New Mexico Instructional Audit Manual 2014-2015 New Mexico Public Education Department
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
© Copyright 2025