgroup, and grade level data to improve student outcomes. • Teachers of ELA and math can demonstrate how they assess students, monitor progress and set measurable goals to accelerate student learning. • School leaders have interim goals for some school plans and instructional practices and evaluate success (at least twice per year). • School leaders establish interim checkpoints (at least twice per year) to monitor learning outcomes in all subgroups and individual students in ELA and math. • School leaders use interim checkpoints (at least twice per year) to monitor the curriculum and make improvements in ELA and math.

• School leaders evaluate the effectiveness of organizational decisions and make modifications by examining some of the following: the progress report, quality review, learning environment survey, findings from the inquiry team, interim assessments and attendance data. • School leaders are beginning to implement ways to use data to accurately evaluate the effectiveness of teacher professional development. • The school’s self evaluation is a general description of the conditions in the school. • There is a vision for the school’s development. • The CEP action plan identifies measurable success criteria, desired outcomes, people responsible and timeframes for the completion of each task. It may not be aligned with the school’s most pressing needs.

Proficient • School leaders examine (at least once per marking period) individual student, subgroup, and grade level data to monitor groupings and curricular decisions and improve student outcomes. • Teachers of ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject can demonstrate how they assess students, monitor progress and set measurable goals to accelerate student learning. • School leaders and faculty have measurable interim goals for all school plans and instructional practices, evaluate success (at least once per marking period), and make adjustments. • School leaders establish interim checkpoints (at least once per marking period) that result in varied instruction to achieve maximum student learning outcomes in all subgroups and individual students in ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject. • School leaders use interim checkpoints (at least once per marking period) to monitor the curriculum and make improvements as identified in the school plans in ELA, math, and at least one additional core subject.

Well Developed • School leaders have systems in place to regularly examine (at least once per month) individual student, subgroup, and grade level data to monitor and revise groupings and curricular decisions throughout the year to improve student outcomes. • Teachers across core subjects demonstrate how they consistently assess and monitor the progress of all students and set and revise measurable goals to accelerate student learning. • School leaders and faculty have established rigorous and measurable interim goals for all of the school’s plans and instructional practices, consistently evaluate success (at least once per month or after each unit), and make adjustments as needed throughout the year. • School leaders establish interim checkpoints (at least once per month) that result in differentiated instruction to achieve maximum student learning outcomes in all subgroups and individual students in all core subjects. • School leaders use interim checkpoints (at least once per month or at the end of each unit) to monitor the curriculum and make timely improvements as identified in the school plans across all core subjects.

• School leaders use the progress report, quality review, learning environment survey, findings from the inquiry team, interim assessments, attendance data and disciplinary data to evaluate the effectiveness of organizational decisions and modify them as required.

• School leaders use the progress report, quality review, learning environment survey, findings from the inquiry team and other professional collaborations, student work, interim and other assessments, attendance data and disciplinary data to evaluate the effectiveness of organizational decisions and modify them as required.

• School leaders use data including formal and informal observations, as well as results, of periodic formative and summative assessments to accurately evaluate the effectiveness of teacher professional development plans.

• The school’s self evaluation is an accurate reflection of the school’s practices. • There is a coherent vision for the school’s development that is understood by members of the school community. • The CEP action plan precisely identifies measurable success criteria, desired outcomes, people responsible and timeframes for the completion of each task. It is clearly aligned with the school’s plans for improving student outcomes.

• The school’s self evaluation is an accurate reflection of the school’s practices and demonstrates that self-reflection is a widespread and integral part of the school culture. • There is a coherent and motivational vision for the school’s development that is understood and supported by all members (parents, staff and students) of the school community. • The CEP action plan precisely identifies measurable success criteria, desired outcomes, people responsible and timeframes for the completion of each task. This clear vision has resulted in the meeting of the goals set for accelerated learning.

*Note: Sub-criteria will be scored Underdeveloped when the school’s practices do not meet the minimum definition of UPF.

Last Revised: September, 2008