Introduction

A review of school improvement and strategic planning literature provides several guiding principles to establish a conceptual framework for school improvement in North Carolina. These principles are discussed below. The process model provided in Section Four aligns with these guiding principles.

1. The vision of the North Carolina State Board of Education is that every public school student will graduate ready for post-secondary education and work, prepared to be a globally engaged and productive citizen. The State Board of Education established the following five goals for public education: Every student in the NC Public School System graduates from high school prepared for work, further education and citizenship.

2. Every student has a personalized education.

3. Every student, every day has excellent educators.

4. Every school district has up-to-date financial, business, and technology systems to serve its students, parents and educators.

5. Every student is healthy, safe, and responsible.

District-Role in School Improvement

Central office staff should actively participate in school improvement efforts in their district to generate both practical and cultural improvements. First, if district-level staff understand school- level goals across the district, they can pinpoint areas where applying resources across the district may help. Second, regular participation can develop a symbiotic relationship. The school improvement process ultimately benefits students, and resulting student- and school-level improvements help districts achieve their goals and meet state and federal performance requirements.

The NCDPI recommends that districts form a District Support & Improvement Team (DSIT) that will regularly coach and assist schools throughout the stages of their school improvement cycle. Decades of research shows that regular feedback improves goal- setting effectiveness, and some researchers have argued that feedback is a necessary condition for goal-setting to enhance performance. The DSIT should ensure that administrators, teachers and the school improvement team receive the feedback needed to determine how well their chosen practices are working.

Moreover, DSIT should coach school improvement teams so that they are able to make informed decisions about ineffective tasks and continue to expand those that are working. The DSIT should guide schools in using all data to drive decision making about school improvement.

Distributed Leadership

Implementing distributed leadership provides an opportunity to strengthen cooperative culture and increase buy-in for the SIP across the organization and all stakeholders. Legislative requirements directly reinforce the collaborative nature of the SIP process. Additionally, distributed leadership increases the odds of school improvement being sustainable. School improvement research (Harris, 2001; Spillane & Diamond, 2007) supports the concepts of distributed leadership and collaboration among a team to help drive improvement. For example, Improving Quality of Education for All (IQEA), is one of the most successful school improvement initiatives in the United Kingdom. (Harris 2001) This initiative focuses on creating conditions in schools that promote quality teaching and learning. Like school improvement teams, IQEA “school improvement groups” work together to understand school problems, to set priorities for improvement, and to select opportunities for making change. (Harris 2001) Additionally, Spillane and Diamond (2007) note that the school improvement planning process can be a valuable mechanism for creating collaboration within the school and developing a sense of shared purpose and collective reflection. Achieving this perspective among the leadership and faculty within a school is an NCDPI-recommended best practice. A collaborative environment creates an opportunity for diverse ideas, perspectives and experiences to surface from team members.

Execute with Fidelity

A school improvement plan may be well-developed, built on relevant data, loaded with evidence- based practices to improve learning, and focused on the school’s critical needs – but the plan is only as good as the fidelity of implementation. School improvement teams should include fidelity measures when planning to ensure there is some way to measure the implementation process and to make mid-course corrections whenneeded.

Goal Alignment

Local school boards should align district goals to the five SBE goals, and schools should align school improvement plans to their district goals. This process will help schools address all critical components of educational reform and focus on local school needs. School improvement teams should recognize this as a guiding principle – that is, it should generally be followed unless there is a sound reason to diverge from it. For instance, if data analysis indicates a need to focus school-level goals in one area such as student instruction or teacher quality, then the team should include tasks that specifically address these needs.. For detailed information regarding the State Board’s goals and strategic plan, see Appendix C, or visit the NCDPI website at: http://stateboard.ncpublicschools.gov/strategic-plan.

Calendar Alignment

School improvement does not begin and end during each school year. School improvement is a continuous process. Each objective that a SIT includes in their plan should have a goal that is written using the SMART (Specific, Measureable, Attainable, Relevant, and Time-Bound) methodology.

While legislation requires that school plans are developed at least every two years, the NCDPI recommends a continuous improvement cycle that contains interim goals so that multi-year plans can be monitored as the school progresses on its chosen objectives. A school improvement plan is not fixed – it is a true ‘living’ document that is constantly evolving and growing as the school improvement team continues to make adjustments to ensure all students succeed.

Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS)

NC MTSS is a multi-tiered framework, which promotes school improvement through engaging, research-based academic and behavioral practices. NC MTSS employs a systems approach using data-driven problem solving to maximize growth for all.

MTSS is built on critical components. Critical components are installed through an intentional school improvement plan that addresses building the needed framework to address the needs of any school site. This section will provide an overview of the critical components to assist with not only developing, but implementing a school improvement plan.

Critical Components of MTSS

implementing instruction and intervention, and ensuring that staff have the data needed for data- based problem solving.

Building the Capacity/Infrastructure for Implementation

School-wide capacity and infrastructure are required in order to implement and sustain MTSS. This capacity and infrastructure usually include ongoing professional development and coaching with an emphasis on data-based problem solving and multi-tiered instruction and intervention; scheduling that allows staff to plan and implement instruction and intervention; and processes and procedures for engaging in data-based problem solving.

Communication and Collaboration

Ongoing communication and collaboration are essential for successful implementation of MTSS. Many innovations fail due to a lack of consensus, lack of feedback to implementers to support continuous improvement, and not involving stakeholders in planning. In addition to including stakeholders in planning and providing continuous feedback, it is also important to build the infrastructure to communicate and work with families and other community partners. These practices increase the likelihood that innovative practices will be implemented and sustained.

Data-Based Problem Solving

The use of data-based problem solving to make education decisions is a critical element of MTSS implementation. This includes the use of data-based problem solving for student outcomes across content areas, grade levels, and tiers, as well as the use of problem-solving to address barriers to school-wide implementation of MTSS. While several models for data-based problem solving exist, the basic four-step problem solving approach includes: 1) defining the objectives/goals to be attained, 2) identifying possible reasons why the desired goals are not being attained, 3) developing a plan for implementing data-driven tasks to attain goals, and 4) evaluating the effectiveness of the plan. Whatever problem solving model is chosen by the school/district should be evaluated against these four steps outlined as crucial in research literature to date.

Three-Tiered Instructional/Intervention Model

The three-tiered instructional/intervention model is another critical element of MTSS implementation. In a typical system, Tier 1 includes the instruction all students get; Tier 2 includes supplemental instruction or intervention provided to students not meeting benchmarks; and Tier 3 includes intensive, small group or individual interventions for students showing significant barriers to learning the skills required for school success. It is important to consider both academic and social-emotional/behavioral instruction and interventions when examining this domain.

Data Evaluation

Given the importance of data-based problem solving within an MTSS model, the need for a data and evaluation system is clear. In order to do data-based problem solving, school staff need to understand and have access to data sources that address the purposes of assessment. Procedures and protocols for administering assessments and data use, allow school staff to use data to drive decision making. In addition to student data, data on the fidelity of MTSS implementation (including fidelity of implementation of all instructional practices) allow school leadership to examine the current practices and make changes for improving MTSS implementation.

Section Four – Recommended School Improvement Planning Process

The basis of any strong school improvement plan is a thorough, unrelenting assessment of the current state of the school. Often, the true impact of a school’s efforts on student learning is diffused over time. A need-driven approach to school improvement planning requires a review that considers both internal and external factors associated with the school. An objective,

effective needs assessment incorporates both student and implementation data, gathered quantitatively and qualitatively. Multiple data pieces are triangulated to ensure accuracy. While a single measure provides useful information, various data used together provides a more comprehensive picture of the needs of all students in the school. Multiple measures of data may be categorized as follows:

Student Level Data:

● Demographics – Provides an indication of the changes in the context of the school over time (e.g., enrollment, attendance, drop-out rate, ethnicity, gender, gradelevel)

● Student Learning – Provides information about student performance based on different measures (e.g., standardized tests, teacher observations, benchmark data, formative assessment data, percentage of students receiving intervention, student response to intervention data)

● Engagement Data- Provides information on student participation (e.g., Office Discipline Referral (ODR), In-School and Out-Of-School Suspension Data, classroom-managed behavior data, attendance data including tardies and absences)

● Implementation Data

o Perceptions/Beliefs– Provides information about environmental improvements (e.g., teacher surveys, student surveys, climate and culture surveys, focus groups)

The school improvement team should first assess internal factors and instructional practices to explicitly identify the school's strengths and weaknesses. Next, the team should analyze external factors to identify opportunities and challenges that may impact what the school should focus on or can accomplish. While this analysis might identify issues the team must address, the purpose of this process is to develop an understanding of the broader context in which the school operates and to identify issues that might affect the school in the future. Finally, the team should understand the school’s weaknesses and identify possible solutions and growth opportunities.

Identifying root causes of issues allows the improvement team to address these causes rather than just the symptoms so they can solve the real problem.

There are a variety of structured needs assessment systems available today. The NCDPI District and School Transformation Division uses a comprehensive assessment process to help improve low performing schools and districts that is based on Cambridge Education's assessment model and is customized for North Carolina schools. The current rubric used for assessing schools as part of a Comprehensive Needs Assessment (CNA) may be found in Appendix D. The CNA is composed of 5 critical dimensions (Instructional Excellence & Alignment, Leadership Capacity, Professional Capacity, Planning & Operational Effectiveness, and Families & Community).

To assess the school’s use of a Multi-Tiered System of Support as a total school improvement framework, the NCDPI recommends the NC Self-Assessment of MTSS (SAM). SAM measures school-level implementation of MTSS. The purpose of administration is to help school-level and district-level personnel identify and prioritize implementation steps. The SAM contains 39 items in 6 domains (Leadership, Building Capacity/Infrastructure for Implementation, Communication and Collaboration, Data-based Problem-solving, Three-tiered Instructional/Intervention Model, and Data-Evaluation). The rubric for the SAM may be found in Appendix E.

Quality implementation of MTSS is associated with increased likelihood of instruction and interventions leading to successful student outcomes. It is important for schools to monitor not only student outcomes, but also how assessments, instruction, interventions, and data‐ based problem-solving are put into place (i.e., the fidelity with which these elements are implemented). Successful implementation is influenced by many factors within and around the school system (e.g., professional development, administrative support, data systems, staff member perceptions, successful adaptation, etc.). As a measure of school‐ level implementation of an MTSS, the focus of this instrument is on the necessary actions and activities to successfully implement and sustain the critical elements of MTSS with fidelity.

Create

Effective school improvement planning creates shared direction and generates an attention on priorities that drives action. Plans that concentrate on a limited set of priorities are better than exhaustive lists of initiatives and programs. While schools always have on-going initiatives and objectives, their concentration should be limited to the school's top three to five priorities. These priorities must guide the efforts of teachers and administrators as they carry out the business of educating children. Ongoing plan review and revisions allow schools to introduce new objectives when original objectives are at full implementation.

When priorities are identified, pursue an understanding of root causes by using techniques such as Ishakawa (cause-and-effect) diagrams, the “5 Whys,” and others. Identifying root causes allows the team to address more than the easily-identifiable symptoms and achieve a long-term solution. Analyzing and understanding data allows school improvement teams to identify root causes for problems and take action to address them. All school improvement plans should be data-driven. (See GS 115C-105.27 (a).) School Improvement Teams could ask themselves the following questions to determine an appropriate course of action:

● What data must be analyzed to determine the level of implementation?

● What instruments must be created to gather the data?

● Who will make the data available?

Established priorities should have clear goals. The goal statement under each objective (essentially a SMART goal) provides clarity for the school community. Once the goal is defined in the plan, identify and document specific tasks for achieving the objective. Tasks should

address the root cause(s) identified by the school improvement team. A SIT must define ownership of each task. This means specifying an individual responsible for executing the task. Do not over burden an individual with too many responsibilities as that can negatively impact implementation.

The District Support & Improvement Team should review school plans periodically to see if the designated tasks need revising. These reviews also provide opportunity for the principal and superintendent to discuss additional resource needs or specific tasks for which district level assistance is needed. Districts using these frequent and structured review approaches confirm they are time-consuming, yet the discussions have a dramatic effect on focusing effort on student learning and achievement. Student learning is the business of our schools, and the NCDPI recommends this significant investment of time as a mechanism to help achieve it.

Monitor

The most critical and often overlooked stage of a continuous improvement cycle is this monitoring stage. Once the plan is designed with clarity, the execution of the plan is to take place. It is important to note that the execution of the plan has no guarantee of success. As the plan is implemented, the team is taking part in ongoing assessment and checking to see the impact of each objective and its corresponding tasks. The team should check the results of the plan’s implementation against the goal that was outlined during the “create” stage.

Working the plan as intended with check points affords the team the opportunity to check progress, modify and adjust along the way. The team should check the results of the tasks used for impact toward goal attainment. If movement toward the goal is not being made at the identified check points, the team has the opportunity to adjust the goal, the fidelity of implementation, or identification of a new tasks. It is also important that if progress toward the goal is being made to celebrate those wins along the way. Identifying those points of progress serves to support the need to adjust or acknowledge goal attainment.

If during the “monitor” stage, the team finds that the plan was successful, then the team may determine that the effective practice addressed by the objective is in full implementation. If the “monitor” stage shows that the plan was not or is not being successful, then the team may need to go back through the cycle and examine whether another underlying problem that was not addressed originally needs to be addressed first. Evaluating progress is part of the process, hence lack of monitoring could adversely affect the ongoing cycle of improvement.