PART 3: FINDINGS - SUMMARY EXPLANATION OF RUBRIC RATINGS Focus Standard
Rubric Rating
Meaningful and Challenging Curriculum
Beginning
Roughly one out of every two Global classrooms had consistent evidence of meaningful and challenging curriculum. Students felt strongly positive about learning in both English and Spanish and believed it was meaningful, but also consistently reported that learning at Global was “not hard,” even “easy”. The “dual language” program at Global Family faced several hurdles in providing meaningful and challenging the curriculum for all students (see p. 20).
1.2
Safe and Nurturing Learning Experiences
Sustaining
Nearly every Global classroom had strong and consistent evidence of a safe and nurturing learning environment. Students consistently reported that they felt safe in their classrooms. Most reported that they liked their teachers and had “good relationships” with them. Most parents interviewed reported satisfaction with how safe and nurturing classrooms were, sometimes in sharp contrast to what they reported about the school campus (see Quality Indicator 2).
1.4
Active & Different Types of Learning
Beginning
Overall one out of every two or three Global classroom had consistent evidence of instructional strategies that make learning active for students and provide them with different ways to learn. Students experienced predominately teacher-centered instruction and had relatively few opportunities to lead their learning, actively construct knowledge, and engage in higher levels of thinking. The variety and lack of alignment in teacher descriptions of instruction suggested that there was not a school-wide focus on effective instructional practices (as there was on dual language content) and therefore no shared view of good teaching at Global Family.
Focus Standard 1.1
Global Family Elementary School School Quality Review 2012-2013—Final
Summary Explanation of Ratings
10
1.7
Students Know What They are Learning, Why, and How it can be Applied
1.8
Academic Intervention & Enrichment Support
Developing
Undeveloped
Most students interviewed knew the learning objectives for the lesson. Few students recognized the connection between the day’s learning and longer-term outcomes. Teachers were clear or specific with students about what learning a specific activity was trying to promote in about half the observations. Students had their learning checked with immediate feedback regarding their progress toward the day’s learning objectives in about half the observations. Assessment data informed classroom interventions provided by some teachers. Global Family did not, however, have established school-wide systems for analyzing assessment data and referring students to needed academic supports. Global Family provided some academic intervention supports (see pp. 24-25).
1.10
Equitable Access to Curriculum
Developing
Diverse groups of students were proportionally represented in the academic programs. Global staff showed consistent awareness of the needs of different groups of students (including Mam-language students), even as they described their struggles to provide effective dual language programs, supports and interventions that would prepare students ultimately for college.
1.11
College-going Culture & Resources
Beginning
Each year Global Family paid for 5th grade students to participate in the “I’m Going to College” program.
2.1
Safe & Healthy Center of Community
Developing
Global Family campus was well maintained and attractive, and adults and students contributed to keeping the facilities this way. Arrival and dismissal on the streets and outside the entrances to Global Family were observed to be not adequately supervised and at times unsafe. Supervision at recesses was adequate, with noon supervisors and teachers watching children; however, the absence of structured play often created chaotic, unsafe conditions.
Global Family Elementary School School Quality Review 2012-2013—Final
11
2.2
Coordinated & Integrated System of Academic Learning Support Services
Beginning
Global Family had a limited set of on-site strategies, services and partnerships that responded to student/family needs. Global Family did not have well-established, school-wide systems to coordinate efficiently and effectively social-emotional supports for students.
2.5
Identifies At-Risk Students & Intervenes
Beginning
Global Family staff had effective informal practices for identifying at-risk students and providing interventions, within the scope of their resources. The challenge of these informal practices was that it was not a system; interventions varied from staff to staff based on commitment, experience and expertise. The SST process was reportedly “loose” and inconsistent, and management of it was being reorganized. The COS Team was being organized.
2.6
Inclusive, Welcoming & Caring Community
Developing
Students felt safe and free from threat, bullying, and/or discrimination. Parents presented a more divided picture. Many reported they felt their children were safe, but they also said they had on-going concerns about safety on campus. Students and parents consistently reported strong trust of the staff. The principal and other supervisory staff were visible on campus, and there was some evidence of systems and a “family culture” that promoted positive behavior. Several staff reported dissatisfaction with the school climate and how it was being managed.
3.1
Collaboration
Undeveloped
Global Family teachers did not meet in PLCs for collaborative planning and inquiry focused on student learning. Teachers did meet with their grade level colleagues on their own time. The quality, consistency, and content of this collaboration varied significantly.
3.2
Data Development & Analysis
Global Family Elementary School School Quality Review 2012-2013—Final
Beginning
Global Family teachers collected classroom observation, student work, and a variety of assessment data. Individual Global Family teachers did have effective practices for analyzing this data, identifying individual needs, and responding accordingly in their classrooms.
12
The challenge of these individual practices was that they were not part of a system. Teachers did not have opportunities to talk across grade-levels about the patterns of student performance, the challenges these reveal, and the strategies that should be implemented.
3.2 (cont.)
Data Development & Analysis (cont.)
3.4
Professional Learning Activities
Beginning
Global Family teachers and principal have participated in the Dual Language Inquiry Cohort. This cohort provided an opportunity to access supports for the implementation of their dual language immersion program. Once a week teachers engaged in professional development together on a variety of topics. These activities, however, were not meeting the needs of all teachers and did not support teachers to evaluate and improve their classroom practices. The conditions did not support a “one band, one sound” shared instructional approach that raised the effectiveness of all teachers.
4.2
Working Together in Partnership
Developing
Global Family had a variety of high-quality activities and strategies which built partnerships, particularly with a core group of families. Challenges to partnership included concerns that communication with families reached an engaged core, but did not reach many families.
4.5
Student/Family Engagement on Student Progress
Sustaining
The school had multiple high-quality activities and strategies, including Back To School Night; scheduled parent-teacher conferences three times a year; Student Study Team meetings; and regular contact by teachers and other support staff to inform parents of student progress. In campus observations, the SQR Team saw that after school there were many, impromptu check-ins occurring between teachers and parents.
4.6
Family Engagement on Academic Expectations and Opportunities
Developing
Back to School Night and Open House Night were annual events provided information to parents and guardians on student achievement and learning goals. Parents reported several meetings and newsletters about the school’s participation in the dual language cohort. The principal explained the goals of their dual language efforts, what a good program looked like, and what they hoped it would prepare students for.
Global Family Elementary School School Quality Review 2012-2013—Final
13
4.7
Standards of Meaningful Engagement
Beginning
Global Family relied on implicit standards that drove their approaches to meaningful family/community engagement. But the school has not yet developed/adopted and implemented standards of meaningful engagement (either school or district approved).
5.2
Partners with Students and Families in Decision Making
Beginning
Global Family’s parents reported that, through the SSC/ELAC, they participated in approving key school plans and got input into the kinds of supports they would like to see on campus. They felt that their voice was taken into consideration. Beyond this mandated body, there was no evidence of parent involvement in other shared leadership structures.
5.4
Vision Driven
Developing
As part of Global Family’s participation in the Dual Language Cohort, the school staff had recently updated the school’s vision to explicitly include the commitment to this model. The school’s vision was often cited and discussed in meetings—as part of efforts to get staff to focus on the students and on their core work of teaching and learning. These efforts, while variously successful, were attempts to have the school’s vision guide all aspects of the school’s programs and activities and to engage staff in aligning their work with the vision
5.5
Focused on Equity
Beginning
School leadership—the principal, the teacher on special assignment, the Instructional Leadership Team—persistently advocated for and supervised/supported with a focus on the implementation of the dual language model, as the path through which learning at Global Family would interrupt patterns of historical inequity. Where school leadership struggled was in the development of a variety of systems that would ensure the effective implementation of the dual language model—collaboration and professional development systems; data analysis, inquiry, and monitoring systems, and systems for instructional improvement and mutual accountability.
Global Family Elementary School School Quality Review 2012-2013—Final
14
5.6
Supports the Development of Quality Instruction
Beginning
Global Family leadership and staff faced significant challenges in the development of quality instruction across the school (see pp. 40-41). Guiding, monitoring, and supporting curricular choices and instructional practices appeared extremely difficult under the professional circumstances—as was ensuring adequate professional learning, coaching and supervision. Ultimately, it was the school leadership’s responsibility to manage professional conflict and focus staff on the development of quality curriculum.
5.9
Culture of Mutual Accountability
Beginning
The school staff described student outcomes and goals for learning and behavior, but those goals were not very specific. Global Family did not yet have a culture of mutual accountability. This did not mean that Global Family had a complete absence of individual accountability. Some teachers reported that they knew that the achievement of their students was their responsibility, but it was difficult to have a “deep conversation with the colleagues, using data” because some staff were unwilling to be accountable for their students’ performance.
5.10
Organizational Management
Developing
School leadership had effectively aligned Global Family’s financial and human resources with the school’s vision of implementing the dual language model and providing supports to students. School leadership and the Programs for Exceptional Children (PEC) leadership “allowed” the school’s resource specialist position to not be adequately staffed for too many weeks. Several teachers reported frustration with how staff resources and time were used related to how the principal managed communications and decision-making. School leadership effectively leveraged district and community resources, grants and partnerships in service of the school’s vision.
Global Family Elementary School School Quality Review 2012-2013—Final
15
PART 4: FOCUS STANDARDS RATINGS CHART Quality Indicator 1 1 1 1
Std. # 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.7
Focus Standard
Rubric Rating Beginning Sustaining Beginning Developing
5.9
Meaningful and Challenging Curriculum Safe and Nurturing Learning Experiences Active & Different Types of Learning Students Know What They are Learning, Why, and How it can be Applied Academic Intervention/ Enrichment Equitable Access to Curriculum College-going Culture & Resources Safe & Healthy Center of Community Coordinated & Integrated System of Academic Learning Support Services Identifies At-Risk Students & Intervenes Inclusive, Welcoming & Caring Community Collaboration Data Development & Analysis Professional Learning Activities Working Together in Partnership Family Engagement on Student Progress Family Engagement on Academic Expectations and Opportunities Standards of Meaningful Engagement Partners with Students and Families in Decision Making Vision Driven Focused on Equity Supports the Development of Quality Instruction Culture of Mutual Accountability
1 1 1 2 2
1.8 1.10 1.11 2.1 2.2
2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4
2.5 2.6 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.2 4.5 4.6
4 5
4.7 5.2
5 5 5
5.4 5.5 5.6
5 5
5.10
Organizational Management
Global Family Elementary School School Quality Review 2012-2013—Final
Undeveloped Developing Beginning Developing Beginning Beginning Developing Undeveloped Beginning Beginning Developing Sustaining Developing Beginning Beginning
Undeveloped
Beginning
Sustaining
Refining
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Developing Beginning Beginning
X X
Beginning
X
Developing
Developing
X
X
16
