Office of Education Performance Audits

1. Policy 2320: A Process for Improving Education: Performance-Based Accreditation SystemRESA 6 – October, 2014 Office of Education Performance Audits

2. Policy Review

3. Characteristics of the New Policy There are six major characteristics of the new policy: (1) improving student performance, (2) clearly communicating the level of school quality, (3) focusing on allschools, (4) purpose – quality and self-improvement, (5) emphasizing local control and accountability, and (6) differentiating supports, consequences, and rewards.

4. Section 6: School Accreditation

5. Accreditation System Verifying A-F. Assessing and reporting Policy 2322, adherence to policy and Code, reporting best practices, efficiencies, and resource, facility, and capacity building needs. Identifying and reporting classroom conditions and non-compliances.

6. Accreditation System System of self-study Method for promoting continuous improvement Basis for determining rewards, supports, technical assistance, and intervention

7. Measures and Levels • A-F system (Section 5 of Policy 2320) • Student outcomes are the primary measures of school effectiveness. • School performance rating • Calculated by the WVDE; • Verified by the OEPA through accreditation process; • Approved by the WVBE; and • Communicated to schools, school systems, and communities.

8. Operating Principles Focus on Student Performance Transparency and Clarity Vehicle for Local Decision-Making

9. Review Processes Annual and cyclical reviews are designed to: verify the school’s annual performance grade; provide feedback for local school improvement efforts; verify compliance with core policy and Code; document best practices; and identify efficiencies, resource, facility, and capacity building needs.

10. Annual Reviews • School Monitoring Report as self-assessment • School quality defined in Policy 2322 • Compliance with policy and Code • Best practices • School resource and capacity building needs • School Monitoring Report • Developed with staff input • Reviewed by Faculty Senate and LSIC • Approved by principal and superintendent • Submitted to the OEPA

11. Cyclical Reviews • On-site review • At least every 4 years • Assures all schools are accountable • common set of high quality standards • core policy and Code compliance • continuous improvement • External Team managed by OEPA

12. Cyclical Reviews • Team responsibilities: • Determine accuracy of School Monitoring Report. • Review School Strategic Plan. • Examine school practices (Policy 2322) and provide feedback on strengths and needs. • Document best practices. • Identify resource, facility, efficiency, and capacity building needs impeding improvement.

13. Section 9: Continuous Improvement and Strategic Planning

14. School Continuous Improvement • Facilitated • Principal • Involves • teachers • staff • stakeholders in decision-making

15. School Continuous Improvement • Data Sources • school system • RESA • WVDE • other entities • Data Use • determining root causes of student deficits • determine changes needed in practice.

16. School Continuous Improvement Designated team or committee Process of using data and information On-going professional development and research

17. School Continuous Improvement Guiding Improvement Efforts: School Monitoring Report Summary of employee evaluation data

18. School Strategic PlanningDevelopment Process School electronic strategic improvement plan • School’s self-study of student performance • School’s self-study of school and classroom learning conditions

19. School Strategic Planning Development Process • The plan is developed under the direction of the principal with collective involvement and input from the staff and the LSIC. • The plan must includes the following: • Core beliefs • Mission • Goals • Measurement evidence • Action steps • Professional development needs

20. School Strategic PlanningDevelopment Process • The action steps are based on examination of best practices and innovative approaches to improve student performance and address student needs. • Allmembers of the school staff are responsible for implementing the plan. • The principal is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the plan. • The plan is updated and revised as data and information dictate based on the tenets of continuous improvement. • Annual updates to the plan must consider the OEPA School Monitoring Report when the report identifies deficits in quality or compliance.

21. School Onsite Review Process

22. School Onsite Review Process Overall Intent Review Purposes 80/20 Principle

23. School Onsite Review Process • SECTION 1 • Examination of High Quality Standards • Verifying Evidence of High Quality Standards • Rating the High Quality Standards • Function Statements

24. School Onsite Review Process • Section 2 • Resource Needs • Facility Needs • Capacity Building Needs • Section 3 • Best Practices

25. School Onsite Review Process • Section 4 • Policy Compliance • Code Compliance • Section 5 • Principal’s Verification • Superintendent’s Verification

26. School Onsite Review Process • Rating Determination • Consensus • Final Report • Recommendations • Commendations • Findings

27. LESSON PLANS

28. Lesson Plans §18A-2-12 states that “Lesson plans are intended to serve as a daily guide for teachers and substitutes for the orderly presentation of the curriculum.“ Policy 2322: Standard 3 – Function C • Designed • long term • short term • Based On Students • Needs • Interests • Performance Levels

29. Lesson Plans • The OEPA does not recommend any particular Lesson Plan Format. • The focus of an OEPA review is primarily on Instructional Quality . • Classroom Lesson Plan review documentation: • Written lesson plans are evident for classroom instruction (could include weekly lessons or extended project-based learning). • Lesson plans focus on delivery of instructional objectives. • The instructional intent of lesson plans is clear and discernible. • Lesson plans adequately cover the instructional time allotted for the class or subject.

30. Questions