Introduction - Home - Hobbs Municipal Schoolshobbsschools.net/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File... ·...
Transcript of Introduction - Home - Hobbs Municipal Schoolshobbsschools.net/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File... ·...
1
New Mexico Public Education Department300 Don Gaspar Ave,
Santa Fe, NM87107
New Mexico Public Education Department300 Don Gaspar Ave,
Santa Fe, NM87501
June
2012
Instruc
tional
New
Mex
ico
Publ
ic E
duca
tion
Depa
rtm
ent
Prepared for the New Mexico Public Education Department (NMPED)
By
New Mexico Public Education Department, Priority Schools Bureau with The Southwest Comprehensive Center, Center on Instruction, and RMC Research Corporation
September 2011
Revised June 2012By
The Southwest Comprehensive Center and The New Mexico Public Education Department, Priority Schools Bureau
Copyright NoticeThis manual is copyright free, so no permission is needed to cite or reproduce it for non-profit purposes. If material from it is included in another non-profit publication, cite as follows:
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.
NotesThis 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.
June
2012
Instruc
tional
Acknowledgements
The editors wish to acknowledge the support and assistance of following individuals who contributed to this New Mexico Instructional Audit Handbook:
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 Katzenmyer-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...................................................................................................................................1
New Mexico A-F School Grading Accountability System Matrix of Requirements for Schools 2012-2013.............................................................................................................5
New Mexico Instructional Audit Process............................................................................7
Pre-Visit: In Advance of the Site Visit.................................................................................8
Day One: First Day of the Site Visit..................................................................................10
Day Two: Second Day of the Site Visit..............................................................................12
Day Three: Third Day of the Site Visit..............................................................................13
Post-Visit: Offsite Report Writing.....................................................................................15
NMPED │ Student Success Division │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit
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. 6-8); and
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 budget reviews;
Data driven decision making;
Resources for best practices and research-based programs; and
Page | 1
NMPED │ Student Success Division │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit
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.1
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;
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;
1 The New Mexico Curriculum Audit is a companion piece. It examines whether a district is able to demonstrate its control of programs, resources, and personnel related to curriculum. Available from the Priority Schools Bureau fall 2013, the Curriculum Audit is to be used in districts with a disproportionate number of low-performing schools.
Page | 2
NMPED │ Student Success Division │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit
9. Implement curriculum and classroom assessments that are aligned with the Common
Core State Standards (CCSS);
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; and
13. Ensure that the school has a culturally respectful environment.2
The process involves a team typically comprised of PED staff, an external consultant, who
serves as the team leader, along with a district representative, conducting a three-day site visit 3
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, and
using data to inform instruction.4
In addition the auditors will review numerous documents and visit a sample of classrooms to
conduct classroom observations.
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 10 days to two weeks.
The principal, with support and input from the district representative and school personnel
will review the findings and determine responses. The Instructional Audit Report provides a 2 New Mexico Public Education Department. (2009). New Mexico CLASS school self-assessment. Santa Fe: Author. The 13 indicators also align with the Seven Turnaround Principles listed in the “New Mexico ESEA Flexibility Request.”3 Number of auditors and length of audit may depend on size of school.4 This is an adaptation of Denton and Vaughn’s three components of quality classroom instruction. See Denton C. A. & Vaughn, S. (2010). Preventing and remediating reading difficulties: Perspectives from research. In T.A. Glover & S. Vaughn (Eds.). The promise of response to intervention: Evaluating current science and practice, (pp. 78-112). New York: Guilform Press. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED509983)
Page | 3
NMPED │ Student Success Division │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit
section to be used as a worksheet by the school in determining how to address report findings.
Once the school has responded to the findings, the report is to be uploaded into the filing
cabinet of the Web EPSS using the document title NMIA Report [name of district/school] 2012-
2013. The school will revise its 2012-2013 Web EPSS to reflect the changes that address the
findings in the report. The Instructional Audit tag will be available to denote which action steps
link to findings. The school will revise its Web EPSS to reflect the findings within 10 days to two
weeks.
Page | 4
NMPED │ Student Success Division │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit
New Mexico A-F School Grading Accountability SystemMatrix of Requirements for Schools 2012-2013
TITLE I SCHOOLS Reward (5%) Strategic (10%) Focus (10%) Priority (5%)
Definition Overall grade of “A” and graduation rate of 85% or higher, or
High progress as demonstrated by a high annual growth in graduation rates, or
High growth for both Q1 and Q3 students (may still demonstrate minimal average status).
School Q1 to state Q3 gap that is among the largest 25% in state and whose overall grade is a “C” or lower.
School is not a Priority school and graduation rate less than 60% regardless of overall grade, or
School Q1 to state Q3 gap among the largest 25% in state and has a Q1 growth grade of D or F.
Tier I SIG schools or, Overall grade of “F” and graduation
rate less than 60%, or Lowest overall grade points
(multiple F’s) not previously identified.
Implications for Title One
Set Aside
Must set aside up to 20% of the district Title I award to implement 4 of the 7 Turnaround Principles
Must set aside up to 20% of the district Title I award to implement 4 of the 7 Turnaround Principles
Requirements Focus on performance of subgroups
Focus on performance of subgroups
Choose 4 of the 7 Turnaround Principles to implement
Focus on performance of subgroups
Required to include 4 of the 7 Turnaround Principles to include:o Strengthening the school’s
instructional program, ando Using data to inform
instruction for continuous improvement
Alignment of tools to proven strategies that are research based
Complete tools listed below (8-31-12)
Instructional Audit (completed by LEA Team)
Focus on performance of subgroups
Required to include all 7 of the Turnaround Principles to implement proven strategies that are research based
Alignment of tools to proven strategies that are research based
Complete tools listed below (8-31-12)
Instructional Audit (completed by NMPED Team)
Web EPSS Requirements
Focus on performance of subgroups
Focus on performance of subgroups
Required to include 4 of the 7 Turnaround Principles to include:o Strengthening the school’s
instructional program, ando Using data to inform
instruction for continuous improvement
Alignment of tools to proven strategies that are research based
Required to include all 7 Turnaround Principles
Alignment of tools to proven strategies that are research based
Page | 5
NMPED │ Student Success Division │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit
Tools Literacy Reflective Summary Math Reflective Summary School and Systems Reflective
Summary
Literacy Reflective Summary Math Reflective Summary School and Systems Reflective
Summary
New Mexico A-F School Grading Accountability SystemMatrix of Requirements for Schools 2012-2013
A Grade B Grade C Grade D Grade F Grade
Definition Overall grade of A and not a Reward or Strategic School.
Overall grade of B and not a Reward or Strategic School.
Overall grade of C and not a Strategic, Focus or Priority School.
Overall grade of D and not a Strategic, Focus or Priority School.
Overall grade of F and not a Strategic, Focus or Priority School.
Requirements
Focus on performance of subgroups Required to include 4 of the 7 Turnaround
Principles to include:o Strengthening the school’s instructional
program, ando Using data to inform instruction for
continuous improvement Alignment of tools to proven strategies that
are research based Complete tools listed below (8-31-12) Instructional Audit (completed by LEA Team) School Budgets reviewed in spring 2013
Focus on performance of subgroups Required to include all 7 of the Turnaround
Principles to implement proven strategies that are research based
Alignment of tools to proven strategies that are research based
Complete tools listed below (8-31-12) Instructional Audit (completed by NMPED
Team) School Budgets reviewed in spring 2013
Web EPSS Requirement
s
Focus on performance of subgroups
Focus on performance of subgroups
Focus on performance of subgroups
Focus on performance of subgroups Required to include 4 of 7 Turnaround
Principles (see under requirements)
Focus on performance of subgroups Required to include all 7 Turnaround
Principles
Tools Literacy Reflective Summary Math Reflective Summary School and Systems Reflective Summary
Literacy Reflective Summary Math Reflective Summary School and Systems Reflective Summary
7 TURNAROUND PRINCIPLES7 Turnaround
Principles1. Providing Strong Leadership by: (1) reviewing the performance of the current principal; (2) either replacing the principal if such a change is necessary to ensure strong
and effective leadership; or demonstrating to the SEA that the current principal has a track record in improving achievement and had the ability to lead the turnaround effort; and (3) providing the principal with operational flexibility in the areas of scheduling, staff, curriculum, and budget.
2. Ensuring that teachers are effective and able to improve instruction by: (1) reviewing the quality of all staff and retaining only those who are determined to be effective and have the ability to be successful in the turnaround effort; (2) preventing ineffective teachers from transferring to these schools; and (3) providing job-embedded, ongoing professional development informed by the teacher evaluation and support systems and tied to teacher and student needs.
3. Redesigning the school day, week or year to include additional time for student learning and teacher collaboration.4. Strengthening the school’s instructional program based on student needs and ensuring that the instructional program is research-based, rigorous, and aligned with
Page | 6
NMPED │ Student Success Division │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit
State academic content standards.5. Using data to inform instruction for continuous improvement, by providing time for collaboration on the use of data.6. Establishing a school environment that improves school safety and discipline and addressing other non-academic factors that impact student achievement, such as
students’ social, emotional, and health needs.7. Providing ongoing mechanisms for family and community engagement.
Page | 7
NMPED │ Student Success Division │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit
New Mexico Instructional Audit Process
In New Mexico, the audit process involves a three-day site visit5 to the Priority, Focus, D,
and F schools. The PED will be sending teams to audit the Priority and F Schools during the fall
of 2012. Districts are responsible for auditing the remaining D and Focus schools during this
same time frame.
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 observations 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
observations 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 competency in the area of instructional practice. Competency is
determined through a process that compares documentation collected by the leadership with
observations made by the auditors. The entire process, including preparation, document 5 Number of auditors and length of audit may depend on size of school.
Page | 8
NMPED │ Student Success Division │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit
review, site visitation and observations, 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
appendices and described below. A sample agenda (see Appendix A) is provided 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 three-person auditing team will consist of an external consultant, approved, and
trained by the Public Education Department (PED), a PED staff member, and a representative
from the district whose school is being audited. The consultant will serve as team leader. The
district representative will serve as a member of the audit team and may conduct classroom
observations, 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 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
Page | 9
NMPED │ Student Success Division │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit
link: http://www.ped.state.nm.us/AssessmentAccountability/AcademicGrowth/NMSBA.html.
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 observations. 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 such as a room to work in and access to
electrical outlets. 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 Appendices 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.
Day One: First Day of the Site Visit
Page | 10
NMPED │ Student Success Division │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit
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 observations 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).6 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.
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
6 If one of the auditors is free, he or she may take notes while the team leader interviews the principal and school leadership team.
Page | 11
NMPED │ Student Success Division │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit
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
allow comparison between the responses of the principal. Responses should be recorded on
the sheet found in Appendices 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.
Group Interview with Parents: This is a group interview with parents that is designed to last
approximately 30 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.
Page | 12
NMPED │ Student Success Division │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit
Teachers are not to be mentioned by name, nor should an attempt be made to describe a
situation that would identify an individual. A one-page guide for conducting a group interview
may be found in Appendix W.
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 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
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 address two of the three of the audit criteria; there
are no questions on ensuring that teachers provide effective instruction. Appendix W contains a
one-page guide for conducting a group interview. 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.
Day Two: Second Day of the Site Visit
Morning and Afternoon
Conduct Classroom Observations: Classroom observations provide formative assessment
data that answers the question, “How are we doing?” in regards to the implementation of
quality teaching and learning. The Classroom Observation 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.
Page | 13
NMPED │ Student Success Division │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit
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 observations 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.
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
observation 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, observations should become a finding in the Instructional
Audit Report.
Page | 14
NMPED │ Student Success Division │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit
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 visit7 (approximately 45 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 10 days to two
weeks as will the superintendent. School and district officials will also have 10 days to two
weeks to respond to the 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:
[School name] Instructional Audit Report 2012-13] and revisions are made to the School’s Web
EPSS using the “Instructional Audit” tag to identify the changes 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.
Post-Visit: Offsite Report Writing7 The superintendent should also be invited to attend.
Page | 15
NMPED │ Student Success Division │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit
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; and
A section for the school response to each 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 problems relating to instruction and the
management of instruction.
The team leader will formulate a report with findings. The report format will focus on
aspects of instruction that the school does well, another third on priorities that need immediate
attention, and the final third on findings that can be addressed but not with urgency. Evidence
will 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 this review and
approval, the team leader sends the report along with a cover email, (see Appendix Y), to the
School Principal with a copy to the Superintendent, and PSB staff member who was a part of
your team, ensure to add a delivery and read receipt. This is to be done within 10 days to two
weeks of completing the site visit in the district.
Page | 16
NMPED │ Student Success Division │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit
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. At the end of a months’ time the Team Leader shall shred all documents.
Upon receiving the report, the district and the school have 10 days to two weeks for review
and respond to the findings. For each finding the school needs to provide a response. The
expectation is that the school addresses all findings, utilizing the cells provided in the report
template and incorporates the revisions into its 2012-2013 Web EPSS.
The completed report is then uploaded into the filing cabinet of the school Web EPSS,
and the School Principal will notify the Priority Schools Bureau at the following email address:
Page | 17
NMPED │ Student Success Division │ Priority Schools Bureau │ Instructional Audit
Page | 18