300 likes | 422 Views
Michigan School Improvement Framework. The Challenge…. Provide a comprehensive framework based on current research and best practice to serve as a road map to support continuous school improvement. The Challenge….
E N D
The Challenge… • Provide a comprehensive framework based on current research and best practice to serve as a road map to support continuous school improvement.
The Challenge… • Develop a framework that is based on research yet can be individualized to support the unique needs of each school.
The Challenge… • Provide the educational community with a common school improvement dialogue and vocabulary.
The Challenge… • Serve as a conceptual foundation to guide our thinking and action regarding school improvement.
The Challenge… • Develop a set of standards through which our work is filtered and/or designed • Professional Development • Technical Support and Program Development • Grant Criteria • Accreditation – Performance Indicators
Criteria for SI Framework • Build on current performance Indicators • Easy to Understand and User Friendly • Focused on Student Achievement • Measurable • Self-sufficient/Stand Alone
Criteria continued… • Aligned - NCLB, Research, State/Federal Programs, NCA, PA 25, existing Performance Indicators • Address triple purpose: • feedback and guidance, • guideposts for our work, and • internal accountability
Overview of Workgroup Process • Convened 60 educators (July ‘04) • Reviewed current EdYES! Performance Indicators • Reviewed the literature on school improvement • Cross-referenced research – search for common elements
Overview of Workgroup Process • Developed a “School Improvement Framework” as a curriculum – strands, standards, benchmarks, criteria, rubrics • OSI develops framework; OEAA develops measurements • Cross reference Framework with Continuous Improvement Monitoring System (CIMS) • State Board Final Approval (Dec ’05)
SI Framework Structure Strand– General Area of Focus Standard- Category of Influence within the Strand Benchmark - Specific Area of Performance within a Standard Key Characteristics – Examples of the Benchmark statements Evidence- Hard and/or soft data that provides evidence of Benchmark performance.
Prioritize The SI Framework 5 Strands 12 Standards Prioritize 26 Benchmarks Key Characteristics
The 5 Strands Strand I - TEACHING for LEARNING Strand II – LEADERSHIP Strand V - DATA & INFORMATION MANAGEMENT Strand III - PERSONNEL & PROFESSIONAL LEARNING Strand IV – SCHOOL & COMMUNITY RELATIONS
Rubric Intent • Further defines and gives meaning to the School Improvement Framework. • Helps to visualize a “continuum of practice.” • Facilitates a conversation based upon a common language. • Promotes self-assessment of current level of implementation.
Rubric Intent Cont. • Provides a description of the next level of success. • Describes exemplary practice. • Suggests sources of documentation to validate level of implementation. • Serve as a foundation for the replacement of the current EdYES performance indicators.
The SI Rubrics 5 Strands 12 Standards 26 Benchmarks Key Characteristics
Conversation Using the Framework and Rubric handouts, • Review Strand IV, Standard 2, Benchmark B – Engagement (page 12 of Framework) • Discuss the activities that you currently have in place that would address the Key Characteristics under 1-4 • Discuss how your school might rate itself on the rubric scope of practice for each of the Characteristic/Key Attributes listed ( pages 75-78 of rubrics)
Documents Available Online • The School Improvement Framework, Rubrics, this PowerPoint, and other resources are available online at: www.mi.gov/osi or at www.mi.gov/schoolimprovement
Contact Information • Dr. Yvonne Caamal Canul, Director Office of School Improvement Canuly@michigan.gov • Linda Forward, Supervisor Office of School Improvement ForwardL@michigan.gov • Linda Kent, Project Coordinator Office of School Improvement KentL2@michigan.gov