Monitoring Definitions: Derived from Latin monere “to advise”
Ineffective Practice
Effective Practice
1.
1.
2.
2.
3.
3.
4.
4.
5.
5.
6.
6.
 Effective
Schools Research emerged in the
late 60s in response to the Coleman Report
 Correlates
of Effective Schools
 Continuous
Improvement and Systems
Thinking
 West
Virginia Standards for High Quality
Schools
SCHOOL AS THE
UNIT OF
CHANGE
CLEAR PUBLIC
REPORTING
SYSTEM
IMPROVED
STUDENT
PERFORMANCE
ACCREDITATION
PROCESS
SCHOOL
IMPROVEMENT
PROCESS
 Every
School Improving
 Improvement
Context
Function
Form
Process
from Inside

Learning Organization

CHARTING A COURSE
What evidence will you accept?
What do you want your school to look like in a year?
Three?
 Five?


Consistent Pervasive Practice
 Understand Current Conditions
 Plan
 Implement
 Refine Data
 Self-study

A – F “Grade Card”
Ensure grade reliability
State Awards
Public Announcement
1. School
Self-Study
5. School uses
Team
Feedback for
Improvement
4. Team visits
school, reviews
evidence,
provides ratings &
recommendations
2.Submit
SMR with
self-rating
and
evidence
REVIEW
PROCESS
3.
Review
team
studies SMR
Understanding WV
HQS for School
Improvement
Understanding
Continual
Improvement and
Systems Thinking
Evaluating
Progress
Developing the
Work Plan
Clarifying Vision,
Mission and Core
Beliefs
Writing Action
Steps
Data Analysis
Choosing
Research-based
Strategies
Setting Priorities
Establishing Goals
and Objectives
The 80/20 Principle represents a major shift in how
school improvement in West Virginia will be assessed
and reported. Accreditation in the state will now be
based equally on verification of a school’s claims made
in the School Monitoring Report:
 Use of Continuous Improvement Processes to
successfully meet the Standards for High Quality
Schools;
 Plan to improve based on a needs analysis of
resources, facilities, and efficiency needs’
 Professional Development and Capacity Building
Needs’
 Best Practices extant in the school; and
 Code and policy compliance
KNOW THE STANDARDS AND FUNCTIONS
Activity: Matching evidence to
standards and functions
Each table will need:
 Reader (cards)
 Recorder (paper)
 Copies of the WV Standards for HQS
Standards
and
Functions
Evidence
Of
Practices
And
Processes
Who?
What?
When?
Where?
Why?
How?
Who?
Team Leader and all team members
(size depends on school)
What?
A process that assures the evidence
examined by every member is heard
and considered by the team in
reaching agreement on a rating for
each function.
Verifying and Gathering Evidence
HOW?
 Team
members will spend one day collecting
and reviewing evidence through observations
and interviews.
 Using that information, they will verify the
evidence you submitted for each standard on
the School Monitoring Report and identify any
additional evidence they find that supports or
negates the presence of the standards and
functions.
 They will come to consensus on the rating for
each function and provide recommendations if
appropriate.
When?
The Team Consensus Meeting will begin
as soon as the last observation or
interview has been completed.
Where?
The meeting will take place at the
school in the workroom provided.
Why?
To provide the school with
feedback that gives a clear
picture of current conditions
and allows the school to build on
those conditions to improve
student performance.
Verify Evidence Provided by the School in
the School Monitoring Report
HOW?
The Lead member on Standard 1 will begin the
consensus discussion. He or She will:
 Identify the evidence submitted by the school and



the verifying evidence that she has found.
Add evidence that either supports or negates the
school’s evidence.
Ask team members to contribute additional
evidence (if any).
Poll the team regarding their rating of that
function.
Simulating Individual
and Team Processes for
OEPA School Monitoring
Overview
1.
a)
b)
c)
Each Table will assume the
role of a monitoring team.
Review the school report.
Review the substantiating
evidence collected by the team.
Come to consensus on the rating
for each function.
Team Notes –
Color Coded
by Person and
standard
How?
1. The lead will review each piece of
school evidence submitted for the
standard & functions assigned.
Then identify substantiating
evidence he/she found to verify or
negate that school’s evidence
including other evidence the school
didn’t list.
Conducting the Consensus Meeting
2. The lead member will begin the
discussion by reviewing his/her
assigned standard, and function
(one at a time).
3. Identify the key words within the
function statement.
(Function A only for training
purposes)
Conducting the Consensus
Meeting
4.
The lead for that standard calls
upon team members to provide
any additional information they
found that validates or negates the
school’s evidence for that
function.
(Put everything on the table)
5.
How?
Review the Rating Scale.
Share the school’s selfrating and then poll the
team to reach consensus
on the function at hand.

4 = Strong and pervasive characteristic (Distinguished)
(All aspects of the function are present at the school and are applied to all
appropriate aspects of school/classroom operations and behaviors)

3 = Present but not a pervasive characteristic (Accomplished)
(Most aspects of the function are present at the school; aspects are
broadly applied but may not be consistently and pervasively demonstrated
throughout all applicable school/classroom operations and behaviors.)

2 = Present in a few areas and/or situations but needs improvement
(Emerging)
(Some aspects of the function are present at the school; aspects are
occasionally demonstrated in applicable school/classroom operations and
behaviors.)

1 = Rarely evidenced; needs significant improvement (Unsatisfactory)
(Few, if any, aspects of the function are present at the school; aspects are
rarely demonstrated in applicable school/classroom operations and
behaviors.)
Questions?
Issues?
Comments?