Session Objectives Begin to understand the goals, purpose and rationale for Program Reviews Learn about the components of implementing Program Reviews.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Ohio Improvement Process - OIP
Advertisements

Technology Use Plan Methacton School District Patty McGinnis ED TECH 501.
[Imagine School at North Port] Oral Exit Report Quality Assurance Review Team School Accreditation.
Consensus Building Infrastructure Developing Implementation Doing & Refining Guiding Principles of RtI Provide working knowledge & understanding of: -
RIDE – Office of Special Populations
School Leadership Team Fall Conference West Virginia Department of Education Division of Educator Quality and System Support Bridgeport Conference Center.
The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Specialists August 2013 Training Module I Introduction to DPAS II Training for Specialists.
Session Learning Target You will gain a better understanding of identifying quality evidence to justify a performance rating for each standard and each.
Field Testing Testing the Test March PARCC Consortium 2 Governed by the education chiefs in the states.
SEED – CT’s System for Educator and Evaluation and Development April 2013 Wethersfield Public Schools CONNECTICUT ADMINISTRATOR EVALUATION Overview of.
Implementation of the PA Core Standards. Effective Communication Guiding Principle 1 Design and establish systems of effective communication among stakeholders.
Introduction to Creating a Balanced Assessment System Presented by: Illinois State Board of Education.
Gifted Education and Response to Intervention Update on Gifted Education Workshop August 2013 Toddie Adams, Marshall County Schools.
FRANKLIN PUBLIC SCHOOLS SCHOOL COMMITTEE MAY 27, 2014 Massachusetts Kindergarten Entry Assessment (MKEA)
Gwinnett Teacher Effectiveness System Training
Sub-heading ADMINISTRATOR EVALUATION AND SUPPORT SYSTEM Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment Leader Proposed Adaptations.
Support Professionals Evaluation Model Webinar Spring 2013.
1 Literacy PERKS Standard 1: Aligned Curriculum. 2 PERKS Essential Elements Academic Performance 1. Aligned Curriculum 2. Multiple Assessments 3. Instruction.
Math Content Network Update The Power of Mistakes Student Engagement Culture of Learning Growth Mindset Congruent Tasks.
Utah Effective Teaching Standards-based Jordan Performance Appraisal System Orientation (UETS-based JPAS)
Campus Improvement Plans
April 6, 2011 DRAFT Educator Evaluation Project. Teacher Education and Licensure DRAFT The ultimate goal of all educator evaluation should be… TO IMPROVE.
Carol Franks, KDE Literacy Consultant
Evaluating School Literacy Programs October 22, 2009 Presented by Pamela Wininger, Reading Consultant Carol Franks, Writing.
Building & Using an Effective Leadership Team Kathi Cooper Aida Molina Bette Harrison Sandy Lam.
 Reading School Committee January 23,
Service Agency Accreditation Recognizing Quality Educational Service Agencies Mike Bugenski
School Writing Programs October 7, 2009 Presented by Carol Franks, Writing Consultant, KDE , ext
Muscogee County School District Division of Academics (DOA) District Accreditation Module 4: Quality Assurance.
Moving Forward With Assessment and Accountability August 2011.
1 Why is the Core important? To set high expectations – for all students – for educators To attend to the learning needs of students To break through the.
Commit” ” to Program Reviews Rhonda Back Program Review Director Bath County Public Schools Kentucky Association of School Councils September 17, 2014.
Grade 12 Subject Specific Ministry Training Sessions
Designing and Implementing An Effective Schoolwide Program
Alaska School Leaders Institute Moving Toward Implementation of Alaska’s ELA & Math Standards.
Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy Program (SRCL) SRCL is a comprehensive literacy development education program to advance literacy skills for students.
Milwaukee Partnership Academy An Urban P-16 Council for Quality Teaching and Learning.
Moving to the Common Core Janet Rummel Assessment Specialist Indiana Department of Education.
An Overview of the New HCPSS Teacher Evaluation Process School-based Professional Learning Module Spring 2013 This presentation contains copyrighted material.
Student Achievement Teacher and Leader Effectiveness Principal Professional Growth and Effectiveness System Field Test Overview.
Instructional System Design
1. 2 Why is the Core important? To set high expectations –for all students –for educators To attend to the learning needs of students To break through.
Goals of This Session Provide background for program review development Describe document make-up.
Iowa’s Teacher Quality Program. Intent of the General Assembly To create a student achievement and teacher quality program that acknowledges that outstanding.
PRESENTED BY THERESA RICHARDS OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AUGUST 2012 Overview of the Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and.
School Improvement Planning Today’s Session Review the purpose of SI planning Review the components of SI plans Discuss changes to SI planning.
Technology Use Plan Bighorn County School District #4 Basin / Manderson, Wyoming “Life-long learning through attitude, academics, and accountability.”
T WO FOR O NE P ROGRAM R EVIEWS Beth Sumner Assistant Superintendent Trigg County Public Schools Kentucky Association of Assessment Coordinators October.
School Writing Programs Kentucky Department of Education October 2009.
CommendationsRecommendations Curriculum The Lakeside Middle School teachers demonstrate a strong desire and commitment to plan collaboratively and develop.
1. Housekeeping Items June 8 th and 9 th put on calendar for 2 nd round of Iowa Core ***Shenandoah participants*** Module 6 training on March 24 th will.
Designing Local Curriculum Module 5. Objective To assist district leadership facilitate the development of local curricula.
Expeditionary Learning Queens Middle School Meeting May 29,2013 Presenters: Maryanne Campagna & Antoinette DiPietro 1.
Building and Recognizing Quality School Systems DISTRICT ACCREDITATION © 2010 AdvancED.
Fall, 2011 Get ready, Get set………..It’s Here. PROGRAM REVIEW Wide Lens View Senate Bill 1-March 2009 Arts & Humanities, Writing, and Practical Living Career.
Washington State Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project Update 11/29/12.
“A Truthful Evaluation Of Yourself Gives Feedback For Growth and Success” Brenda Johnson Padgett Brenda Johnson Padgett.
TPEP Teacher & Principal Evaluation System Prepared from resources from WEA & AWSP & ESD 112.
Program Review A systematic method of analyzing components of an instructional program, including instructional practices, aligned and enacted curriculum,
Ohio Department of Education March 2011 Ohio Educator Evaluation Systems.
Writing Policy for SBDM Councils. Goals of this Session provide an overview of Senate Bill 1 requirements related to writing provide guidance in reviewing.
School Accreditation School Improvement Planning.
WELCOME Next Generation Councils. Jan Stone, Director of Data, Assessment and Research Bullitt County Schools Amy Ramage, District Assessment Coordinator.
Assessment Small Learning Communities. The goal of all Small Learning Communities is to improve teaching, learning, and student outcomes A rigorous, coherent.
Learning Resource Team: Aligning Systems To Support All Learners What does this look like in our school? 3/9/20161.
An Overview of Revisions to the Rhode Island Model
PENFIELD CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT: K-5 LITERACY CURRICULUM AUDIT Presented by: Dr. Marijo Pearson Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum, Instruction,
PROGRAM REVIEWS GETTING STARTED. THE PURPOSE OF THE PROGRAM REVIEW PROCESS To provide for careful and systematic analysis of current programs.
Effective Professional Learning Communities (PLC) Where do we begin at Myers Middle School? (Adapted from Professional Learning Communities at Work Robert.
Richard Woods, Georgia’s School Superintendent “Educating Georgia’s Future” gadoe.org Quality Comprehensive Improvement System Key School Performance Standards.
Presentation transcript:

Session Objectives Begin to understand the goals, purpose and rationale for Program Reviews Learn about the components of implementing Program Reviews Become familiar with the Program Review Rubric Learn about how to access resources to support the implementation of Program Reviews

Program Review A systematic method of analyzing components of an instructional program, including instructional practices, aligned and enacted curriculum, student work samples, formative and summative assessments, professional development and support services, and administrative supports and monitoring KRS (1)(i)

KDE Resources KDE Program Review Guide Section 1: Overview KDE Program Review Guide Section 2: Program Review Process KDE Program Review Guide Section 3: Using the Program Review Rubric KDE Program Review Guide: Appendix KDE Program Review Guide for Arts & Humanities KDE Program Review Guide for Practical Living/Career Studies KDE Program Review Guide for Writing KDE link to resources:.

The Purpose of the Program Review Process To provide for careful and systematic analysis of current programs and help identify the next steps that will make the most impact on student learning. To inform the schools programs in order to establish a process of on-going discussion, reflection and growth. To provide a basis for developing a plan for improvement which may become a component in the Comprehensive School Improvement Plan.

Goals of Program Reviews To improve the quality of teaching and learning for all students in all programs To allow equal access to all students to the skills that will assist them in being productive citizens To allow students to demonstrate their understanding beyond a paper-and-pencil test To ensure a school wide natural integration of the program skills across all contents, beyond the program areas

Program Reviews Timeline Phase 1: – Pilot in 48 Kentucky schools Phase 2: – Voluntary Implementation Phase 3: Field Test – Mandatory implementation in all schools, not part of accountability Phase 4: – Full accountability in spring 2013 Next-Generation Learners (academic component) 70% Next-Generation Instructional Programs & Support (Program Reviews) 20% Next-Generation Professionals (multiple measures) 10% GradeA/HPL/CSWritingK-3World Language Year 2 + E M25 NA25100 H25 NA25100

Program Reviews A formative assessment tool for schools A summative assessment for the SBDM Council, district, & state Each Program assessed against four Standards Curriculum & Instruction Formative & Summative Assessment Professional Development & Support Services Administrative Leadership – Support & Montoring Each Standard has Demonstrators, Evidence, and Characteristics Internal Reviews occur three times a year: beginning of school year, mid-year, end of school year

Recommendations for Beginning the Program Review Process Share the program review documents/information with all school staff Establish a Review Team for each content area: Teachers: in-house Resource Teacher, one primary, one intermediate, one discipline specific, representation of ECE and/or ESL teachers Administrative staff: one Other school staff: FRYSC, media specialists, classified staff Parent, student, community member (optional) Each grade group/department identifies a representative who is responsible for collecting data or information related to the review

Role of Review Team Meet to develop a plan to address the Review and schedule three Review dates Collect and review program evidence Use the evidence to complete the program rubric Reflect on rubric assessment results, create a program report, and recommend actions for ongoing program improvement Share each review report with SBDM Council and appropriate stakeholders

Curriculum and Instruction Characteristics

Program Review Process Compose a Review Team (for each content area) Identify Evidence for each Characteristic Determine Performance Level for Characteristics Complete the rubric Determine Performance Level Points for each Demonstrators Identify areas of strength and areas of need for each Demonstrator Complete rationale with evidence & recommendations Complete the Internal Program Review Coversheet Share each review report with SBDM Council and appropriate stakeholders Make adjustments in program

External Program Review Annual District Review composed of superintendent representative, district specialists, university partners, others Study internal review report Conduct site visit Produce external review report Share report with school The method a district uses to complete the external review is a local decision. State Review: use Program Review Reports and Rubrics for a verification review process