New Mexico Instructional
Audit Manual 2014-2015
New Mexico Public Education Department
300 Don Gaspar Ave
Santa Fe, New Mexico
87501
Prepared for the
New Mexico Public Education Department (PED)
By
New Mexico Public Education Department, Priority Schools Bureau with the
West Comprehensive Center (formerly Southwest Comprehensive Center),
Center on Instruction, and RMC Research Corporation
September 2011
Revised June 2012
Revised June 2013
Revised August 2014
By
The Southwest Comprehensive Center and the New Mexico Public Education
Department, Priority Schools Bureau
Copyright Notice
This manual is copyright free, so no permission is needed to cite or reproduce it for non-profit
purposes. Some information in this document was adapted from “New Mexico—ESEA Flexibility
Request November 14, 2011” which is a copyright-free document published by the New Mexico
Public Education Department.
Notes
This document is available at www.ped.state.nm.us
Click on the A–Z directory to locate it under “Priority Schools Bureau.”
Prepared for the New Mexico Public Education Department, by the Southwest Comprehensive
Center at WestEd with funds from the U.S. Department of Education under cooperative agreement
number S283B050049. The content does not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the U.S.
Department of Education, nor does mention or visual representation of trade names, commercial
products, or organizations imply endorsement by the federal government.
Acknowledgements
The editors wish to acknowledge the support and assistance of following individuals who
contributed to this New Mexico Instructional Audit Handbook – 2012 Revisions:

Norma Binder, School Improvement, Curriculum and Instruction, Bernalillo Public
Schools.

Debbie Cooper, Assistant Superintendent for Elementary Instruction, Hobbs
Independent Schools.

Becca Ferguson, Dean of Students, Carrizozo High School, Carrizozo Public Schools.

Crystal Herrera, Special Education Teacher, Hawthorne Elementary School,
Albuquerque Public Schools.

Diane Katzenmeyer-Delgado, Principal, Atalya Elementary School, Santa Fe Public
Schools.

Jacque Mangham, Principal, Lybrook Elementary School, Jemez Mountain Public
Schools.

Grace Marquez, Principal, Gadsden Elementary School, Gadsden Independent
Schools.

Patti Nesbitt, Principal, Carrizozo High School, Carrizozo Public Schools.

Felicia Sena, Principal, Cesar Chavez Elementary School, Santa Fe Public Schools.

Susie Yturralde, Director, Bilingual Education and Multicultural Programs, Gadsden
Independent Schools.
Table of Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................ 4
New Mexico Instructional Audit Process .................................................................................................. 11
Pre-Visit: In Advance of the Site Visit .......................................................................................... 12
Pre-Visit: Document Review .............................................................................................................. 13
Day One: First Day of the Site Visit.............................................................................................................. 14
Entering the School .............................................................................................................................. 14
Staff Meeting .......................................................................................................................................... 14
Principal Interview............................................................................................................................... 14
Group Interview with School Leadership Team. ........................................................................ 15
Afternoon .............................................................................................................................................................. 15
Interviews with Teachers and Other Instructional or Support Staff. .................................. 15
Group Interview with Parents. ......................................................................................................... 16
Group Interview with Students ........................................................................................................ 16
Day Two: Second Day of the Site Visit........................................................................................................ 17
Morning and Afternoon ...................................................................................................................... 17
Conduct Classroom Walkthroughs ................................................................................................. 17
Continue Teacher Interviews ............................................................................................................ 17
Day Three: Third Day of the Site Visit ........................................................................................................ 18
Morning.................................................................................................................................................... 18
Early Afternoon ..................................................................................................................................... 18
Exit Interview. ........................................................................................................................................ 18
Post-Visit: Offsite Report Writing ................................................................................................................ 20
Introduction
Conducting an instructional audit can be the first step toward developing a systems-wide
approach to ensuring all students benefit from high-quality instruction.
-McREL (Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning)
This New Mexico Instructional Audit (NMIA) is part of New Mexico’s A-F School Grading
Accountability System of school and district support. Its purpose is to improve instruction
at the classroom level through examining systems that both support and monitor teachers
and other instructional personnel. The audit generates data that inform the Educational
Plan for Student Success (Web EPSS), the school’s improvement plan, which is required for
every school in the state.
The state’s current system of school and district support is designed to help schools and
districts meet state mandates as outlined in the approved “New Mexico ESEA Flexibility
Request” (February 15, 2012). These mandates are as follows:

Implementation of the college-and-career-readiness standards (Common Core State
Standards)

Development and administration of annual, statewide, aligned, high-quality
assessments that measure student growth

Implementation of the state-developed A-F School Grading Accountability System,
Table 1 (pp. 5-6)

Development and adoption of guidelines for local teacher and principal evaluation
and support systems
The state’s support system includes:

Differentiated technical assistance

Opportunities for professional development

Annual program budget reviews

Data driven decision making
PED │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit 2014-2015│Page | 4

Resources for best practices and research-based programs

A number of tools to assist schools and districts in analyzing and determining their
strengths and opportunities for improvement
The New Mexico Instructional Audit is one of the tools, and serves as an independent
examination of the operations and systems that support and relate to instruction. It serves
as the mechanism for examining the systems in place and is supported by the school
leadership to increase teacher effectiveness and enhance student learning through
professional dialogue. It provides a means by which an auditor or auditors can compile
data for feedback to a school about the instructional practices that were observed during
the school visitation.
Curriculum and instruction were selected because they are at the core of the educational
process. If some aspect of curriculum and/or instruction is problematic, students will not
be achieving at the desired level. The audit is based on 13 indicators related to research
and best practices for teaching and learning. The indicators state that all teachers and other
instructional staff must:
1. Implement research-based strategies, interventions, and programs that ensure
quality teaching and learning that meet student academic needs.
2. Effectively employ a continuous improvement process in the classroom with
students.
3. Use data derived from short-cycle, other formative assessments, and summative
assessments to refocus or modify instruction at the classroom or individual level to
help all students meet high standards.
4. Consistently implement the district policy for allocating and protecting instructional
time in all core subject areas.
5. Demonstrate appropriate content knowledge for effective and accurate instruction.
6. Employ effective teaching strategies including differentiated instruction to meet the
learning needs of all students.
PED │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit 2014-2015│Page | 5
7. Provide specific and timely feedback to students on an ongoing basis, with students
using feedback to improve performance.
8. Offer students multiple opportunities for demonstrating proficiency.
9. Implement curriculum and classroom assessments that are aligned with the New
Mexico Content (NMCS).
10. Maintain positive, respectful classroom climates and use effective classroom
management strategies that are consistent with school and district policies to meet
the learning needs of all students.
11. Maintain a culture of respect where relationships, trust, communication, and
collaboration are valued with the entire school community.
12. Ensure that the school is a safe and orderly environment conducive to learning.
13. Ensure that the school has a culturally respectful environment.
The audit process involves a small team (typically 1 – 3) of external consultants (one is
designated the team leader), along with an invited district representative, conducting a
three-day site visit to the school and gathering data through interviews with the school
leadership, teachers, students, and parents. The questions in the interviews are divided
into three categories, as appropriate, for each group being interviewed. These categories
are:

Strengthening the school instructional program

Ensuring that teachers provide effective instruction

Using data to inform instruction1
In addition, the team will review numerous documents and visit a sample of classrooms to
conduct classroom walkthroughs.
See Denton C. A., and Vaughn, S. (2010). Preventing and remediating reading difficulties: Perspectives from
research. In T.A. Glover, and S. Vaughn (Eds.). The promise of response to intervention: Evaluating current
science and practice (pp. 78–112). New York: Guilford Press. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No.
ED509983)
1
PED │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit 2014-2015│Page | 6
At the end of the visit, the team will compile its data and determine findings, which will be
shared with the principal and school leadership team on the last day of the site visit at an
exit meeting. Shortly after the visit, the team leader will write a formal report and send it to
the school principal and superintendent within two weeks.
The principal, with support and input from the district representative and school personnel
will review the report and determine strategies and action steps to address the findings.
The Instructional Audit Report provides a section to be used as a worksheet by the school
in determining how to address report findings. Once the school has addressed the level 2
findings, the report is to be uploaded into the file cabinet of the School Web EPSS using the
document title NMIA Report [name of district/school] 2014-2015. The school will revise
its 2013-2014 Web EPSS within two weeks of receiving the NMIA Report to include action
steps that address the level 2 findings in the report. The Instructional Audit tag will be
available to denote which Action Steps link to findings.
PED │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit 2014-2015│Page | 7
New Mexico A–F School Grading Accountability System 2014–2015
Matrix of Requirements and Monitoring for Districts and Schools
Rationale
The state’s current system of school and district support is designed to help schools and
districts meet state mandates as outlined in the approved New Mexico Elementary and
Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Flexibility Request (February 2012). These mandates are
as follows: implementation of Common Core State Standards; development and
administration of annual, statewide, aligned, high-quality assessments that measure
student growth; implementation of the state-developed A–F School Grading Accountability
System; and development and implementation of guidelines for local teacher and principal
evaluation and support systems.
The state’s support system includes: differentiated technical assistance, opportunities for
professional development, annual program budget reviews, data-driven decision making,
resources for best practices and research-based programs, and a number of tools to assist
schools and districts in analyzing and determining their strengths and opportunities for
improvement. Each school will be able to find themselves on a specific page within this
document based on their school’s report card grade (and status if applicable).
PED │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit 2014-2015│Page | 8
New Mexico A–F School Grading Accountability System 2014–2015
Matrix of Requirements and Monitoring for Districts and Schools
For A Focus, B Focus, C Focus, D Focus, D Strategic and D No Assigned Status Schools
No Assigned
Status
A
B
C
D
F
Schools Will Receive
Reward
X
Strategic
Focus
X
X
X
X
X
District and School Requirements

Regionalized support from
 Web EPSS
Priority Schools Bureau staff
— Focus on performance of Q1, Q3, and subgroups

New Mexico Instructional
Audit (NMIA)
(only for schools who have
not had an NMIA in 2012–
2013 or 2013–2014)

Data Review to include Q1,
Q3, and subgroup
achievement
(pending final appeals of
NM 2014 School Grade
Report Card)

2014–2015 School Web
EPSS annual reviews begin
in January 2015

Leadership development
training
Priority
—

Required to include four of the seven Transformation Goal Strategies (Turnaround Principles)
to include
o strengthening the school’s reading and math programs
o using data to inform instruction for continuous improvement
Must set aside 20 percent of the district Title I award to implement four of the seven
Transformation Goal Strategies (Focus schools only)
 NMIA level 2 findings reflected in action steps in the School Web EPSS by December 31, 2014 (only
for schools who have not had an NMIA in 2012–2013 or 2013–2014)
 Findings from the Data Review to be reflected in the 2014–2015 School Web EPSS
Note: If your school has had a D Grade or a combination of D and F grades
for three consecutive years and/or a status of Focus or a combination of Priority and Focus for
three consecutive years, proceed directly to page 9. If your school has had an F grade (F3) for
three consecutive years and/or a status of Priority (Priority3) for three consecutive years,
proceed directly to page 10.
PED │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit 2014-2015│Page | 9
New Mexico A–F School Grading Accountability System 2014–2015
Matrix of Requirements and Monitoring for Districts and Schools
For A Priority, B Priority, C Priority, D Priority, F Priority, F Focus, F Strategic, and F No Assigned Status Schools
No Assigned
Status
A
B
C
D
F
Schools Will Receive
Reward
X
Strategic
X
Regionalized support from
 Web EPSS
Priority Schools Bureau staff
— Focus on performance of Q1, Q3, and subgroups

New Mexico Instructional
Audit (only for schools who
have not had an NMIA in
2012–2013 or 2013–2014)

Data Review to include Q1,
Q3, and subgroup
achievement (pending final
appeals of NM 2014 School
Grade Report Card)
Desktop monitoring of the
2014–2015 Web EPSS: Fall
2014 and Winter 2015

2014–2015 School Web
EPSS annual reviews begin
in April 2015

Leadership development
training
X
Priority
X
X
X
X
X
District and School Requirements


Focus
—

Required to include all seven of the Transformation Goal Strategies (Turnaround Principles) to
implement proven strategies that are research based
Must set aside 20 percent of the district Title I award to implement four of the seven
Transformation Goal Strategies (Focus and Priority schools only)
 NMIA level 2 findings reflected in action steps in the School Web EPSS by December 31, 2014 (only
for schools who have not had an NMIA in 2012–2013 or 2013–2014)
 Findings from the Data Review to be reflected in the 2014–2015 School Web EPSS
Note: If your school has had a D Grade or a combination of D and F grades for three
consecutive years and/or a status of Focus or a combination of Priority and Focus for
three consecutive years, proceed directly to page 9. If your school has had an F grade
(F3) for three consecutive years and/or a status of Priority (Priority3) for three
consecutive years, proceed directly to page 10.
PED │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit 2014-2015│Page | 10
New Mexico Instructional Audit Process
Auditors are there to take a snapshot of instructional practices in place at the school across
classrooms, not to assess individual teachers. This audit process is built on a framework
that examines the systems that have been put in place by those in key leadership positions
at the school (i.e., the principal, assistant principal) to ensure that research-based
instructional practices are fully implemented in all classrooms. To this end, the framework
provides auditors with the tools to assess the practices of the administrators and the
teachers. The auditors will review the data on the frequency of observations, coaching,
professional development, and other actions taken by the leadership to ensure fidelity to
the curriculum and high-quality instruction throughout the school. Document review, both
prior to and during the site visit, is also part of the NMIA.
During the three days on site, the auditors will conduct classroom walkthroughs and
individual or group interviews with key personnel including the principal, teachers,
students, and parents. Document reviews, individual and/or group interviews, classroom
visits, and walkthroughs make up the data-gathering phase of the instructional auditing
process. Auditors ask specific interview questions in order to determine how well the
school is meeting Denton and Vaughn’s (2010) three criterion (adapted) (see page three of
this document). They review documents looking for specific items and features that
indicate, for example, whether or not the school has an instructional monitoring system in
place that supports teachers and other instructional staff in mastering the art and science
of teaching by demonstrating the use of research-based instructional practices.
During the site visits, auditors look for specific evidence to show that teachers and other
instructional staff demonstrate skills in the area of instructional practice. The entire
process, including preparation, document review, site visitation and walkthroughs, exit
interview, and report writing should take approximately five to seven days, depending on
the size and location of the school and complexity of the data that were collected.
The auditors will closely follow the content and templates for the audit process found in
the NMIA appendices and described below. A sample agenda (see Appendix A) is provided
PED │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit 2014-2015│Page | 11
for guidance purposes. If followed, it ensures optimal use of time by both auditors and
school personnel. A list of all the tasks the auditors are responsible for is found in
Appendices B, C, and D.
The audit is designed to yield maximum benefit to all of the individuals whose practices are
being examined. Auditors will take notes throughout the process, organizing them
according to the three criteria (adapted) put forth by Denton and Vaughn (2010) and cited
on page three of this document. For the auditors’ convenience, each of the three criteria
appearing in the document review is used as an organizing element that ties the criteria to
the document under review. The elements are used in most of the templates found in the
appendices.
Pre-Visit: In Advance of the Site Visit
The auditing team will consist of a team of external consultants, approved and trained by
the Public Education Department (PED), and an invited representative from the district
whose school is being audited. An external consultant will serve as team leader. The district
representative will serve as a member of the audit team and may conduct classroom
walkthroughs, review documents, and participate in the debriefing meetings at the end of
each day. This district representative would preferably be someone with experience and
expertise in curriculum and instruction, knowledge of federal programs, and experience as
a school administrator.
In advance of the site visit to the school, all auditors (including the invited district
representative) must successfully complete the professional development sessions
required by the PED. Auditors should become familiar with New Mexico’s documents and
procedures for the instructional audit, as well as the school they will be auditing. School
and the NMPED websites contain useful information about school operations, especially
performance on state-required assessments. To access the NMPED Assessment and
Accountability website click the following link:
http://www.ped.state.nm.us/AssessmentAccountability/AcademicGrowth/NMSBA.html.
PED │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit 2014-2015│Page | 12
To access New Mexico School Report Cards click here:
http://webapp2.ped.state.nm.us/SchoolData/SchoolGrading.aspx
The team leader shall contact and send a letter to the district superintendent and principal
of the Priority or F school that will be audited as soon as possible after the NMPED has
determined the school, district, and the names of the auditors. Team leaders will then work
with their team members and schools to set the dates for the site visit. (For a sample letter,
see Appendix E.) In the letter, the team leader indicates the specific documents the team
intends to review before and during the site visit. The letter should indicate when the team
plans to conduct the entrance meeting, principal interview, and exit interview and specify
when they would like to conduct individual/group interviews and classroom walkthroughs.
The principal or his/her designee is expected to make these and other arrangements in
coordination with the district representative and team leader.
The team leader should feel free to personalize the letter, as long as the communication
remains clear about the general schedule and purpose of the site visit. The letter should
also list any special needs that the audit team may have including an appropriate room for
interviews, conferences and debriefing, along with access to the Internet. If there is need
for an interpreter, this should be coordinated between the team leader and the school
principal.
Pre-Visit: Document Review
Document reviews are a primary source of data in the auditing process. Auditors review
specific documents to formulate and inform findings and recommendations related to
specific indicators. The guidelines found in Appendix F should be used to review specific
documents prior to the visit. Observations and findings from the review of documents
should be recorded and summarized in the NM Audit of Instructional Practices “Document
Review Summary” form found in Appendix H.
PED │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit 2014-2015│Page | 13
Day One: First Day of the Site Visit
Morning
Entering the School: The auditing team meets briefly with the principal and reviews the
three-day schedule including resolution of any logistical issues. If necessary, the auditing
team presents the principal with a short list of any additional documents that they may
need (10 minutes).
Staff Meeting (before school begins): All staff should be invited to attend a brief (15
minute maximum) gathering so that the principal can introduce the auditors, who will give
school staff an overview of the schedule and process that will be followed. The purpose of
this meeting is to make certain that all staff know that they will not be personally evaluated
and that any classroom walkthroughs are meant to give the auditors an overview of the
programs and processes used to plan and deliver instruction to the students – not an
assessment of the teacher’s performance. The purpose of the NMIA is to improve
instruction at the classroom level through examining systems that both support and
monitor teachers and other instruction personnel.
Principal Interview: This is a one-on-one interview with the principal and team leader
(one hour).2 The team leader reiterates that the audit is intended to help the school identify
problems related to the systems that support effective instruction, which are or are not in
place in the school, and provide the school the opportunity to address these problems, with
the ultimate goal of improving student achievement. To begin the questioning, the team
leader may ask any questions he or she may have based on the pre-visit document review,
then will proceed to ask the questions contained in Appendix I. Note that some may have
already been answered by the pre-visit document review or may not be relevant to a
particular school. The team leader will need to screen the questions beforehand or during
the interview. He or she may also need to ask probing questions that are not listed.
2
If one of the auditors is free, he or she may take notes while the team leader interviews the principal and
school leadership team.
PED │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit 2014-2015│Page | 14
The principal is interviewed alone to provide him or her the opportunity to speak
freely. High-performing schools have principals who are strong leaders in the areas of
curriculum and instruction. Interview questions address all three of the audit criteria. The
criterion to which each question relates appears as a header preceding a bank of questions
found below. A note taking/reporting template for this interview is found in Appendices J,
the Principal Reporting Form. Each of the cells will expand as the auditors enter their
notes and observations into the templates.
Group Interview with School Leadership Team: The team leader interviews the school
leadership team as a whole (45 minutes). The auditor asks questions from Appendix K that
allows comparison between the responses of the principal. Responses should be recorded
on the sheet found in Appendix L, the School Leadership Team Reporting Form.
Afternoon
Interviews with Teachers and Other Instructional or Support Staff: Auditors should
interview as many teachers as possible in the time available (45 minutes each). For
elementary schools, at least one teacher per grade level is the minimal requirement. Other
staff might include the librarian, music teacher, art teacher, or physical education teacher.
Counselors may also be selected. (Questions will need to be adapted for other instructional
staff and counselors.) At the secondary level there should be at least two teachers for the
core subjects and other instructional personnel and counselors as time allows. The auditor
may conduct a group interview with two or more teachers if scheduling does not permit
individual interviews.
Interview questions address all three of the audit criteria. The criterion to which each
question relates appears as a header preceding a bank of questions found below. Questions
may need to be tailored to the individual teacher. A note taking/reporting form for this
interview is found in Appendix N.
PED │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit 2014-2015│Page | 15
Group Interview with Parents: This is a group interview with parents that is designed to
last approximately 45 minutes. The group should be small (about 6-8) with parents of
children at different grade levels. Parents of special education students and
multilingual/multicultural students will be included. If there is need for an interpreter, the
team leader and School Principal will coordinate this in advance of the site visit.
The interview setting needs to be tightly constructed. The purpose of the interview is to
provide the auditor with the “big picture” regarding the learning climate of the school.
Teachers are not to be mentioned by name, nor should an attempt be made to describe a
situation that would identify an individual.
Interview questions address all three of the audit criteria. The criterion to which each
question relates appears as a header preceding a bank of questions found below. Questions
may need to be tailored to the group of parents chosen. A note taking/reporting form for
this interview is found in Appendix P.
Group Interview with Students: As the ones most personally touched by the instruction
they receive, students need to have input into the instructional audit. A group interview of
5-7 students at the elementary level and 7-10 students at the secondary level
(approximately 30-45 minutes) is ideal. The elementary students should be a mixed group
from the school’s highest grade level when appropriate. The secondary school students will
be a heterogeneous group from a mix of grades. Interview questions, found in Appendix Q,
address two of the three of the audit criteria; there are no questions on ensuring that
teachers provide effective instruction. The criterion to which each question relates appears
as a header preceding a bank of questions found below. A note taking/reporting template
for this interview is found in Appendix R.
PED │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit 2014-2015│Page | 16
Day Two: Second Day of the Site Visit
Morning and Afternoon
Conduct Classroom Walkthroughs: Classroom walkthroughs provide formative
assessment data that answers the question, “How are we doing?” in regards to the
implementation of quality teaching and learning. The Classroom Walkthrough tool
provides a structure for the audit team when observing classrooms. (See Appendix S for
the instrument and Appendix T for a form for reporting data from the observations.)
It is recommended that for the content area(s) (reading/language arts, math) in which the
school did not meet the Student Growth Targets (SGT) in Math 45% and/or Reading 52.3%,
that at least 12-36 classrooms should be observed dependent upon the size of the school.
Other content classes and federal program classrooms such as ELL/Bilingual and Special
Education should be observed as well as intervention programs and elective classes if time
allows. Selection of classrooms for walkthroughs should be based on the elements of the
report card that indicate improvement as needed to include subgroup data. Optimally, the
NMIA team should observe somewhere between 12-36 classrooms dependent upon the
size of the school. This determination will be made by the team based on what the school’s
data reflects as areas of concern.
Continue Teacher Interviews: (See Day One.)
At the end of both Day One and Day Two, the auditors meet to review the day, resolve any
issues that have come up, review/edit their notes, and plan for the next day. A “Data
Organizer for Instructional Auditors” is provided in Appendix U as a mechanism for
summarizing and comparing key points, quotes, and other important data that are gathered
throughout the process.
PED │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit 2014-2015│Page | 17
Day Three: Third Day of the Site Visit
Morning
Triangulation of Data and Draft Report: During this time the auditors should compile and
review all the data that have been gathered through reviewing documents, interviewing
key school staff and stakeholders, and visiting classroom. They may use the templates
provided in Appendix G and Appendix U to help organize the collected data.
The core of the audit is to provide the findings in a way that is credible and useful. A
finding must be substantiated with at least three separate data sources, which is known as
triangulating the data. By the end of their time in the school, auditors will begin to see
common patterns and themes related to instructional issues. For example, the classroom
walkthrough instrument showed that few teachers were providing feedback to their
students on any kind of regular basis. Student and parent interviews confirmed that
students often did not know what they were expected to do to improve. If there are at
least three data points (or two that are very strong) in agreement, “providing specific and
timely feedback to students on an ongoing basis, with students using feedback to improve
performance is not evident” (13 Indicators, page 2-3 of this document) should become a
level 2 finding in the Instructional Audit Report.
The major findings of the audit, with the data that support them, are the focus of the exit
interview that is conducted. These findings and data sources can be jotted down in note
form for auditors to use during the exit interview, but they should not be copied or
distributed to participants or formalized in any way.
Early Afternoon
Exit Interview: In keeping with the “no surprises” policy of all good auditing processes, the
auditors should meet with the principal and as many of the school leadership team
members as available in the afternoon of the final day of the site visit3 (approximately 45
3
The superintendent should also be invited to attend.
PED │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit 2014-2015│Page | 18
minutes). The purpose is to verbally deliver and discuss the preliminary findings of the
audit. Auditors should encourage participants in the exit interview to ask clarifying
questions about the findings, paying particular attention to any findings that appear to be
based on inaccurate or incomplete information. Auditors must assure personnel that
the final written audit report will be consistent with findings presented during the
exit interview.
Clearly, the final written report will include much more detail, but it should not contain any
major findings that are not addressed in the exit interview. District and school participants
should also be told when to expect the NMIA report. The exit interview provides the
district and the school the opportunity to question findings and conclusions.
The team leader will explain that the principal will receive the report within two weeks as
will the superintendent. School and district officials will also have two weeks to respond to
the level 2 findings in the section provided in the NMIA Report. The school will then upload
the NMIA Report to the school’s Web EPSS filing cabinet using the document title: NMIA
Report [name of district/school] 2013-2014 and revisions are made to the School’s Web
EPSS Action Steps using the “Instructional Audit” tag to identify the Action Steps in the
plan. Once this is done, the school principal will email the Priority Schools Bureau,
([email protected]) indicating that the report is now uploaded to the Web EPSS.
PED │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit 2014-2015│Page | 19
Post-Visit: Offsite Report Writing
The team leader is responsible for writing the NMIA report and tracking it through to its
finalization. He or she has all of the notes that the other auditors have taken to help in
writing the NMIA report, which is done after the auditors conclude their visit. The report
consists of four sections:

Identifying information about the school, audit, and auditors

A brief description of the process the auditors used (e.g., numbers of people
interviewed by role group, list of documents reviewed)

A findings section with evidence listed

A section for the school response to each Level 2 finding
See Appendix X for the NMIA report template. The NMIA report should be written with the
following audiences in mind: the board of education, the district and school staff, and the
public. Because the district and the school should be encouraged to make the audit report
public, quotations should be used sparingly, with no attribution to named individuals;
instead, the source of the quote should be identified by the category of his/her position
(e.g., administrator). The job of the team leader is not to affirm or deny hypotheses or even
to solve the school’s instructional problems, but to identify findings, levels of concern and
evidence.
The team leader will formulate a report with findings. The report format will focus on
aspects of instruction that the school does well - Level 0, - issues/systems that may be
impacting student achievement, but do not require immediate attention - Level 1, and
findings that need immediate attention - Level 2. Evidence will be cited to support all
findings.
After the team leader has completed a draft of the report, he/she sends it to a Priority
Schools Bureau representative who will be identified at that time. After review and
approval, the team leader sends the report along with a cover email, (see Appendix X), to
the School Principal with a copy to the Superintendent, and PSB representative. Team
PED │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit 2014-2015│Page | 20
leader will add a delivery and read receipt. This is to be done within two weeks of
completing the site visit at the school.
The Team Leader shall keep all protocols, notes, and documents from the site visit for at
least one month beyond the date the NMIA Report is sent to the School Principal and
District Superintendent. This is done in the event there are questions about the report
findings that need clarifying.
After one (1) month, all documents, hard copy and electronic, are to be transmitted to NM
PED/Priority Schools Bureau:
NM Public Education Department
ATTENTION: Patricia “Kitty” Montoya
Priority Schools Bureau
Room 121
300 Don Gaspar Avenue
Santa Fe, NM 87501
Upon receiving the report, the district and the school have two weeks for review and to
respond to the level 2 findings. For each finding the school needs to provide a strategy. The
expectation is that the school addresses all level 2 findings, utilizing the cells provided in
the report template and incorporates the Action Steps into its 2013-2014 Web EPSS.
The completed report is then uploaded into the filing cabinet of the school Web EPSS, titled
NMIA Report [name of district/school] 2014-2015, and the School Principal will notify the
Priority Schools Bureau at the following email address: [email protected]
PED │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit 2014-2015│Page | 21
Kids First …
New Mexico Wins