Report of the External Review Team for Westminster Public Schools 6933 Raleigh St Westminster CO 80030-5912 US Dr. Pamela Swanson Superintendent Date: April 24, 2016 - April 27, 2016 Document Generated On September 29, 2016 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Copyright (c) 2016 by Advance Education, Inc. AdvancED™ grants to the Institution, which is the subject of the External Review Team Report, and its designees and stakeholders a non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free license and release to reproduce, reprint, and distribute this report in accordance with and as protected by the Copyright Laws of the United States of America and all foreign countries. All other rights not expressly conveyed are reserved by AdvancED™. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 2 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Table of Contents Introduction Results Teaching and Learning Impact Standard 3 - Teaching and Assessing for Learning Standard 5 - Using Results for Continuous Improvement Student Performance Diagnostic Effective Learning Environments Observation Tool (eleot™) eleot™ Data Summary Findings Leadership Capacity Standard 1 - Purpose and Direction Standard 2 - Governance and Leadership Stakeholder Feedback Diagnostic Findings Resource Utilization Standard 4 - Resources and Support Systems Findings Conclusion Accreditation Recommendation Addenda Individual Institution Results (Self-reported) Team Roster Next Steps About AdvancED References Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved 4 10 10 11 12 12 14 18 21 26 27 27 28 28 33 33 34 36 39 40 40 41 49 50 51 Page 3 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Introduction The External Review is an integral component of AdvancED Performance Accreditation and provides the institution with a comprehensive evaluation guided by the results of diagnostic instruments, in-depth review of data and documentation, and the professional judgment of a team of qualified and highly trained evaluators. A series of diagnostic instruments examines the impact of teaching and learning on student performance, the capacity of leadership to effect continuous improvement, and the degree to which the institution optimizes its use of available resources to facilitate and support student success. The results of this evaluation are represented in the Index of Education Quality (IEQ™) and through critical observations, namely, Powerful Practices, Opportunities for Improvement, and Improvement Priorities. Accreditation is a voluntary method of quality assurance developed more than 100 years ago by American universities and secondary schools and designed primarily to distinguish schools adhering to a set of educational standards. Today the accreditation process is used at all levels of education and is recognized for its ability to effectively drive student performance and continuous improvement in education. Institutions seeking to gain or retain accreditation must meet AdvancED Standards specific to their institution type, demonstrate acceptable levels of student performance and the continuous improvement of student performance, and provide evidence of stakeholder engagement and satisfaction. The power of AdvancED Performance Accreditation lies in the connections and linkages between and among the conditions, processes, and practices within a system that impact student performance and organizational effectiveness. Standards help to delineate what matters. They provide a common language through which an education community can engage in conversations about educational improvement, system effectiveness, and achievement. They serve as a foundation for planning and implementing improvement strategies and activities and for measuring success. AdvancED Standards were developed by a committee comprised of talented educators and leaders from the fields of practice, research, and policy who applied professional wisdom, deep knowledge of effective practice, and the best available research to craft a set of robust standards that define institutional quality and guide continuous improvement. Prior to implementation, an internationally recognized panel of experts in testing and measurement, teacher quality, and education research reviewed the standards and provided feedback, guidance and endorsement. The AdvancED External Review Team uses AdvancED Standards, associated indicators and criteria related to student performance and stakeholder engagement to guide its evaluation. The Team examines adherence to standards as well as how the institution functions as a whole and embodies the practices and characteristics expected of an accredited institution. The Standards, indicators and related criteria are evaluated using indicator-specific performance levels. The Team rates each indicator and criterion on a scale of 1 to 4. The final scores assigned to the indicators and criteria represent the average of the External Review Team members' individual ratings. The External Review is the hallmark of AdvancED Performance Accreditation. It energizes and equips the institution's leadership and stakeholders to achieve higher levels of performance and address those areas that Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 4 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools may be hindering efforts to reach desired performance levels. External Review is a rigorous process that includes the in-depth examination of evidence and relevant data, interviews with all stakeholder groups, and extensive observations of learning, instruction, and operations. Use of Diagnostic Tools A key to examining the institution is the design and use of diagnostic tools that reveal the effectiveness with which an institution creates conditions and implements processes and practices that impact student performance and success. In preparation for the External Review the institution conducted a Self Assessment that applied the standards and criteria for accreditation. The institution provided evidence to support its conclusions vis a vis organizational effectiveness in ensuring acceptable and improving levels of student performance. - - an indicator-based tool that connects the specific elements of the criteria to evidence gathered by the team; a student performance analytic that examines the quality of assessment instruments used by the institution, the integrity of the administration of the assessment to students, the quality of the learning results including the impact of instruction on student learning at all levels of performance, and the equity of learning that examines the results of student learning across all demographics; a stakeholder engagement instrument that examines the fidelity of administration and results of perception surveys seeking the perspective of students, parents, and teachers; a state-of-the-art, learner-centric observation instrument, the Effective Learning Environments Observation Tool (eleot™) that quantifies students' engagement, attitudes and dispositions organized in 7 environments: Equitable Learning, High Expectations, Supportive Learning, Active Learning, Progress Monitoring and Feedback, Well-Managed Learning, and Digital Learning. All evaluators must be trained, reach acceptable levels of inter-rater reliability, and certified to use this researchbased and validated instrument. The External Review Team's findings and critical observations are shared in this report through the IEQ™ results as well as through the identification of Powerful Practices, Opportunities for Improvement, and Improvement Priorities. Index of Education Quality In the past, accreditation reviews resulted in an accreditation recommendation on status. Labels such as advised, warned, probation, or all clear were used to describe the status of a school relative to the AdvancED Standards and other evaluative criteria. Beginning in the 2013-14 school year, AdvancED introduced a new framework to describe the results of an accreditation review. Consistent with the modern focus of accreditation on continuous improvement with an emphasis on student success, AdvancED introduced an innovative and state-of-the-art framework for diagnosing and revealing institutional performance called the Index of Education Quality (IEQ™). The IEQ™ comprises three domains of performance: 1) the impact of teaching and learning on student performance; 2) the capacity of leadership to guide the institution toward the achievement of its Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 5 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools vision and strategic priorities; and 3) use of resources to support and optimize learning. Therefore, your institution will no longer receive an accreditation status. Instead, your institution will be accredited with an IEQ™ score. In the case where an institution is failing to meet established criteria, the accreditation will be under review thereby requiring frequent monitoring and demonstrated improvement. The three domains of performance are derived from the AdvancED Standards and associated indicators, the analysis of student performance, and the engagement and feedback of stakeholders. Within each domain institutions can connect to the individual performance levels that are applied in support of the AdvancED Standards and evaluative criteria. Within the performance levels are detailed descriptors that serve as a valuable source of guidance for continuous improvement. Upon review of the findings in this report and building on their Powerful Practices, institutional leaders should work with their staff to review and understand the evidence and rationale for each Opportunity for Improvement and Improvement Priority as well as the corresponding pathway to improvement described in the performance levels of the selected indicator(s). The IEQ™ provides a new framework that recognizes and supports the journey of continuous improvement. An institution's IEQ™ is the starting point for continuous improvement. Subsequent actions for improvement and evidence that these have had a positive impact will raise the institution's IEQ™ score. Benchmark Data Throughout this report, AdvancED provides benchmark data for each indicator and for each component of the evaluative criteria. These benchmark data represent the overall averages across the entire AdvancED Network for your institution type. Thus, the AdvancED Network average provides an extraordinary opportunity for institutions to understand their context on a global scale rather than simply compared to a state, region, or country. It is important to understand that the AdvancED Network averages are provided primarily to serve as a tool for continuous improvement and not as a measure of quality in and of itself. Benchmark data, when wisely employed, have a unique capacity to help institutions identify and leverage their strengths and areas of improvement to significantly impact student learning. Powerful Practices A key to continuous improvement is the institution's ability to learn from and build upon its most effective and impactful practices. Such practices serve as critical leverage points necessary to guide, support and ensure continuous improvement. A hallmark of the accreditation process is its commitment to identifying with evidence, the conditions, processes and practices that are having the most significant impact on student performance and institutional effectiveness. Throughout this report, the External Review Team has captured and defined Powerful Practices. These noteworthy practices are essential to the institution's effort to continue its journey of improvement. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 6 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Opportunities for Improvement Every institution can and must improve no matter what levels of performance it has achieved in its past. During the process of the review, the External Review Team identified areas of improvement where the institution is meeting the expectations for accreditation but in the professional judgment of the Team these are Opportunities for Improvement that should be considered by the institution. Using the criteria described in the corresponding rubric(s) to the Opportunity for Improvement, the institution can identify what elements of practice must be addressed to guide the improvement. Improvement Priorities The expectations for accreditation are clearly defined in a series of the rubric-based AdvancED Standards, indicators and evaluative criteria focused on the impact of teaching and learning on student performance, the capacity of the institution to be guided by effective leadership, and the allocation and use of resources to support student learning. As such, the External Review Team reviewed, analyzed and deliberated over significant bodies of evidence provided by the institution and gathered by the Team during the process. In the professional judgment of the Team as well as the results of the diagnostic process, the Team defined, with rationale, Improvement Priorities. The priorities must be addressed in a timely manner by the institution to retain and improve their accreditation performance as represented by the IEQ™. Improvement Priorities serve as the basis for the follow-up and monitoring process that will begin upon conclusion of the External Review. The institution must complete and submit an Accreditation Progress Report within two years of the External Review. The report must include actions taken by the institution to address the Improvement Priorities along with the corresponding evidence and results. The IEQ™ will be recalculated by AdvancED upon review of the evidence and results associated with the Improvement Priorities. The Review On April 24, 2016, a group of 22 education professionals met in Westminster, Colorado to conduct a three-day External Review of the system. Westminster Public Schools is a publicly funded system comprised of 19 attendance centers, including an early learning center. The system office is located in a suite on the second floor of the high school. The External Review Team (Team) was comprised of practicing educators and education consultants, several of whom were very knowledgeable of standards-based instruction and assessment. This expertise was critical to the success of the Review due to the fact that the system engaged in this methodology, which they referred to as their Competency Based System (CBS.) Preparation for the on-site Review included collection of evidence by the system and its schools. This evidence was stored in AdvancED's® ASSISTTM tool as well as a separate cloud-based environment (Google Docs) provided by the system. The evidence was shared with members of the External Review Team several weeks in advance of the on-site review. Prior to the on-site Review, the Team participated in a webinar to introduce team members to one another, answer questions concerning logistics and arrangements for the on-site portion, and an initial review of the evidence in both ASSIST and the system's cloud environment. All Team Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 7 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools members completed the required online team member training course, and all Team members completed training for and were certified observers for eleot®. During an off-site webinar before the Review, the Lead Evaluator shared a document for organizing visits to the system's schools. The superintendent of the system had requested that all attendance centers be visited during this review. As a result, this team was significantly larger than the AdvancED requirement for a system of this size. Because several of the attendance centers included early learning classrooms, the Lead Evaluator assigned either three or four team members to those centers, as opposed to the traditional two-person "miniteam," in an effort to meet the requirements for early learning certification. Additionally, AdvancED's Early Childhood Director visited the early childhood center during the Lead Evaluator's introductory on-site visit to the system. The system's staff provided exceptional support before and during the External Review. System personnel and community members were very hospitable, open and honest in their interactions with the Team. The Team interviewed over 500 individuals during the External Review. Any questions the Team put forward, system personnel promptly provided answers or evidentiary documents. The superintendent began and ended the process with the statement, "We are open to your feedback. Nothing is hidden, we are showing you how we really are." Evidence from all sources indicated the system was honest and transparent about their work, from the Self Assessment through the on-site review. It was apparent to the Team that the system gathered considerable data and utilized that data in a variety of ways on a regular basis, with additional data collection and analysis completed for the Internal Review. The system garnered high response rates on the AdvancED surveys and the Stakeholder Feedback Data Document included a thorough analysis of results. The Student Performance Data Document was similarly well done. In addition to the required AdvancED surveys, the system engaged in additional stakeholder data gathering. The system's Self Assessment of the AdvancED Standards for Quality was honest and forthright, with clear examples and references to evidentiary documents available throughout the report. The system's assessment was validated by a comparison of the Team's final ratings to the system's self ratings, where little variation occurred. The Team also found system personnel to be deeply engaged in the Internal and External Review processes. Personnel throughout the system responded to questions and comments thoughtfully. Several Team members commented, "The people in this system are serious about this process and about improvement." Stakeholders were interviewed by members of the External Review Team to gain their perspectives on topics relevant to the institution's effectiveness and student performance. The feedback gained through the stakeholder interviews was considered with other evidences and data to support the findings of the External Review. The following chart depicts the numbers of persons interviewed representative of various stakeholder groups. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 8 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Stakeholder Interviewed Number Superintendents 1 Board Members 5 Administrators 68 Instructional Staff 101 Support Staff 27 Students 250 Parents/Community/Business Leaders 95 Total 547 Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 9 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Results Teaching and Learning Impact The impact of teaching and learning on student achievement is the primary expectation of every institution. The relationship between teacher and learner must be productive and effective for student success. The impact of teaching and learning includes an analysis of student performance results, instructional quality, learner and family engagement, support services for student learning, curriculum quality and efficacy, and college and career readiness data. These are all key indicators of an institution's impact on teaching and learning. A high-quality and effective educational system has services, practices, and curriculum that ensure teacher effectiveness. Research has shown that an effective teacher is a key factor for learners to achieve their highest potential and be prepared for a successful future. The positive influence an effective educator has on learning is a combination of "student motivation, parental involvement" and the "quality of leadership" (Ding & Sherman, 2006). Research also suggests that quality educators must have a variety of quantifiable and intangible characteristics that include strong communication skills, knowledge of content, and knowledge of how to teach the content. The institution's curriculum and instructional program should develop learners' skills that lead them to think about the world in complex ways (Conley, 2007) and prepare them to have knowledge that extends beyond the academic areas. In order to achieve these goals, teachers must have pedagogical skills as well as content knowledge (Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voxx, T., Jordan, A., Klusmann, U., Krauss, S., Nuebrand, M., & Tsai, Y., 2010). The acquisition and refinement of teachers' pedagogical skills occur most effectively through collaboration and professional development. These are a "necessary approach to improving teacher quality" (Colbert, J., Brown, R., Choi, S., & Thomas, S., 2008). According to Marks, Louis, and Printy (2002), staff members who engage in "active organizational learning also have higher achieving students in contrast to those that do not." Likewise, a study conducted by Horng, Klasik, and Loeb (2010), concluded that leadership in effective institutions "supports teachers by creating collaborative work environments." Institutional leaders have a responsibility to provide experiences, resources, and time for educators to engage in meaningful professional learning that promotes student learning and educator quality. AdvancED has found that a successful institution implements a curriculum based on clear and measurable expectations for student learning. The curriculum provides opportunities for all students to acquire requisite knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Teachers use proven instructional practices that actively engage students in the learning process. Teachers provide opportunities for students to apply their knowledge and skills to real world situations. Teachers give students feedback to improve their performance. Institutions with strong improvement processes move beyond anxiety about the current reality and focus on priorities and initiatives for the future. Using results, i.e., data and other information, to guide continuous improvement is key to an institution's success. A study conducted by Datnow, Park, and Wohlstetter (2007) from the Center on Educational Governance at the University of Southern California indicated that data can shed light on existing areas of strength and weakness and also guide improvement strategies in a systematic and strategic manner (Dembosky, J., Pane, J., Barney, H., & Christina, R., 2005). The study also identified six Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 10 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools key strategies that performance-driven systems use: (1) building a foundation for data-driven decision making, (2) establishing a culture of data use and continuous improvement, (3) investing in an information management system, (4) selecting the right data, (5) building institutional capacity for data-driven decision making, and (6) analyzing and acting on data to improve performance. Other research studies, though largely without comparison groups, suggested that data-driven decision-making has the potential to increase student performance (Alwin, 2002; Doyle, 2003; Lafee, 2002; McIntire, 2002). Through ongoing evaluation of educational institutions, AdvancED has found that a successful institution uses a comprehensive assessment system based on clearly defined performance measures. The system is used to assess student performance on expectations for student learning, evaluate the effectiveness of curriculum and instruction, and determine strategies to improve student performance. The institution implements a collaborative and ongoing process for improvement that aligns the functions of the school with the expectations for student learning. Improvement efforts are sustained, and the institution demonstrates progress in improving student performance and institution effectiveness. Standard 3 - Teaching and Assessing for Learning The system's curriculum, instructional design, and assessment practices guide and ensure teacher effectiveness and student learning across all grades and courses. Indicator Description Review Team Score AdvancED Network Average 3.1 The system's curriculum provides equitable and challenging learning experiences that ensure all students have sufficient opportunities to develop learning, thinking, and life skills that lead to success at the next level. 2.50 2.68 3.2 Curriculum, instruction, and assessment throughout the system are monitored and adjusted systematically in response to data from multiple assessments of student learning and an examination of professional practice. 2.45 2.50 3.3 Teachers throughout the district engage students in their learning through instructional strategies that ensure achievement of learning expectations. 2.09 2.55 3.4 System and school leaders monitor and support the improvement of instructional practices of teachers to ensure student success. 2.00 2.73 3.5 The system operates as a collaborative learning organization through structures that support improved instruction and student learning at all levels. 2.00 2.57 3.6 Teachers implement the system's instructional process in support of student learning. 2.09 2.48 3.7 Mentoring, coaching, and induction programs support instructional improvement consistent with the system's values and beliefs about teaching and learning. 2.27 2.60 Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 11 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Indicator Description Review Team Score AdvancED Network Average 3.8 The system and all of its schools engage families in meaningful ways in their children's education and keep them informed of their children's learning progress. 2.27 2.92 3.9 The system designs and evaluates structures in all schools whereby each student is well known by at least one adult advocate in the student's school who supports that student's educational experience. 2.14 2.40 3.10 Grading and reporting are based on clearly defined criteria that represent the attainment of content knowledge and skills and are consistent across grade levels and courses. 2.50 2.53 3.11 All staff members participate in a continuous program of professional learning. 2.14 2.64 3.12 The system and its schools provide and coordinate learning support services to meet the unique learning needs of students. 2.55 2.66 Standard 5 - Using Results for Continuous Improvement The system implements a comprehensive assessment system that generates a range of data about student learning and system effectiveness and uses the results to guide continuous improvement. Indicator Description Review Team Score AdvancED Network Average 5.1 The system establishes and maintains a clearly defined and comprehensive student assessment system. 2.36 2.66 5.2 Professional and support staff continuously collect, analyze and apply learning from a range of data sources, including comparison and trend data about student learning, instruction, program evaluation, and organizational conditions that support learning. 2.05 2.41 5.3 Throughout the system professional and support staff are trained in the interpretation and use of data. 2.00 2.15 5.4 The school system engages in a continuous process to determine verifiable improvement in student learning, including readiness for and success at the next level. 2.82 2.46 5.5 System and school leaders monitor and communicate comprehensive information about student learning, school performance, and the achievement of system and school improvement goals to stakeholders. 2.14 2.72 Student Performance Diagnostic The quality of assessments used to measure student learning, assurance that assessments are administered with procedural fidelity and appropriate accommodations, assessment results that reflect the quality of Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 12 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools learning, and closing gaps in achievement among subpopulations of students are all important indicators for evaluating overall student performance. Evaluative Criteria Review Team Score AdvancED Network Average Assessment Quality 4.00 3.28 Test Administration 4.00 3.50 Equity of Learning 4.00 2.44 Quality of Learning 3.00 2.97 Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 13 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Effective Learning Environments Observation Tool (eleot™) Every learner should have access to an effective learning environment in which she/he has multiple opportunities to be successful. The Effective Learning Environments Observation Tool (eleot™) measures the extent to which learners are in an environment that is equitable, supportive, and well-managed. An environment where high expectations are the norm and active learning takes place. It measures whether learners' progress is monitored and feedback is provided and the extent to which technology is leveraged for learning. Observations of classrooms or other learning venues are conducted for a minimum of 20 minutes per observation. Every member of the External Review Team is required to be trained and pass a certification exam that establishes inter-rater reliability. Team members conduct multiple observations during the review process and provide ratings on 30 items based on a four-point scale (4=very evident; 3=evident; 2=somewhat evident; and 1=not observed). The following provides the aggregate average score across multiple observations for each of the seven learning environments included in eleot™ as well as benchmark results across the AdvancED Network. 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.86 2.81 2.56 2.69 3.07 2.94 2.58 2.50 2.87 2.79 2.52 3.14 2.0 2.07 1.5 1.83 1.0 0.5 ng rni ing ea lL Le G. Dig ita ed ag an ll-M We F. res s F e Mon ed b a itorin ck g og Pr E. Review arn an d ng rni Ac D. ort pp C. Su tiv ive eL Le ec xp hE Hig B. ea arn ion tat arn Le le ab uit Eq A. ing s 0.0 ing Performance Levels eleot™ Results Network The Team conducted 215 eleotTM classroom observations during the Review. Results showed a limited range among the environment scores. Most were slightly lower than the AdvancED network averages. After reviewing the summary of results, the Team speculated that the slightly lower ratings could be attributed to two factors. First, the eleotTM instrument was originally designed for more traditional classroom settings, not Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 14 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools competency-based environments. The Team's thinking was that, while the instrument has been proven valid in a variety of settings, a competency-based model may include activities and interactions between and among students and teachers that may not have been as readily observable as in a traditional model. Second, during the off-site portion of the Review and at the beginning of the on-site portion, Team members studied and discussed the use of eleotTM in the competency-based setting, and as a result, may have overcompensated to some degree. Even given these possibilities, the Team determined that the ratings were internally valid and could be used as benchmarks. Comparison to the AdvancED network averages might not be as useful. The top two environments were the Well-Managed Learning Environment and the Supportive Learning Environment, with scores of 2.87 and 2.86, respectively. The Digital Learning Environment, though it was the lowest of the scores among the environments, was 2.07, which was noticeably higher than the AdvancED network average of 1.82. Results of ratings from the AdvancED Education Network (AEN) showed that the Well-Managed Learning Environment was usually rated highest among all environments, followed by the Progress Monitoring/Feedback Environment, then by the Supportive Learning Environment. The ratings for this system were slightly different in that, while Well-Managed was the highest score, Supportive Learning was rated second highest followed by Active Learning (which is fourth highest in the AEN averages). Additionally, Team members noted they often observed a high degree of collaboration among students. Another noted aspect was that the Equitable Learning Environment, rated sixth out of seven in the AEN list, was fourth in this system. One interpretation could be that in a CBS environment, children should be more actively engaged and supported in work that meets their needs (equitable) than an observer might see in a more traditional setting. The Progress Monitoring and Feedback Environment, ranked second highest in the AEN, was ranked fifth in observations conducted for this system. Team members speculated that because students managed much of the monitoring and feedback themselves in the CBS environment, it was likely observers did not see teachers providing feedback to students as would be expected in traditional classrooms. The Team reviewed proficiency scales and observed their use in some but not all classrooms. Many teachers expressed the phrase "kids are held accountable for their learning." However, the Team was not able to confirm that students always knew what the expectations were for assignments. When asked by an observer, "When is this project due to be completed?" one student replied, "I don't know." Some teachers indicated they were not sure how to use the proficiency scales. Further probing revealed that many students, especially at the elementary levels, reported they did not know how to go about finding out the overall requirements for the project. Other students in several schools commented they were really unsure about what was expected in terms of assignments. Conversely, several parents reported that their children could clearly articulate what they needed to know. System-wide ratings showed that the item titled "Understands how her/his work is assessed" was the lowest among the five items in that environment. In the AEN, the High Expectations Environment was ranked fifth out of the seven environments. In this system, this environment ranked sixth out of seven. Comments from Team members during deliberations verified this finding. The Team found several inconsistencies in practice and philosophy among classrooms and especially among schools. Several Team members noted that many of the student activities observed were lower level Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 15 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools and did not require critical thinking nor did those activities build depth of knowledge. One Team member, after witnessing students using the computers for non-curriculum related work, asked the teacher if the children were challenged with rigorous and challenging work, to which the teacher replied, "At least most of the kids in this class do their work." Another team member commented, "In some of the classrooms, students did not appear engaged in school-related work. Many were talking among themselves and texting." It should be noted that in these situations, the observers verified they were aware of the actual topics of conversations of students and the general topics of the texts. A comment from one team member was echoed by several: "I didn't feel the intensity in the classroom I expected. The climate seemed quite laissez-faire." A teacher reported, "We have two or three targets to cover, but I don't agree with them. They are too hard for my kids." Another teacher commented, "Educational equity is compromised by ability grouping students." Other Team members commented they saw many examples of high quality learning, very active student engagement, and teachers facilitating learning as opposed to lecturing. Some parents commented they were pleased with the degree of differentiation and flexible learning opportunities. Team members shared several examples from their observations demonstrating that students were working through playlists (lists of assignments and activities) and working on different materials based on their learning level. System-wide ratings confirmed that the item titled "has differentiated learning opportunities that meet her/his needs" was noticeably higher than the AEN average. Observation ratings on the Digital Learning Environment were noticeably higher for this system than the AEN average. In presentations, staff members described the "one-to-one" computer to student initiative and gave an overview of the high quality of the digital infrastructure across the system. However, not all comments concerning technology were positive. One teacher said, "We are working to embed technology, but we are mostly getting gadgets rather than creating more effective instruction." Parent interviews corroborated this concern. One parent volunteer stated, "I don't like these Chromebooks. Too many students are doing things they are not supposed to be doing." Team members reported that some teachers appeared to "opt out" of using any form of technology in their classrooms, as no equipment was observed inside the room nor were instructional strategies using technology employed. A staff member reported, "We need more training for teachers on the one to one integration of technology." Based on the history of implementation of CBS in the system, Team members posited they would see higher degrees of "CBS behaviors" in elementary classrooms, declining in higher grades where CBS had not been implemented as long. After the observations were complete, the Team could not fully confirm this hypothesis, finding no particular thread of consistency in and among classrooms across all levels. Analysis of Team member comments during deliberations indicated that certain schools, regardless of level, appeared to be more highly engaged in the CBS model than others. At the time of this writing, eleotTM ratings had not been disaggregated to confirm or refute this analysis. Overall, the Team found that eleotTM observation ratings generally supported the system's description of CBS implementation. The Team noted some inconsistencies in implementation of CBS teaching strategies and classroom practices. The Team encouraged the system to use results of the ratings for internal comparison with future observations as opposed to placing too much emphasis on comparisons with the AEN averages. System personnel should use their own system knowledge and experience to thoroughly review individual and Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 16 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools environmental item ratings to determine additional findings. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 17 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools eleot™ Data Summary Item Average Description Evident Somewhat Evident Not Observed % Very Evident A. Equitable Learning 1. 2.55 Has differentiated learning opportunities and activities that meet her/his needs 21.86% 33.02% 23.26% 21.86% 2. 3.16 Has equal access to classroom discussions, activities, resources, technology, and support 36.74% 46.98% 12.09% 4.19% 3. 2.93 Knows that rules and consequences are fair, clear, and consistently applied 26.98% 48.37% 15.35% 9.30% 4. 1.60 Has ongoing opportunities to learn about their own and other's backgrounds/cultures/differences 6.98% 12.09% 15.35% 65.58% Overall rating on a 4 point scale: 2.56 Item Average Description Evident Somewhat Evident Not Observed % Very Evident B. High Expectations 1. 2.82 Knows and strives to meet the high expectations established by the teacher 25.58% 40.00% 25.58% 8.84% 2. 2.89 Is tasked with activities and learning that are challenging but attainable 24.19% 45.58% 25.58% 4.65% 3. 1.86 Is provided exemplars of high quality work 12.09% 16.74% 16.28% 54.88% 4. 2.56 Is engaged in rigorous coursework, discussions, and/or tasks 15.81% 37.67% 33.02% 13.49% 5. 2.39 Is asked and responds to questions that require higher order thinking (e.g., applying, evaluating, synthesizing) 15.35% 33.02% 26.51% 25.12% Overall rating on a 4 point scale: 2.50 Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 18 Item Average Not Observed % Somewhat Evident C. Supportive Learning Evident Westminster Public Schools Very Evident AdvancED 1. 3.01 Demonstrates or expresses that learning experiences are positive 31.16% 44.19% 19.07% 5.58% 2. 3.04 Demonstrates positive attitude about the classroom and learning 31.63% 45.12% 19.07% 4.19% 3. 2.72 Takes risks in learning (without fear of negative feedback) 23.26% 39.53% 23.26% 13.95% 4. 2.99 Is provided support and assistance to understand content and accomplish tasks 31.16% 44.65% 16.28% 7.91% 5. 2.55 Is provided additional/alternative instruction and feedback at the appropriate level of challenge for her/his needs 21.40% 34.88% 20.93% 22.79% Description Overall rating on a 4 point scale: 2.86 Item Average Evident Somewhat Evident Not Observed % Very Evident D. Active Learning 1. 2.76 Has several opportunities to engage in discussions with teacher and other students 26.98% 33.95% 26.98% 12.09% 2. 2.10 Makes connections from content to reallife experiences 17.21% 18.14% 22.33% 42.33% 3. 2.88 Is actively engaged in the learning activities 27.44% 38.60% 28.84% 5.12% Description Overall rating on a 4 point scale: 2.58 Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 19 Item Average Description Not Observed % Somewhat Evident E. Progress Monitoring and Feedback Evident Westminster Public Schools Very Evident AdvancED 1. 2.53 Is asked and/or quizzed about individual progress/learning 16.28% 40.00% 24.19% 19.53% 2. 2.68 Responds to teacher feedback to improve understanding 19.07% 43.72% 23.72% 13.49% 3. 2.67 Demonstrates or verbalizes understanding of the lesson/content 16.74% 46.51% 24.19% 12.56% 4. 2.20 Understands how her/his work is assessed 15.35% 22.33% 29.30% 33.02% 5. 2.50 Has opportunities to revise/improve work based on feedback 17.21% 36.28% 26.05% 20.47% Overall rating on a 4 point scale: 2.52 Item Average Evident Somewhat Evident Not Observed % Very Evident F. Well-Managed Learning 1. 3.12 Speaks and interacts respectfully with teacher(s) and peers 34.42% 46.51% 15.81% 3.26% 2. 2.98 Follows classroom rules and works well with others 31.16% 39.07% 26.51% 3.26% 3. 2.68 Transitions smoothly and efficiently to activities 24.19% 36.74% 22.33% 16.74% 4. 2.52 Collaborates with other students during student-centered activities 24.19% 32.09% 14.88% 28.84% 5. 3.04 Knows classroom routines, behavioral expectations and consequences 32.09% 44.19% 19.07% 4.65% Description Overall rating on a 4 point scale: 2.87 Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 20 Item Average Not Observed % Somewhat Evident G. Digital Learning Evident Westminster Public Schools Very Evident AdvancED 1. 2.26 Uses digital tools/technology to gather, evaluate, and/or use information for learning 22.79% 22.33% 12.56% 42.33% 2. 2.10 Uses digital tools/technology to conduct research, solve problems, and/or create original works for learning 20.00% 20.00% 10.23% 49.77% 3. 1.85 Uses digital tools/technology to communicate and work collaboratively for learning 15.35% 13.95% 11.16% 59.53% Description Overall rating on a 4 point scale: 2.07 Findings Improvement Priority Design and implement a process to continually verify that all instructional staff and leaders are implementing CBS with fidelity. (Indicator 2.6, Indicator 3.4, Indicator 3.6) Primary Indicator Indicator 3.6 Evidence and Rationale Comments from teachers concerning implementation of CBS appeared to come from two points of view. The paragraphs below give examples of both points of view. First, there appeared to be a sizable number of teachers who expressed confusion and frustration over proper processes and practices in classrooms. Some teachers admitted (some hesitatingly, some freely) they were not as knowledgeable and skilled as they needed to be in classroom practices related to CBS. While the Team reviewed a great deal of training documentation, it seemed apparent that the information had not been assimilated and put into actual practice by all individuals. Team members heard that much of the training was new and had only recently been implemented in a systematic way. One student who had just moved into the district from a nearby school said, “Teachers pay more attention to you here, but some teachers [have trouble with classroom management], and their classes are loud and we don’t do much.” Several teachers reported that “EMPOWER is difficult to use and takes a lot of time” but that “it gets easier as we learn more about how to use it.” The Team did hear from many teachers that “students are held accountable for their own learning.” Many teachers talked about individual components of CBS, but the Team was able to get a “complete picture” and evidence of depth of knowledge of CBS implementation from few. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 21 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools In contrast, some teachers held a second point of view that clearly did not embrace the CBS philosophy. One teacher commented, “When I realized I had six or seven performance levels in one class, I thought I would die.” Several teachers worried that CBS appeared to be “another term for tracking kids.” One teacher commented, “Educational equity is compromised by ability grouping of students” while another stated, “When you group students by ability, students in low ability groupings don’t have good models.” Classroom observations conducted by the team using the eleot instrument corroborated that there was wide variation in the definition of terms, understanding of processes and practices, and philosophical alignment with and commitment to CBS. Teachers and students were engaged in a variety of activities including lecture, worksheets, cooperative learning activities, individual computer work, and in some cases, few or no learning activities at all. While most of these activities could be appropriate in a CBS classroom, during our limited observations the Team seldom found evidence that the connections to CBS were being made. Concerning technology use, Team members observed a wide range of use of Chromebooks by students at all levels in the system, including playing games that appeared unrelated to the subject, drill and practice games related to the subject, all the way to student engagement in research and collaborative projects using technology. Several teachers commented they were not skilled at use of technology in the classroom. One teacher commented, “We are working to embed technology, but mostly we have been getting gadgets rather than creating more effective instruction." A board member stated, “We ensure our staff is properly evaluated, and give staff opportunity improve, even if it means providing a fourth year for them to show improvement.” While all principals reported full commitment to CBS, Team members often inferred from comments in interviews that several concepts of CBS from definition of terms to implementation and evaluation were interpreted differently from principal to principal. One principal provided data from walkthrough observations; however, the Team was unclear on how much time or how often principals actually were in classrooms, or the types of data principals gathered to evaluate the effectiveness of CBS implementation. Documentation showed that the system uses the state’s teacher evaluation system. At face value, the 342 page manual for the implementation of teacher evaluation appeared to be based on traditional teaching and learning models. Without explanations and demonstrations of how the state evaluation model applies to CBS, supervision and evaluation may continue to be less than effective. However, no supervision process can be successful if the root causes, including the two possibilities discussed in this description, are not adequately dealt with. To that end, the Team developed a second Improvement Priority to enhance professional development. Both Improvement Priorities focus on complex topics that will require in-depth analysis of root cause and effective short and long term strategies to achieve the goal of permeation of the model throughout every classroom in the system. Improvement Priority Implement professional learning and evaluation programs to guarantee that all instructional staff and leaders have deep knowledge of and skills to implement CBS effectively. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 22 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools (Indicator 3.3, Indicator 3.5, Indicator 3.11) Primary Indicator Indicator 3.11 Evidence and Rationale The Team heard and read about the current professional development program content and process that has been instituted in the past year. Evidence indicated the process was well organized, and included input from staff at all levels. The amount of professional content available was impressive. The Team found, however, that content of professional development was not always being used in classrooms. Evidence from classroom observations, administrator and teacher interviews indicated wide variation of understanding and ability to apply the content. Some staff seemed unsure of definitions of terminology. Others felt comfortable with the concepts and terminology, but could not apply them in an efficient and effective way, which resulted in comments concerning over work and frustration. Comments also indicated building-level activities varied greatly within the system. One teacher commented, “Our [professional learning community] has been pretty inconsistent. Professional days are good because they are based on need.” A system staff member stated, “Intensive coaching will be needed to help teachers use technology to enhance learning.” One staff member described the need to increase training opportunities throughout the year, and to “spiral” and scaffold learning to more accurately address the varying performance levels of individuals. Overall, the team heard comments indicating wide variation of the degree of collaborative practices to improve instruction and student learning. The Team also found a wide variety of instructional strategies in professional development content from building to building, and even within the system’s “library” of content. The Team was unable to determine if this content, some of which appeared to be aligned with traditional instructional models, had been altered to fit the CBS model. This priority is summed up in the thirteenth of Deming’s 14 points of management: Institute a vigorous program of education and self-improvement. Additionally, all professional development should clearly demonstrate how it relates to CBS in order to maintain focus. However, even the best training will not be effective if it is not used with fidelity in the classroom. Therefore, the Team developed a second Improvement Priority concerning the review of supervision and evaluation practices. Both Improvement Priorities focus on complex topics that will require in-depth analysis of root cause and effective short and long term strategies to achieve the goal of permeation of the model throughout every classroom in the system. Opportunity For Improvement Design report cards that are more easily understood by parents, and educate parents and students more intensively on how to interpret CBS reporting. (Indicator 3.8, Indicator 3.10, Indicator 5.5) Primary Indicator Indicator 3.8 Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 23 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Evidence and Rationale Parents were clearly frustrated by and found CBS “report cards” difficult to understand. One parent reported that she took her oldest child out of the system prior to high school for fear of how credits would be reflected on the transcript. Several parents stated that they learned more from what teachers told them about how their students were performing than they did by trying to understand reports. System staff reported work that has been done with the state department of education and local universities, and suggested that progress had been made, but not as quickly as they wished. Many students could describe in varying degrees the concepts of grading and reporting, but often even they could not articulate a simple, clear explanation of the process. Comments related to performance levels and proficiency scales from some teachers and administrators indicated varying degrees of understanding as well. Though this Opportunity for Improvement is not perfectly aligned with these indicators, its importance cannot be overemphasized. When parents and students do not understand how learning progress is reported, engaging them in meaningful ways becomes much more difficult. Clarity and degree of complexity of data presentation based on the intended audience who is to receive the information is critical to understanding and engagement of those stakeholders. Powerful Practice The system has consistently responded to unique student needs through innovative opportunities, strategies and practices. (Indicator 3.12, Indicator 4.8) Primary Indicator Indicator 3.12 Evidence and Rationale The Team found a broad range of evidence indicating that the system had focused on the needs of students for at least seven years, beginning with the adoption of the CBS model. Differentiation models such as the alternative high school and STEM school were observed at the system level. Other evidence included the oneto-one technology initiative, use of Chromebooks, the system’s vision statement, “pipelines to success”, advisory cabinets, the use of various online learning programs, EMPOWER as a student information system, bilingual/international elementary program, multi-age competency-based classrooms, a robust early childhood program (including no limits on the number of programs necessary to meet the need), a blossoming transition program focused on future success of student through college and career readiness, and an award winning special services/interventionist program focused on “collaboration, not fragmentation” to assist students with almost any describable need. A simple statement from the Vision 2020 document appears to sum up the system's philosophy: The system “is committed to raising academic achievement for all students.” Continued commitment to this ideal will guide the system to focus on student success. Powerful Practice Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 24 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools The system’s student performance evaluation process using CBS coupled with the system's data management software provides truly verifiable data concerning student performance and readiness for success at the next educational level. (Indicator 5.4, SP3. Quality of Learning) Primary Indicator Indicator 5.4 Evidence and Rationale The Team heard and reviewed evidence that system personnel had searched diligently to find a student management software program that would allow the system to successfully manage the CBS model, and selected a solution called EMPOWER. Though teachers commented using the student information system was daunting, and parents reported they had difficulty understanding the reports, the commitment to the task and perseverance in implementation was obvious. A board member even noted in a public board meeting that “EMPOWER is here to stay.” While most systems and schools rely on grades and credit-based reporting systems, this system is committed to reporting actual student competency. Through internal and external education initiatives, the system should overcome current stakeholders concerns. Through competency-based reporting, the system will be able to more accurately verify students’ knowledge, skills, attitudes, and as a result, more accurately predict future success for all students to a greater degree than their more traditional counterparts. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 25 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Leadership Capacity The capacity of leadership to ensure an institution's progress towards its stated objectives is an essential element of organizational effectiveness. An institution's leadership capacity includes the fidelity and commitment to its institutional purpose and direction, the effectiveness of governance and leadership to enable the institution to realize its stated objectives, the ability to engage and involve stakeholders in meaningful and productive ways, and the capacity to enact strategies to improve results of student learning. Purpose and direction are critical to successful institutions. A study conducted in 2010 by the London-based Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) reported that "in addition to improving performance, the research indicates that having a sense of shared purpose also improves employee engagement" and that "lack of understanding around purpose can lead to demotivation and emotional detachment, which in turn lead to a disengaged and dissatisfied workforce." AdvancED has found through its evaluation of best practices in more than 32,000 institutions around the world that a successful institution commits to a shared purpose and direction and establishes expectations for student learning that are aligned with the institutions' vision and supported by internal and external stakeholders. These expectations serve as the focus for assessing student performance and overall institution effectiveness. Governance and leadership are key factors in raising institutional quality. Leaders, both local administrators and governing boards/authorities, are responsible for ensuring all learners achieve while also managing many other facets of an institution. Institutions that function effectively do so without tension between the governing board/authority, administrators, and educators and have established relationships of mutual respect and a shared vision (Feuerstein & Opfer, 1998). In a meta-analysis of educational institution leadership research, Leithwood and Sun (2012) found that leaders (school and governing boards/authority) can significantly "influence school conditions through their achievement of a shared vision and agreed-on goals for the organization, their high expectations and support of organizational members, and their practices that strengthen school culture and foster collaboration within the organization." With the increasing demands of accountability placed on institutional leaders, leaders who empower others need considerable autonomy and involve their communities to attain continuous improvement goals. Leaders who engage in such practices experience a greater level of success (Fink & Brayman, 2006). Similarly, governing boards/authorities that focus on policy-making are more likely to allow institutional leaders the autonomy to make decisions that impact teachers and students and are less responsive to politicization than boards/authorities that respond to vocal citizens (Greene, 1992). AdvancED's experience, gained through evaluation of best practices, has indicated that a successful institution has leaders who are advocates for the institution's vision and improvement efforts. The leaders provide direction and allocate resources to implement curricular and co-curricular programs that enable students to achieve expectations for their learning. Leaders encourage collaboration and shared responsibility for school improvement among stakeholders. The institution's policies, procedures, and organizational conditions ensure equity of learning opportunities and support for innovation. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 26 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Standard 1 - Purpose and Direction The system maintains and communicates at all levels of the organization a purpose and direction for continuous improvement that commit to high expectations for learning as well as shared values and beliefs about teaching and learning. Indicator Description Review Team Score AdvancED Network Average 1.1 The system engages in a systematic, inclusive, and comprehensive process to review, revise, and communicate a system-wide purpose for student success. 2.91 2.62 1.2 The system ensures that each school engages in a systematic, inclusive, and comprehensive process to review, revise, and communicate a school purpose for student success. 2.36 2.63 1.3 The school leadership and staff at all levels of the system commit to a culture that is based on shared values and beliefs about teaching and learning and supports challenging, equitable educational programs and learning experiences for all students that include achievement of learning, thinking, and life skills. 3.09 2.89 1.4 Leadership at all levels of the system implement a continuous improvement process that provides clear direction for improving conditions that support student learning. 2.41 2.61 Standard 2 - Governance and Leadership The system operates under governance and leadership that promote and support student performance and system effectiveness. Indicator Description Review Team Score AdvancED Network Average 2.1 The governing body establishes policies and supports practices that ensure effective administration of the system and its schools. 2.77 2.95 2.2 The governing body operates responsibly and functions effectively. 3.00 2.92 2.3 The governing body ensures that the leadership at all levels has the autonomy to meet goals for achievement and instruction and to manage day-to-day operations effectively. 2.86 3.12 2.4 Leadership and staff at all levels of the system foster a culture consistent with the system's purpose and direction. 2.68 2.97 2.5 Leadership engages stakeholders effectively in support of the system's purpose and direction. 2.14 2.67 Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 27 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Indicator 2.6 Description Review Team Score AdvancED Network Average 2.23 2.76 Leadership and staff supervision and evaluation processes result in improved professional practice in all areas of the system and improved student success. Stakeholder Feedback Diagnostic Stakeholder Feedback is the third of three primary areas of evaluation in AdvancED's Performance Accreditation model. The AdvancED surveys (student, parent, and teacher) are directly correlated to the AdvancED Standards and indicators. They provide not only direct information about stakeholder satisfaction but also become a source of data for triangulation by the External Review Team as it evaluates indicators. Institutions are asked to collect and analyze stakeholder feedback data, then submit the data and the analyses to the External Review Team for review. The External Review Team evaluates the quality of the administration of the surveys by institution, survey results, and the degree to which the institution analyzed and acted on the results. Evaluative Criteria Review Team Score AdvancED Network Average Questionnaire Administration 4.00 3.36 Stakeholder Feedback Results and Analysis 4.00 3.04 Findings Improvement Priority Broaden and deepen stakeholder engagement to ensure that the voice of all stakeholders is equitably represented in implementation of the system’s purpose and direction. (Indicator 2.5, Indicator 3.8, SF1. Questionnaire Administration) Primary Indicator Indicator 2.5 Evidence and Rationale A common theme from interviews was the challenge of involving parents in significant numbers to effectively represent this stakeholder group in the implementation of the system’s purpose and direction. Most parents and school personnel commented that there was a great deal of communication from schools to parents, but the Team found little evidence that the communication was two-way. While personnel in some schools reported high levels of parent involvement, the involvement did not appear to be related to the support or understanding of CBS. Comments from a broad range of stakeholder groups clearly indicated that in general, parents did not understand CBS. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 28 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Further, there appeared to be a gap between system level leadership and school staff regarding the understanding of the implementation of the system’s purpose and direction, especially as it relates to CBS. The Team conjectured that the problem may be a lack of clear operational definitions to help staff understand the meaning of terms and the processes of implementation. The degree of the gap appeared to vary by school, but the Team identified it as a systemic issue. The Team reviewed documents and heard descriptions in presentations of strategies the system had already attempted to reduce these gaps, but evidence (including statements from interviews) indicated minimal impact. The Team also observed student behaviors during formal classroom observations and listened to comments during informal interviews with students that indicated students either did not fully understand their role in CBS or were indifferent and not committed to their own learning. While one student stated, “It took me about three weeks to check off this competency, but it felt good,” many students did not appear to be enthusiastic about learning or the CBS process. Parents are the best ambassadors for the district in terms of growing enrollment. Without parent’s basic understanding of CBS (communicated through parent-friendly language) and their enthusiastic involvement and commitment, the district remains vulnerable. Equally important is the support of staff in the robust and successful implementation of CBS. Staff members at all levels need to be achieving victories in implementing CBS in order to overcome skepticism and deepen commitment to the system’s purpose and direction with fidelity. Finally, students must understand and accept their role in CBS and understand how their actions and activities will ensure their own successful futures. Deming’s Point 14 of Management sums up the rationale for this Improvement Priority: “Put everybody to work to accomplish the transformation. The transformation is everybody’s job.” Opportunity For Improvement Align the state’s Unified Improvement Plans (UIPs) with the system’s internal improvement plans. (Indicator 1.4) Primary Indicator Indicator 1.4 Evidence and Rationale In a review of documents and artifacts, the Team reviewed the “District Mandatory District Expectations and Practices 2015-16” dated August 21, 2015 which included: Implement a School Unified Improvement Plan (UIP) that uses three week data cycles and is aligned to the District Unified Improvement Plan; however, the Team did not find a documented, systematic process to support this expectation. During interviews, system and school leaders indicated that the district reviews and ensures that schools have complied and submitted their UIPs. The system relies on the Colorado Department of Education to provide training and support to principals for the development and implementation of goals, strategies, action plans and targets, although the system does have a robust leadership development curriculum in place as well. In addition the Team reviewed a “Westminster Public Schools Decision Making Process” document, which described a Plan, Do, Check, Act Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 29 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools (PDCA) process, that has not yet been applied to the Unified Improvement Plan process. The Unified Improvement Plan provides a framework for continuous improvement for systems and schools. The challenge is to make the plan a “living and breathing” document that is fully implemented and monitored at the system and building leadership level and not merely a compliance activity. Schools should be accountable for regular reporting to system leaders on progress towards meeting benchmark targets and summative goals. If the system documents, implements and requires the use of a continuous improvement process, the system’s direction is clearer for administrators and staff to implement at the school and classroom levels. The system has a basic framework and structure in place to monitor and provide feedback to schools about their UIP’s. However, having multiple sets of plans (a compliance document and multiple “plans in use”) is inefficient use of time and could actually lead to confusion among staff. Finding ways to “make square pegs fit into round holes,” while difficult initially, can save time and effort in the long run. Opportunity For Improvement Document a process for review, revision, and communication of the system’s purpose and direction. (Indicator 1.1) Primary Indicator Indicator 1.1 Evidence and Rationale Artifacts (Vision 2020, CBS documentation, website pages, and several others), presentations by system staff, and interviews with board members and staff clearly demonstrated that a new and powerful system-wide purpose existed. However, the Team could find no documentation that the process for development, review, revision, or communication was systematic. Documenting a systematic process for the review, revision, and communication of a system-wide purpose will ensure on-going fidelity to the rigorous and complex vision and purpose the system has currently adopted, and allow systematic changes and updates as environmental factors change over time. Powerful Practice The Westminster Public School Board of Education demonstrates commitment to the transformation of education and culture by professionalizing their practices and by being proactive in addressing challenges faced by the district. (Indicator 2.2) Primary Indicator Indicator 2.2 Evidence and Rationale Presentations by administration, stakeholder interviews, and observations by the Team validated the exceptional positive characteristics of the system’s leadership commitment. As one board member stated, “We Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 30 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools don’t dwell on problems, we focus on solutions.” The Team reviewed the system’s policies on Board of Education roles and responsibilities, a proactive and comprehensive communication plan, and a Board of Education Operating Agreement that guides interactions among board members and between board members and other stakeholders in the community. A board member quipped that the Operating Agreement showed board members “how to disagree without being disagreeable.” Board members shared that all policies recently had been reviewed to ensure they aligned with the system’s vision, mission and goals. As board members shared their personal interpretations of their role as a board and as individual board members in separate interviews, the Team found striking alignment among the responses. Interview responses from board members and personnel throughout the district indicated that the board did not interfere in the day-to-day operations of the system or schools. Documentation reviewed by the Team indicated the board maintained a strong strategic focus, provided good stewardship of financial resources, and held high expectations for all staff while expressing patience and understanding of the difficulties and pitfalls of the CBS path. One board member captured the philosophy of the board by saying, “We are working to change the narrative of the district, which means owning the story from our past and getting out in front of the new story we are creating." Strong commitment from the top leadership of the organization can help sustain second order change over time. Powerful Practice The board, system leadership and staff at all levels have committed to a culture built on a shared purpose, values, and beliefs about learning through challenging and equitable strategies, programs, and learning experiences. (Indicator 1.3) Primary Indicator Indicator 1.3 Evidence and Rationale While several documents described and provided data related to the Competency Based System strategy and the shared beliefs (Vision 2020 and “We Believe…” statements as examples), the most powerful evidence of a strong, positive culture clearly came through interviews with individuals at all levels throughout the organization. Evidence indicated CBS had become a rallying point for the entire district. From board members who were also alumni of the system to teachers new to the system this year, all expressed strong beliefs that the system was headed in the right direction. In reference to the culture of the community and system, one parent commented, “I like the way we do business here.” Another said, “[People in the system] don’t treat you like ‘a parent,’ they treat you like family.” An administrator stated, “Families come here because of the culture and climate. They know their kids are safe and happy.” A teacher stated, “We’re trying something revolutionary here!” Even the system’s name change from Adams 50 to Westminster Public Schools and the new “tag line” of “Where education is personal” appeared to be reflected in stakeholders’ comments and pride concerning the system. Comments from interviews indicated this strong, positive culture had been around for many years, and was growing stronger. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 31 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools There is a saying in leadership and management literature that culture trumps strategy. However, even a strong culture with no focus can be ineffective. Despite changes in system demographics, state-sponsored programs, and multiple changes in curricular standards, the system persevered because of this strong culture and the commitment to the CBS strategy. Maintaining the CBS strategy and continuing to celebrate the culture of the community and system will ensure continued success. The first of Deming’s 14 points of management appropriately summarizes this practice: Constancy of purpose. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 32 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Resource Utilization The use and distribution of resources must be aligned and supportive of the needs of an institution and the students served. Institutions must ensure that resources are aligned with the stated mission and are distributed equitably so that the needs of students are adequately and effectively addressed. The utilization of resources includes an examination of the allocation and use of resources, the equity of resource distribution to need, the ability of the institution to ensure appropriate levels of funding and sustainability of resources, as well as evidence of long-range capital and resource planning effectiveness. Institutions, regardless of their size, need access to sufficient resources and systems of support to be able to engage in sustained and meaningful efforts that result in a continuous improvement cycle. Indeed, a study conducted by the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory (Pan, D., Rudo, Z., Schneider, C., & SmithHansen, L., 2003) "demonstrated a strong relationship between resources and student success... both the level of resources and their explicit allocation seem to affect educational outcomes." AdvancED has found through its own evaluation of best practices in the more than 32,000 institutions in the AdvancED Network that a successful institution has sufficient human, material, and fiscal resources to implement a curriculum that enables students to achieve expectations for student learning, meets special needs, and complies with applicable regulations. The institution employs and allocates staff members who are well qualified for their assignments. The institution provides a safe learning environment for students and staff. The institution provides ongoing learning opportunities for all staff members to improve their effectiveness and ensures compliance with applicable governmental regulations. Standard 4 - Resources and Support Systems The system has resources and provides services in all schools that support its purpose and direction to ensure success for all students. Indicator Description Review Team Score AdvancED Network Average 4.1 The system engages in a systematic process to recruit, employ, and retain a sufficient number of qualified professional and support staff to fulfill their roles and responsibilities and support the purpose and direction of the system, individual schools, and educational programs. 2.27 2.92 4.2 Instructional time, material resources, and fiscal resources are sufficient to support the purpose and direction of the system, individual schools, educational programs, and system operations. 2.86 2.93 4.3 The system maintains facilities, services, and equipment to provide a safe, clean, and healthy environment for all students and staff. 2.82 3.05 4.4 The system demonstrates strategic resource management that includes long-range planning in support of the purpose and direction of the system. 2.86 2.63 Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 33 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Indicator Description Review Team Score AdvancED Network Average 4.5 The system provides, coordinates, and evaluates the effectiveness of information resources and related personnel to support educational programs throughout the system. 2.68 2.74 4.6 The system provides a technology infrastructure and equipment to support the system's teaching, learning, and operational needs. 2.91 2.54 4.7 The system provides, coordinates, and evaluates the effectiveness of support systems to meet the physical, social, and emotional needs of the student population being served. 2.32 2.66 4.8 The system provides, coordinates, and evaluates the effectiveness of services that support the counseling, assessment, referral, educational, and career planning needs of all students. 2.18 2.60 Findings Opportunity For Improvement Improve processes and programs to recruit and retain employees. (Indicator 4.1) Primary Indicator Indicator 4.1 Evidence and Rationale The Human Resources Department Annual Report provided a great deal of information to the Team, as did the interviews with human resources staff members and personnel across the district. Major findings from documentation and interviews included personnel demographics that did not reflect the current student population of the system, high attrition rates, and difficulty attracting teachers with diverse skills (especially multiple languages). The director reported the system was aware of these needs, and the human resources department was engaging in activities (such as national job fairs) to address these concerns. The director also mentioned an initiative to encourage former students to return to the system as teachers, and another initiative with a local university that included an exclusive agreement to accept all student (pre-service) teachers. Staff noted that simply attracting teachers to the system was only part of the challenge. According to several staff members, retaining high quality staff members that are willing to adopt the CBS philosophy exacerbated the human resources challenge. Personnel across the system described CBS as a formidable program to learn that can be a challenge to new or experienced teachers trained in traditional instruction models. Observations by the Team both inside and outside classrooms as well as comments from personnel corroborated this belief. Attracting and retaining staff that are fully committed to the system’s vision, beliefs, and philosophy are critical ingredients for long-term success. Creating and implementing plans (which may include altering some current practices such as Gallup interviewing and screening instruments) to assure proper “fit” in hiring, followed up Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 34 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools with increased levels of mentoring, coaching, and non-punitive evaluation may help retain quality staff. Powerful Practice Digital infrastructure throughout the system is state-of-the art. (Indicator 4.5, Indicator 4.6) Primary Indicator Indicator 4.6 Evidence and Rationale According to the Vision 2020 document, Westminster Public Schools proactively executed multiple technology initiatives and a long-range course of action toward implementation of technological advances. In a presentation by technology staff, the Team learned that the number of devices connected to the system’s network has expanded from 3,000 to 14,000 over the past three years, and that all facilities were connected via a fiber-optic network with up to 10 gigabits of bandwidth as needed. Team members learned that helpdesk support is outsourced, and that the system currently boasts a 22-hour maximum response time. Team members observed a wide variety of technologies in classrooms. Building and maintaining an infrastructure to support a technology initiative of the breadth and depth envisioned by this system is a formidable task. The Team commended and admired the careful planning and implementation processes to support this vision. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 35 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Conclusion The Team was impressed with the high degree of dedication and commitment among all stakeholders involved with the system. The vision of the system was clear and clearly documented, and appeared to be shared among stakeholders. The culture of the community, built by the community's history within the larger urban environment, the loyalty of system alumni, and the intent to succeed, was palpable.The clarity of the system's vision coupled with the supportive community culture and unbending intent will ensure the system's future success. Evidence from multiple sources confirmed the commitment to CBS. Data indicated steady, incremental improvements in student performance for the past several years. Many changes in work that could be classified as first-order change appeared to have already taken place, though additional procedures and refinements can continue. In order to achieve true second-order change, the Team identified several themes upon which the system will need to focus. First, extraordinarily clear operational definitions must be agreed upon, widely distributed, and become firmly entrenched in the philosophies and practices of each stakeholder and the culture of the system. Evidence from interviews and presentations clearly showed that stakeholders, especially system personnel, could "talk the talk," though there was evidence that not all stakeholders had truly adopted the philosophies associated with CBS nor learned the necessary skills to implement CBS with fidelity. Second, the Team confirmed some design flaws in implementation that resulted in over-burdening teachers and building administrators while failing to fully engage students. As one Team member noted, "The system appears to have fallen victim to the 'teachers as workers and students as product' rather than teachers as managers, students as workers, and knowledge and skills as the product." Finally, as one Team member stated, "The system needs to keep it simple and stay focused." Personnel spoke at length about the "never-ending stream of change" in processes and practices. One school-based staff member stated, "Project-based learning is our next big rock to climb." Many staff including teachers commented that, "we're being asked to do more and more, and nothing is being taken off our plates." The Team got the sense that before staff had processed, learned, and implemented an initiative, changes were announced or additional strategies were added. Evidence of inconsistencies in practices and processes was evident through almost all sources of information. The Team determined that the addition of too many new initiatives or more fundamental changes (such as curricular standards) could impede chances for success on a grand scale. The Team found ample evidence that the system desired success for every student, and was willing to provide the opportunities and services necessary to ensure that success. From the use of CBS to the Interventionist Framework to breakfast for every child every day to the Future Center, every aspect and initiative was focused on the success of every individual student. The Powerful Practices, Opportunities for Improvement, and Improvement Priorities recommended by the Team have provided in-depth evidence and rationale to support these themes and improve system performance and effectiveness. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 36 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Student performance data over the past several years showed steady, incremental improvement. Data concerning individual school performance results were even more impressive, and demonstrated a significant reduction in the number of schools identified by the state as underperforming. Only two schools were still so categorized and student performance data indicated that this categorization was only because the state had "stopped the clock" on moving schools throughout the state out of this category. In a presentation posted on the system's website and included in the Team's evidence folders, the system clearly outlined its strategic plan through 2020. In every section of this document, the system had identified its strengths and challenges in a very transparent fashion. Several personnel at different levels throughout the system expressed frustration or in some cases a sense of defeat because they believed that, even after seven years, the system had not successfully implemented CBS to the level of original expectations. One administrator stated, "CBS is not for the faint of heart." A teacher said, "Sometimes I feel like managing 30 students [in the CBS environment] is too hard, but we make it work." The Team determined through a meta-analysis of evidence (including artifacts, data from observations, and comments from interviews), that the system's relative degree of success was commendable based on internal and external influences and obstacles, many outside the system's control. Examples included multiple changes in standards by the state, the adoption of the Common Core curriculum, difficulty finding an appropriate student information management system, and dramatic changes in the systems demographics. A teacher summed up a general feeling expressed by many, "We're trying to do something revolutionary here, but we're stuck inside a traditional box." The Team, through their deliberation and discussions determined that this, indeed, could be the crux of the issue. The system has adopted, along with CBS, other research-based initiatives that were more aligned with traditional instructional and learning models. The Team also conjectured that the system's complete fidelity to those initiatives may actually hinder the transformation of the system, as Collins describes it, "from good to great." Therefore, the Team suggested the system be thoughtful and cautious when adopting any particular program, and using the components from other sources that "fit" to build a learning model that is unique to the system. The Team suggested the system follow James Rohn's advice, "Don't be a follower, be a student." The Team commended the system for its perseverance and dedication to quality education for all children through the CBS model. Indeed, the Team encouraged the system to document it's version of CBS as the "Westminster Learning Model." Despite the sweeping changes in demographics and false starts mostly from causes outside the control of system, the Team determined that this was a very good system on its way to becoming great. The necessary fiscal, curricular, and assessment infrastructure was in place to ensure great results. The focus for the system must be on consistency and fidelity of implementation. Using the AdvancED Standards of for Quality as a framework for improvement, building on Powerful Practices noted by the Team, and addressing Improvement Priorities and Opportunities for Improvement will ensure that the system is truly a place "where education is personal. Improvement Priorities The institution should use the findings from this review to guide the continuous improvement process. The Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 37 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools institution must address the Improvement Priorities listed below: - Broaden and deepen stakeholder engagement to ensure that the voice of all stakeholders is equitably represented in implementation of the system’s purpose and direction. Design and implement a process to continually verify that all instructional staff and leaders are implementing CBS with fidelity. Implement professional learning and evaluation programs to guarantee that all instructional staff and leaders have deep knowledge of and skills to implement CBS effectively. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 38 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Accreditation Recommendation Index of Education Quality The Index of Education Quality (IEQ™) provides a holistic measure of overall performance based on a comprehensive set of indicators and evaluative criteria. A formative tool for improvement, it identifies areas of success as well as areas in need of focus. The IEQ™ comprises three domains: 1) the impact of teaching and learning on student performance; 2) the leadership capacity to govern; and 3) the use of resources and data to support and optimize learning. The overall and domain scores can range from 100-400. The domain scores are derived from: the AdvancED Standards and indicators ratings; results of the Analysis of Student Performance; and data from Stakeholder Feedback Surveys (students, parents, and staff). External Review IEQ Score AdvancED Network Average Overall Score 265.19 278.34 Teaching and Learning Impact 254.11 268.94 Leadership Capacity 287.12 292.64 Resource Utilization 261.36 283.23 The IEQ™ results include information about how the institution is performing compared to expected criteria as well as to other institutions in the AdvancED Network. The institution should use the information in this report, including the corresponding performance rubrics, to identify specific areas of improvement. Consequently, the External Review Team recommends to the AdvancED Accreditation Commission that the institution earn the distinction of accreditation for a five-year term. AdvancED will review the results of the External Review to make a final determination including the appropriate next steps for the institution in response to these findings. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 39 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Addenda Individual Institution Results (Self-reported) Institution Name Teaching and Learning Impact Leadership Capacity Resource Utilization Overall IEQ Score Colorado STEM Academy 295.24 290.91 214.29 279.49 Fairview Elementary School 257.14 254.55 257.14 256.41 Flynn Elementary School 271.43 272.73 285.71 274.36 FM Day Elementary School 247.62 318.18 257.14 269.23 Harris Park Elementary School 347.62 336.36 257.14 328.21 Hidden Lake High School 309.52 309.09 357.14 317.95 Hodgkins Elementary School 290.48 336.36 357.14 315.38 Mesa Elementary School 257.14 245.45 228.57 248.72 Metz Elementary School 295.24 309.09 285.71 297.44 Ranum Middle School 214.29 245.45 257.14 230.77 Scott Carpenter Middle School 295.24 263.64 300.00 287.18 Shaw Heights Middle School 266.67 290.91 257.14 271.79 Sherrelwood Elementary School 371.43 363.64 385.71 371.79 Skyline Vista Elementary 261.90 327.27 300.00 287.18 Sunset Ridge Elementary 342.86 363.64 314.29 343.59 Tennyson Knolls Elementary 290.48 336.36 328.57 310.26 Westminster Elementary 271.43 336.36 271.43 289.74 Westminster High School 252.38 245.45 242.86 248.72 Other System Institutions The following institutions did not utilize ASSIST to complete the Accreditation Report for this External Review. Therefore self-reported results are not included as part of this report. Some institutions appearing below may have been required to submit the Accreditation Report outside of ASSIST. Institution Institution The Early Childhood Center at Gregory Hill Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 40 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Team Roster Member Brief Biography Dr. David S Hurst David Hurst is Deputy Chief of Operations for AdvancED. He lives in Chandler, Arizona. Dr. Hurst served as the Associate Executive Director of the North Central Association Commission on Accreditation and School Improvement (NCA-CASI) prior to that organization's merger with the Southern Association of Colleges and School Council on Accreditation and School Improvement (SACSCASI) to form AdvancED in 2006, and as Assistant State Director for NCA-CASI in Kansas. Before coming to NCA-CASI, he served on the educational administration faculty at Wichita State University in Wichita, Kansas. Dr. Hurst was a principal and a classroom teacher in Tennessee prior to coming to Wichita State. Ms. Mary Vedra For the past twenty-five years, Mary Vedra has served as an educational leader in positions of increasing responsibility from a building level principal, Executive Director, and Associate Superintendent in parochial and public schools, Quality Education Auditor for an international private school system in the United Arab Emirates, to her current position as Chief Academic Officer for Global Village Charter Collaborative. Responsibilities in these positions have included: Visionary Leadership and Strategic Planning; AdvancED System Accreditation, International Baccalaureate Programme Authorization, and School Improvement Planning; Human Resource Development and Evaluation; Instructional and Administrative Supervision; Designing and Delivering Professional Training Programs; Reviewing and Revising Standards-aligned Curricula and Assessments; and, Researching, Developing, Implementing, Benchmarking, and Managing Innovative StudentCentered, Outcome-focused, Instructional Programs and Technologically Efficient Information Systems. With extensive experience working with corporate, public, charter and private schools systems around the world, Mary brings a unique blend of real-world experience and evidence-based research to her work. She has a deep commitment and passion for educational reform initiatives and has continually kept abreast of current research, promising practices and quality programs being implemented in schools today. This unique blend - combining formal education degrees, credentials and licenses, with administrative experience, has provided a firm foundation for supporting the educational improvement efforts around the world. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 41 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Member Dr. George W Griffin Brief Biography Dr. Griffin holds B.A. and M.Ed. degrees from Duke University. He received his Ph.D.in Special Education from The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Primary areas of concentration included the education of students with learning disabilities and/or behavior problems, and educational administration. During his 40-year education career Griffin has been a special education teacher, high school principal, central office program director, state department program director, and university professor. He has extensive experience in alternative school programming; having served as a school director and statewide program director for services for violent and assaultive youth in North Carolina. Griffin has served as the Department Chair in the Department of Educational Leadership, Research, and Technology at North Carolina Central University. He has also served as a Special Education Due Process Hearing Officer in North Carolina. Griffin is the author of several entries in the Encyclopedia of Educational Leadership and Administration as well as a contributor to several special education textbooks and professional journals. Dr. Griffin is an independent educational consultant. He serves as a Lead Evaluator with AdvancED and has lead reviews in numerous schools and school districts throughout the United States and in the Middle East. He was the keynote speaker and a session presenter at the first AdvancED International Learning Disabilities Conference (May, 2013) in Beirut, Lebanon. He has also presented interactive training sessions at AdvancED Global Education Conferences in the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt. Mr. Michael R. Bond Mr. Bond currently serves as a national education consultant. He holds a Masters of Education from Lesley University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, a Bachelor of Science in Elementary and Special Education from Montana State University-Billings, as well as state licensure in Elementary Education, Principal/Director, Special Education, and French. Michael served as Executive Director of Human Resources, Director of Title I programs and Executive Director of Curriculum and Instruction for Natrona County School District in Casper, Wyoming. Mr. Bond served as elementary principal for 13 years and led schools to improved levels of student achievement. He also served as coordinator for special education programs. Since 1983, Michael has served on numerous school and district accreditation teams as lead evaluator. He has led school and district accreditation and strategic improvement efforts, and serves as a member of the Wyoming State Council for Advanc-ED. His career in education began as a special education teacher at the elementary and high school levels in Montana, Wyoming, and New Mexico. During his experience as an administrator, Michael implemented school and district improvement structures designed to use systemic and systematic continuous improvement processes for improving student learning by setting clear direction and engaging stakeholders. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 42 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Member Brief Biography Mrs. Kimberly A. Burkhart Kimberly Burkhart is currently teaching high school science at Laramie High School in Wyoming. She has over 7 years of teaching experience in public school classrooms as well as an alternative high school, and volunteer teacher in both public kindergarten and a private school for fifth and sixth grade science. Her certifications are in middle level and secondary mathematics and science education and she is highly qualified in both fields of mathematics and science. Kimberly obtained two masters degrees from the University of Wyoming as well as her secondary education undergraduate degree. Her first advanced degree was in 2007, an M.S. in Natural Science with a focus on utilizing writing in a science classroom for enhanced content and cognitive complexity. Her second master’s degree was completed in 2013, where she received an M.S. in Teaching with an emphasis on inquiry rich mathematics curricula focused on rational numbers. Kim has been involved in assessment work with the Wyoming Department of Education since 2005, has mentored teachers, served as a cofacilitator for the Professional Learning Communities Platform, and has served on a previous NCA and AdvancED Accreditation Teams. Kim was named Carbon County School District #2's Teacher of the Year in 2007. She is currently seeking her principal certification at the University of Wyoming (graduation date: May 2016) and has completed all of her principal intern hours. Ms. Nicole Caldwell Nicole Caldwell is currently principal at Global Village Academy - Northglenn. She was a founding teacher at GVA-N when it opened in 2010. She has experience in international schools and teaching, having lived and taught abroad herself, in addition to her time at GVA. Dr. Sally Crowser Dr. Sally Crowser has worked in the field of education for 20+ years. She obtained her BA in English/Secondary Education from South Dakota State University in 1992. She obtained her MA in English/Composition and Rhetoric from South Dakota State University in 1997. She also received her Ed.D. in Educational Leadership (Pre-K-12 Principal and Superintendent) in 2008 from University of South Dakota. Dr. Crowser taught English courses at the high school and collegiate levels in South Dakota. She served as K-12 principal in Wyoming while becoming active in the AdvancED accreditation process. She presently serves as a Learning Specialist at Technology and Innovation in Education (TIE) in Rapid City, SD as support to area teachers and districts as well as serving as SD AdvancED State Coordinator. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 43 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Member Mrs. Adrienne Doherty Brief Biography Adrienne Doherty is the Director of Academic Achievement for Global Village Academy- Parker. Adrienne has worked for the Global Village Academy Schools for eight years. She worked as a K-2 English teacher to start. She was asked to join the start-up team when the school replicated the model in Northglenn. Her roles included Instructional Coach, Assistant Principal, and Principal. With new schools opening, she was promoted to the Academic Director of Global Village Charter Collaborative (GVCC). GVCC now has five P8 campuses along the Front Range, offering language immersion in French, Spanish, Chinese, Russian, and German. Adrienne is currently working with the newest GVA School in Parker as the Director of Academic Achievement. Adrienne’s heart has always been in the education field. She believes that all children can learn but each learns in different ways and at different rates. After working in the elementary classroom for many years, she made it her mission to give other teachers the tools that they need to help each child succeed. Adrienne’s main goal within her roles has been to support the teachers as a mentor, coach, and leader but also a teammate and a friend. Adrienne has served in many roles throughout her career with GVA, including the coordination of curriculum, testing, 504s, ALPs, and READ plans. She has been the district professional development lead and focuses her main trainings around reading and writing. Currently, Adrienne leads a group of instructional coaches from each campus, focusing on effective classroom practices and the standards based teaching and learning cycle. Other responsibilities include coordinating the instructional programs of the school, providing leadership and coaching to teachers, and executing the professional development plan. Adrienne has attended and spoke at several trainings throughout the years. Recently, she spoke at UNC in a Community Conversation series for Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Education Programs. She also spoke at the Chinese Education Conference about making literacy work in the Chinese classroom. Adrienne started her teaching career 17 years ago in Pittsburgh after graduating from Penn State University with a Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education. She worked in the public school system in Pennsylvania and then moved to Colorado to work in charter schools. Her passion is to teach students foundational skills needed to read and write. Adrienne has extensive expertise in charter school start up. Her particular expertise is in K-8 Language Immersion Programs. To contact Adrienne, please email adoherty@gvaschools.org Ms. Ashley N Finney Ashley Finney is in her first year of full-time teaching. Ms. Finney currently works at Colorado International School. A school which is also in the process of receiving AdvancedED accreditation. This year is her first exposure to AdvancedED. She states that she has learned an immense amount not only about teaching but also about herself through this accreditation process. She is currently teaching Kindergarten through Eighth grade in the English language. She teaches to the Colorado content standards. She considers this experience to be rewarding and is looking forward to many more years of teaching. Her education background has been a constant evolution. Ms. Finney has a B.S. in Elementary Education and is wrapping up her M.Ed. in International Elementary Education which is focused on the I. B. method of teaching. Mrs. Nancy Fitzpatrick Nancy Fitzpatrick, an educator for 20 years, holds a Master's degree in Elementary Education from the University of New Mexico. She worked as a teacher and assistant principal in the Moriarty and Estancia School Districts, as well as having taught in various private schools. Nancy was one of the founding members of Holy Child Catholic School in Tijeras, NM, and served as principal there for two years. Nancy has been an AdvancEd Lead Evaluator since 2009, and was recently invited to participate on District level reviews in Wyoming and Colorado. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 44 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Member Brief Biography Mrs. Michelle E Foley Michelle Foley joined AdvancED in 2007 and serves as the Director of Operations Management Services. Michelle develops and implements effective strategic plans encompassing accreditation management services, compliance, policies and regulations and she provides technical assistance and professional development to all AdvancED managing office staff. Michelle holds a bachelor’s degree from State University of New York (SUNY) and has served on numerous External Review teams during her career with AdvancED. Michelle is a past branch board president for the Boys & Girls Clubs of America and continues to volunteer her time with many charitable organizations promoting the health and welfare of children and families. Mr. Lance Ronald Hansen Lance Hansen is currently the Assistant Superintendent of Independent School District No. 1 located in Lewiston, Idaho. This is his 23rd year in education. He started his career as a teacher in Emmett, Idaho after graduating from the University of Idaho with a Bachelors of Science in Education, which included a major in Spanish and a minor in Math. Over an eleven year span teaching in the Emmett Independent School District, he taught numerous courses at both Emmett Middle School and Emmett High School including Spanish I, II, III, PreAlgebra, General Math, Algebra I, Algebra II, Statistics, Discrete Math, and Leadership. In the fall of 2003, he accepted a teaching position in the Moscow School District where he taught Algebra I, Geometry, and Adv. Algebra at Moscow High School. In the fall of 2008, he accepted an assistant principal position at Sacajawea Junior High in Lewiston. After one year he accepted the assistant principal position at Lewiston High School. After three years in this position, he accepted the principal position at Lewiston High School and served in that capacity for two years. he was then moved to the Assistant Superintendent position in the fall of 2013. Dr. Lee Jenkins Lee Jenkins is a full-time author, consultant and keynote speaker for Corwin Publishers. Additional information regarding his work is located on his website, www.LtoJConsulting.com. His most recent publication is Optimize Your School from Corwin. In addition to his work with student engagement and continuous improvement Lee teaches two AdvancED classes: Basic Data Analysis (results data) and Continuous Improvement in the Classroom (process data). Mr. David P. Langford David P. Langford is a highly sought after speaker who is committed to improving education. Over the past 24 years, Mr. Langford has traveled extensively training colleagues in K-12 school systems, government, the military, universities and business. He focuses on identifying systemic problems and uses quality improvement tools and processes to create long-term solutions. Mr. Langford has presented his trademark 4-Day Quality Learning Seminar over 300 times to more than 30,000 participants in the United States and other countries. In Australia alone, over 5,000 education leaders have been successfully impacted by his training. Mr. Langford is a graduate of Montana State University-Billings, Montana with a B.S. in Education K-12 and holds a Masters Degree in Educational Administration and Supervision from Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona. He is a consultant, trainer, educator, international speaker, podcaster and writer dedicated to improving learning. David Langford is the author of Tool Time for Education, Tool Time for Business, and Tool Time for Healthcare. He is coauthor of Orchestrating Learning with Quality, Tool Time for Lean, 24 Elements of the Learning Code for Education and the creator of numerous quality improvement tools and products. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 45 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Member Brief Biography Mr. Kirk LoadmanCopeland Kirk Loadman-Copeland is a founder of Global Village Academy-Aurora, along with his wife, Carol. He served as the founding President of the Aurora Board and, later, as the President and then Treasurer of the GVA-Northglenn Board. His work in K-8 education began in June 2003 when he and his wife helped start the Mandarin Chinese program at Denver International School. Both of his daughters attended GVA-Aurora in the Mandarin Village. He is the Board President of Global Village Charter Collaborative & Network, which operates five K-8 charter schools, as well as Global Village International, which operates seven preschools. These schools offer education in English and a second language. Kirk had a 15-year career in business, followed by a 24-year career in non-profit management as a CEO. He is now President of Touchstones Consulting, which provides organizational development and educational consulting services. Kirk has a BA in Psychology and a Master’s Degree. Ms. Jennifer Nehl Jennifer Nehl is an education specialist and has been in the education field for 24 years during which she received more than eight state and national teaching awards for her excellence in the classroom. Jennifer possess a Masters of Art’s in Educational Leadership with K-12 Administrative endorsement and holds a Bachelor of Science in Secondary Language Arts and K-12 Music Education with teaching certificates in three states. She has been working with various communities and districts across the states of South Dakota, Wyoming and Nebraska for the past nine years delivering professional development on various topics, programs and specialized areas. Nehl’s passion for education stretches beyond the academic construct encompassing building a well-rounded student who can be successful in career and life. She has held educator positions in administration, elementary education, and secondary education. Education experience includes:curriculum director, high school assistant principal, secondary language arts teacher, secondary social science, secondary music, elementary music, learning specialist (trained and certified in multiple areas, state literacy coordinator). Mr. Frank No Runner Frank No Runner currently serves as Superintendent of St. Stephen's Indian School in St. Stephen's, Wyoming. He is a Doctoral Candidate at Montana State University. He has served in multiple leadership capacities in American Indian School Districts across Montana and Wyoming. Mrs. Gay Pickner For the lasts three years, Gay Pickner has been the Director of Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment and Accountability for the Huron School District. This past year, Huron went through the AdvancED process and was approved. Before coming to the Huron District, Gay worked for the South Dakota Department of Education in which 8 of the 12 years were spent as the State Assessment Director. Gay received a Bachelor’s and Master’s degree from Dakota State University in Madison, SD and is currently writing her dissertation for an Ed D in curriculum and instruction at the University of South Dakota. Gay serves on Huron’s YWCA Board, serving as treasurer and a member of the local Kiwanis. She is a member of the Technology and Innovation in Education, and the South Dakota Education Data Governance Workgroup. She was newly appointed to the AdvancED State Council. Before coming to Huron, Gay was the South Dakota Department of Education’s Lead Member for the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, WIDA Consortium Executive Committee Member, along with ESEA Flexibility Team Leader. Ms. Carrie Romero Brugger Carrie Romero Brugger has been in education over 20 years. She has worked in a variety of affluent, title and model schools including IB PYP and STEM. She has a Masters Degree in Administrative Leadership from University of Denver. Carrie has been an instructional coach, PYP Coordinator and Dean of Students. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 46 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Member Brief Biography Ms. Helen A Ryley Helen Ryley is a contract consultant living in Colorado over 30 years, providing training, coaching and program management to help schools develop leadership capacity and improve organizational performance. From 2007-2012, she participated on or led CDE School/District school improvement audits (SST and CADI) and trained/coached CDE School Improvement Grant processes for turnaround and struggling schools. She has a team of CDE approved CO Educator Effectiveness trainers/coaches. She has been an intermittent AdvancEd team member since 2007 and team Lead Evaluator for AdvancEd multiple private school accreditation teams. As the project director for the Archdiocese of New Orleans' "Becoming Standards-based" Project she and her team trained 3200 teachers and administrators in a large urban district with 108 schools and 50,000 students. As Hurricane Katrina brought a halt to plans for 2005-2006, ACT scores were up in over half of the 23 high schools and SAT 10 scores showed steady elementary and middle school improvement. Today, as a faculty member for Argosy University, she supervises the practicum for a Principal Licensure candidate cohort and coordinate their overall program. In 2008, her team at St. Vrain Valley Schools won the National Staff Development Council award for the outstanding support staff professional development program serving 1300 staff. The first 15 years of her career were as an Elementary Teacher, a Middle School special education teacher, and 5 years in Taiwan at the Taipei American School coordinating a K-8 Enrichment Center. Dr. Lynn Seifert Dr. Lynn Seifert is the principal of Pueblo Central High School, the only AdvancED STEM certified school west of the Mississippi. She relocated to the West after retiring from Tennessee as a superintendent of a suburban school district. During that time, she was honored to be chosen as the Mid-Cumberland Superintendent of the Year. Prior to serving as a superintendent, Dr. Seifert conceived, planned and opened a public high school for at-risk students. She considers this one of her finest accomplishments. Lynn’s degrees include a B.A., an M.A. and an Ed.D, all in education and leadership. Mrs. Beth Steklac Beth is currently the Assistant Head of School at Mackintosh Academy, a small independent IB World School serving gifted students in PreK through 8th grades, located in Littleton Colorado. Beth is also the Director of Admissions and a member of the school's Leadership Team. In 2011, Beth helped Mackintosh Academy open a second campus in Boulder. She was also the Middle Years IB Program coordinator for both campuses as Mackintosh achieved AdvancEd Accreditation on their Littleton campus and International Baccalaureate (IB) Reauthorization for both campuses. Beth has been in the teaching field for 14 years, primarily in middle school math, science and design. Educational background: Bachelors Degree in Electrical Engineering from Queen's University (Kingston, Canada) and an MBA from the University of Toronto. Beth spent eight years in consulting engineering prior to changing career paths and entering the education field. Since then she has attended numerous trainings in gifted education, IB principles and practice, social emotional development, and serving the needs of twice exceptional learners. Beth has participated as a member of the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) and a member of the Colorado Association for Gifted and Talented (CAGT) . Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 47 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Member Mrs. Tracey Twinam Brief Biography Tracey Twinam has worked in different capacities within the field of education for over twenty years. Currently she is the elementary Extend Teacher at Denver Christian Schools, a PK-12 school in Colorado. This position allows her to work with struggling students, as well as gifted and talented students. Part of the duties she enjoys the most include working alongside teachers to provide support, resources, and teacher training in areas such as individualization, accommodations, and differentiation. Communicating with the local school district to ensure all identified students receive their state mandated rights is another aspect to her position. Coordinating and administering school wide standardized assessments rounds out her job description. Throughout her career Tracey has worked in numerous academic settings. Starting out of college she taught a self-contained special education classroom in the public schools in New Hampshire. Following a move to Colorado she shifted to teaching preschool, Head Start Consultant for special education, Integration Specialist for the public schools, and her current role as Extend Teacher. Along the way she continually coached numerous sports from summer and winter Special Olympics to figure skating, skiing, and hockey. Educationally Tracey continues her life long learning quest. Tracey holds an undergraduate degree from Plymouth State University in Elementary Education with an emphasis on Science. Her Masters degree is in Special Education and was obtained through the University of Denver. She also holds a Gifted and Talented Certificate through the University of California, Irvine. Currently Tracey is a doctoral student at Grand Canyon University seeking her degree in Organizational Leadership with an emphasis in K-12 Education. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 48 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools Next Steps 1. Review and discuss the findings from this report with stakeholders. 2. Ensure that plans are in place to embed and sustain the strengths noted in the Powerful Practices section to maximize their impact on the institution. 3. Consider the Opportunities for Improvement identified throughout the report that are provided by the team in the spirit of continuous improvement and the institution’s commitment to improving its capacity to improve student learning. 4. Develop action plans to address the Improvement Priorities identified by the team. Include methods for monitoring progress toward addressing the Improvement Priorities. 5. Use the report to guide and strengthen the institution's efforts to improve student performance and system effectiveness. 6. Following the External Review, submit the Accreditation Progress Report detailing progress made toward addressing the Improvement Priorities. Institutions are required to respond to all Improvement Priorities. The report will be reviewed at the appropriate state, national, and/or international levels to monitor and ensure that the system has implemented the necessary actions to address the Improvement Priorities. The accreditation status will be reviewed and acted upon based on the responses to the Improvement Priorities and the resulting improvement. 7. Continue to meet the AdvancED Standards, submit required reports, engage in continuous improvement, and document results. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 49 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools About AdvancED AdvancED is the world leader in providing improvement and accreditation services to education providers of all types in their pursuit of excellence in serving students. AdvancED serves as a trusted partner to more than 32,000 public and private schools and school systems – enrolling more than 20 million students - across the United States and 70 countries. In 2006, the North Central Association Commission on Accreditation and School Improvement (NCA CASI), the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Council on Accreditation and School Improvement (SACS CASI), both founded in 1895, and the National Study of School Evaluation (NSSE) came together to form AdvancED: one strong, unified organization dedicated to education quality. In 2011, the Northwest Accreditation Commission (NWAC) that was founded in 1917 became part of AdvancED. Today, NCA CASI, NWAC and SACS CASI serve as accreditation divisions of AdvancED. The Accreditation Divisions of AdvancED share research-based quality standards that cross school system, state, regional, national, and international boundaries. Accompanying these standards is a unified and consistent process designed to engage educational institutions in continuous improvement. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 50 AdvancED Westminster Public Schools References - - - - - Alwin, L. (2002). The will and the way of data use. School Administrator, 59(11), 11. Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voxx, T., Jordan, A., Klusmann, U., Krauss, S., Nuebrand, M., & Tsai, Y. (2010). Teachers' mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 133-180. Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. (2012). Shared purpose: the golden thread? London: CIPD. Colbert, J., Brown, R., Choi, S., & Thomas, S. (2008). An investigation of the impacts of teacher-driven professional development. Teacher Education Quarterly, 35(2), 134-154. Conley, D.T. (2007). Redefining college readiness (Vol. 3). Eugene, OR: Educational Policy Improvement Center. Datnow, A., Park, V., & Wohlstetter, P. (2007). Achieving with data: How high-performing school systems use data to improve instruction for elementary students. Los Angeles, CA: Center on Educational Governance, USC. Dembosky, J., Pane, J., Barney, H., & Christina, R. (2005). Data driven decision making in Southwestern Pennsylvania school districts. Working paper. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Ding, C. & Sherman, H. (2006). Teaching effectiveness and student achievement: Examining the relationship. Educational Research Quarterly, 29 (4), 40-51. Doyle, D. P. (2003). Data-driven decision making: Is it the mantra of the month or does it have staying power? T.H.E. Journal, 30(10), 19-21. Feuerstein, A., & Opfer, V. D. (1998). School board chairmen and school superintendents: An analysis of perceptions concerning special interest groups and educational governance. Journal of School Leadership, 8, 373-398. Fink, D., & Brayman, C. (2006). School leadership succession and the challenges of change. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42 (62), 61-89. Greene, K. (1992). Models of school-board policy-making. Educational Administration Quarterly, 28 (2), 220-236. Horng, E., Klasik, D., & Loeb, S. (2010). Principal time-use and school effectiveness. American Journal of Education 116, (4) 492-523. Lafee, S. (2002). Data-driven districts. School Administrator, 59(11), 6-7, 9-10, 12, 14-15. Leithwood, K., & Sun, J. (2012). The Nature and effects of transformational school leadership: A metaanalytic review of unpublished research. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48 (387). 388-423. Marks, H., Louis, K.S., & Printy, S. (2002). The capacity for organizational learning: Implications for pedagogy and student achievement. In K. Leithwood (Ed.), Organizational learning and school improvement (p. 239-266). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. McIntire, T. (2002). The administrator's guide to data-driven decision making. Technology and Learning, 22(11), 18-33. Pan, D., Rudo, Z., Schneider, C., & Smith-Hansen, L. (2003). Examination of resource allocation in education: connecting spending to student performance. Austin, TX: SEDL. Document Generated On Inc. September 2016 unless otherwise granted by written agreement. © 2016 Advance Education, All rights 29, reserved Page 51