Connecticut

1
Connecticut
Trevor Yates Vice-President Cambridge Education
(LLC)
September 2007
2
WHO ARE WE
Since 1983, Cambridge Education has combined the
expertise and experience of its permanently
employed staff with self-employed associates. We
currently employ 550 full time staff and have a
data base of 7,000 associate education
specialists world-wide and have a current
turnover of over 100m
Our vision is to create a lasting improvement in
the quality of education experienced by the young
people and adults we support, either directly or
indirectly, through our relationship with clients

Our aim is to provide professional educational
advice and practical solutions
Our objective is to contribute to and be part of
the development of every organization we work
with
Our approach is to develop partnerships based
upon mutual trust.
3
WHO DO WE WORK FOR
Funding Agencies Department for International
Development (DFID), European Commission (EC),
Asian Development Bank (ADB), World Bank (WB),
International Development Bank (IDB), UN
Agencies, Other bilateral donors (Sweden, Japan,
Finland, Ireland, Denmark)
Government Ministries policy support, planning
and budgeting, capacity building, restructuring,
systems development etc
Government Institutions and Agencies teacher
training institutions, curriculum authorities,
examination boards,inspection authorities
Districts and Schools district reform, policy
development, leadership development, performance
management, curriculum design, professional
development.
4
Afghanistan street children, non-formal education
WHERE DO WE WORK
Uzbekistan Technical vocational education
Ukraine civic Education curriculum development
and training of teachers.
Armenia examination systems reform
Nepal project preparation, policy development,
teacher training,
Turkey Basic education vocational education
Mongolia textbook design and publishing,
education management, project management
Pakistan pre- and in-service teacher training, ,
curriculum development, textbook development,
EMIS, assessment and examination reform,
China project design, school development
planning, teacher training, curriculum
development, inspection, headteacher training,
Bangladesh project preparation, policy
development at both primary and secondary levels,
school development planning, inspection,
curriculum development, teacher training,
headteacher training, textbook production, EMIS,
5
WHERE DO WE WORK
Lao PDR policy development for teacher
education,
Thailand integrating ICT in the curriculum,
teacher training, institutional development,
human resource development
Cambodia project preparation, textbook
development, production and distribution,
Vietnam project preparation, sector review,
monitoring and evaluation
6
WHERE DO WE WORK
Nigeria strategic and financial planning,
institutional development, teacher training,
curriculum development
Uganda school planning and financing, cost-sharing
Gambia support to the development of a SWAp,
policy and planning, school improvement, teacher
training,
Ethiopia support to design of a SWAp, and
development of textbook policy
Ghana financial planning, institutional
development, human resource development, EMIS
Tanzania project design and sector development
planning
Malawi project and sector review, non-formal
education, institutional development
South Africa strategic and financial planning,
institutional development, human resource
development, quality assurance, teacher training,
curriculum development, equity, school improvement
Botswana TVET project design and policy
development
7
UK School inspection district reform
performance management coaching and mentoring
school improvement school development planning
c.p.d. site-based management childrens
services health education BSF academies,ICT
WHERE DO WE WORK

USA School evaluations, district reform,
executive coaching, district accountability
planning, school improvement school development
planning, technical assistance, charter schools,
charter management organizations
Antigua Strengthening Tech Voc Education
EEC Curriculum development, leadership training,
school development planning, language
development, VET, performance management,
Barbados Development of language centre
Windward Island Dominica, St Vincent, St Lucia,
Grenada - curriculum development, assessment,
children at risk, equity, EMIS, teacher
professional development, literacy and numeracy
development
8
Credible partner

• Over 25 years experience
• 45 countries world wide
• developing local capacity and promoting school
  improvement.
• Completed over 1,800 schools reviews across US
• Worked in Connecticut for past six years
• 50 school reviews
• Executive Coaching (State level)
• Effective Classroom Observation (over 100
  Administrators)
• Facilitated Elementary School Principals Network
  (ESPN)
• Provided Technical Assistance for District
  Improvement and Accountability Planning
• Responsible for running Local Education
  Authorities in UK
• Islington Southwark Isles of Scilly
• Largest single contractor of school inspections
  in England
• over 2,000 inspections a year on behalf of UK
  Government

9
(No Transcript)
10
WHAT RESULTS DO WE ACHIEVE
Islington LEA since 2000, when Cambridge
Education took over responsibility, Islington LEA
has moved from being considered a failing
authority to the top quartile overall and top 5
of LEAs for SEN, according to UK Government
inspections - in 2 of past 3 years recognised as
the most improved LEA in England.
Islington schools - in 2000 Ofsted Inspections
identified 20 of schools in either special
measures or serious weakness. In the Autumn of
2005 0 of schools were in either of these
categories - and the 7 schools inspected under
the New Inspections arrangements were rated 3
outstanding, 2 very good and 2 good.
Achievement of boysfor the past three years,
CEA_at_Islington have consistently succeeded in
raising the achievement levels of both boys and
girls, while reducing the gap in performance
between girls and boys.
Ethnic minority pupilsAfrican Caribbean, African
and Bangladeshi pupils in Islington are
outperforming their counter parts in the rest of
the country in tests at 11, 14 and 16.
11
Purpose of Quality Reviews

• The School Quality Review program is a
  central component in the States strategy for
  promoting continuous school improvement.
• It is designed to enable and assist
• schools and districts to have a clear view of
  their strengths, areas for development
• the School Board and the Connecticut State
  Department of Education to have a clear picture
  of the quality of education provided in each
  district and individual schools
• A commitment to a cycle of monitoring,
  evaluation, review and revision (MERR) by the
  schools leadership and staff is vital in
  creating a dynamic organisational culture of
  continuous improvement

12
A five-stage cycle for school improvement
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
13
Key Focus for School Quality Reviews includes

• The academic performance levels achieved by
  students in the school.
• The quality of the education provided, including
  the quality of teaching and its impact on
  learning the curriculum community and parental
  involvement
• How well the school uses data to inform
  instructional decisions at building and classroom
  levels
• How well the school provides for students
  personal character development.
• How well the school is led and managed.
• These mirror the components of
  Connecticuts Accountability for Learning Model.

14
The Criterion for School Quality Reviews
1 Student achievement in the core subjects 2
The quality of instruction through teaching,
learning and curriculum 3. Students personal
character development 4. Effective leadership
and management 5. Partnerships with parents and
community
15
Key Focus for District Quality Reviews

• The District Quality Review process is
  designed to address three central questions
• What service and support does the district
  provide to the schools in its system?
• How well does it provide these essential
  services and functions?
• To what degree is the district a high performance
  systemas a whole and in key functions?

16
The Criterion for District Quality Reviews

• ATTAINMENT, LEARNING TEACHING, CURRICULUM
  ASSESSMENT
• 2. LEADERSHIP, CULTURE, ACCOUNTABILITY
• 3. MANAGEMENT OF HUMAN FISCAL RESOURCES
• 4. OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS
• 5. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT SATISFACTION

17
The grade levels
There is a 5 point scale
Grade Achievement Overall and Criteria judgments
5 advanced excellent
4 goal exceeds minimum requirements
3 proficient meets minimum requirements
2 basic needs improvement
1 below basic needs substantial improvement
18
Quality reviews have 3 stages

• Stage 1 - Pre site visit
• Stage 2 - Site-visit.
• Stage 3 - Feedback.

19
Stage 1 Pre-Assessment Visit

• Preparatory work is the foundation of a
  successful Quality Reviews.
• Each district and every school will be asked to
  complete short Self-Evaluation Forms
• (DSEF and SEF)
• summarize the districts and schools own
  perception of how well they meet the Quality
  Review Criteria.   
• Prior to the review the State and / or District
  and will provide Cambridge Education with
• key student achievement data.
• At the start of the visit the district / school
  will provide the lead reviewer with
• the latest version of the district / schools
  development (improvement) plan
• copies of reports of any internal evaluation
  undertaken during the past two years
• organizational charts which highlights any recent
  the changes made, including roles and
  responsibilities,
• details of the staff professional development
  program.

The lead reviewer will be able to use this
information alongside the SEF to gain an
understanding of the school context, its history
and most importantly actions, which have taken
place during the past two years.
20
DSEF
21
SEF
22
Stage 2 Site visit School reviews

• The reviewer(s)will be in the school for two
  days, during which time they collect evidence,
  through
• meeting with Principal and School Leadership Team
  
• observing teaching and learning
• examining students work
• discussions with teachers, students, parents and
  other members of the school community.
• This evidence provides them with a thorough
  understanding of
• the range and quality of the schools work.

23
Site visit District reviews

• The district review team will normally consist of
  4 reviewers
• 2 from Cambridge Education and 2 from State
  Department of Education
• The review team will spend 1 week reviewing each
  district
• Day 1 will be spent at the State Department,
  reviewing and analyzing data
• The remaining 4 days will be spent in the
  District.
• The team will hold meetings / focus groups with a
  range of individuals and
• organizations including
• The Superintendent and District Leadership Team
• The Chair and at least one other member of the
  District Board
• District leaders for instruction / data-analysis
  / operational support / fiscal
• A range of stakeholders
• Parents / local community groups/ unions /
  administrators/ teachers
• The team will attend district meetings and
  observe the workings of the district
• This evidence provides them with a thorough
  understanding of the range and

24
Student learning and development

• Evidence is collected to evaluate the impact
  the district / school is having on student
  learning and development
• standards achieved and progress made by students
• the impact on student development attitudes,
  character and personal growth and development

25
Engaging the students and staff

• In schools
• Reviewers will talk with students in order to
  assess
• their understanding and knowledge of different
  subjects
• their attitudes towards work
• their life at school
• Reviewers will talk with teachers in order to
  judge how
• roles and responsibilities are fulfilled
• Reviewers will ask teachers for
• examples of students work
• curriculum frameworks
• record of internal assessment
• results in external tests and examinations
• The school may offer other measures or indicators
  of
• attainment and progress

26
Engaging the staff

• In Districts
• Reviewers will talk with central office staff in
  order to judge how
• roles and responsibilities are fulfilled
• Reviewers will ask staff for
• examples of policies and procedures
• evidence on the quality of the services provided
  by the district to the schools it serves track
  individual work
• evidence of the impact of the districts work on
  student achievement
• curriculum frameworks
• record of district assessments
• results in external tests and examinations
• evidence of how the district monitors, evaluates
  and reviews the quality of its own services and
  the quality of the education provided in its
  schools
• The district may offer other measures or
  indicators of school improvement

27
What questions underpin the review?

• Quality reviews asks three key questions
• how well is the district / school doing now?
• what strategies and factors does the district /
  school employ at present to contribute to its
  success?
• what does the district / school need to do in
  order to further improve?

28

• Sample School Schedule

29
Sample District Schedule
30
Overall judgment

• How good is the district / school?
• What does it do well?
• What should it do to improve?
• The MIC approach
• What should it Maintain?
• What should it Improve?
• What should it Change?

31
Stage 3 Feedback

• Throughout the visit the reviewers meet
  regularly with the Superintendent / Principal
  to
• provide on going feedback on the progress of the
  review
• check and clarify understandings
• request any other areas of information
• give a daily overview of the observations made
• The Superintendent / Principal can also direct
  feedback to the lead
• reviewer on any issues which need following up

32
Final oral feedback

• At the end of the visit the reviewers provide
  oral feedback and leave a written summary with
  the school. This feedback includes
• overview of the outcomes from the review
• outlines the main strengths of the school and
  areas for development
• If there has been effective communication it is
  unlikely that this feedback will contain any
  surprises.
• It is helpful for the superintendent /
  principal to have others from their team and/or
  members of the board present at the feedback.
• This enables the principal to listen, direct
  all his /her attention to the message given and
  to ask questions.

33
The final report

• The final written report is an analysis of the
  district / schools strengths and areas for
  development.
• Districts / Schools have the opportunity to
  review the draft report for factual accuracy
  before final publication, which is usually within
  4 weeks of the end of the site visit

34
What the school does well

• The school is well lead and managed by the
  principal and ably supported by many key teaching
  and support staff in the school.
• The literacy and numeracy facilitators lead and
  manage their areas of responsibility very well
  and are driving improvements in English language
  arts and mathematics.
• There are good systems for recording and
  analyzing data on students achievements. This
  underpins the improvements, which the school has
  made.
• The school is making good use of data to measure
  progress, identify where it is doing well and
  target where more improvement is needed.
• There is a good climate for learning and
  relationships between students and adults are
  positive. The students behavior is generally
  good in classes and around the school.

35
What the school needs to improve

• Improve consistency in the implementation of the
  schools strategies for teaching literacy and
  numeracy by
• creating more opportunities for students to
  engage in meaningful discussions
• improving further, the teachers questioning
  skills
• raising the quality and quantity of hands-on work
  that the students undertake
• improving the interest and productivity levels of
  tasks that students do in class
• ensuring senior leaders make more frequent visits
  through classrooms to maintain a clear oversight
  of the quality and consistency of teaching
• continuing to improve teachers knowledge and
  confidence to differentiate work
• continuing to develop the strategic use of
  computerized learning.

36
Post Review

• The district / school can use the report to
• develop a plan of improvement
• focus on the totality of its work
• keep teaching and learning at the forefront of
  its thinking and planning
• When district and school evaluation is set
  within a culture of self-reflection, analysis of
  results and action, it becomes a very powerful
  tool for district / school improvement
• Thought of in this way a Quality Review is a
  beginning

37
District - School improvement planning
Mobilise (the stakeholders)
Discover (open our minds and behaviors to spot
the opportunities)
Improving the district/ school
continuing to assessthe needs of the
communityand adapt to deliver those needs
Deliver (Establish theenterprise)
Results
Deepen (Evaluate and choosethe opportunities)
Develop (Vision Plan )