Report of the External Review Team for Decatur … Novembe… · External Review Team for Decatur County School System ... Effective Learning Environments Observation Tool (eleot™)

Report of theExternal Review Team

forDecatur County School System

P.O. Box 369Decaturville

TN 38329US

Mr. Branson Townsend

Date: November 2, 2014 - November 5, 2014

Document Generated On March 28, 2015

Copyright (c) 2015 by Advance Education, Inc. AdvancED™ grants to the Institution, which is the subject of the External Review Team Report, and its

designees and stakeholders a non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free license and release to reproduce, reprint, and distribute this report in

accordance with and as protected by the Copyright Laws of the United States of America and all foreign countries. All other rights not expressly

conveyed are reserved by AdvancED™.


AdvancED Decatur County School System

© 2015 Advance Education, Inc. All rights reserved unless otherwise granted by written agreement. Page 2

Table of Contents Introduction 4

Results 9

Teaching and Learning Impact 9

Standard 3 - Teaching and Assessing for Learning 10

Standard 5 - Using Results for Continuous Improvement 11

Student Performance Diagnostic 11

Effective Learning Environments Observation Tool (eleot™) 13

eleot™ Data Summary 15

Findings 18

Leadership Capacity 23

Standard 1 - Purpose and Direction 24

Standard 2 - Governance and Leadership 24

Stakeholder Feedback Diagnostic 25

Findings 25

Resource Utilization 28

Standard 4 - Resources and Support Systems 28

Findings 29

Conclusion 32

Accreditation Recommendation 35

Addenda 36

Individual Institution Results (Self-reported) 36

Team Roster 37

Next Steps 39

About AdvancED 40

References 41






IntroductionThe External Review is an integral component of AdvancED Performance Accreditation and provides the

institution with a comprehensive evaluation guided by the results of diagnostic instruments, in-depth review of

data and documentation, and the professional judgment of a team of qualified and highly trained evaluators. A

series of diagnostic instruments examines the impact of teaching and learning on student performance, the

capacity of leadership to effect continuous improvement, and the degree to which the institution optimizes its

use of available resources to facilitate and support student success. The results of this evaluation are

represented in the Index of Education Quality (IEQ™) and through critical observations, namely, Powerful

Practices, Opportunities for Improvement, and Improvement Priorities.

Accreditation is a voluntary method of quality assurance developed more than 100 years ago by American

universities and secondary schools and designed primarily to distinguish schools adhering to a set of

educational standards. Today the accreditation process is used at all levels of education and is recognized for

its ability to effectively drive student performance and continuous improvement in education.

Institutions seeking to gain or retain accreditation must meet AdvancED Standards specific to their institution

type, demonstrate acceptable levels of student performance and the continuous improvement of student

performance, and provide evidence of stakeholder engagement and satisfaction. The power of AdvancED

Performance Accreditation lies in the connections and linkages between and among the conditions, processes,

and practices within a system that impact student performance and organizational effectiveness.

Standards help to delineate what matters. They provide a common language through which an education

community can engage in conversations about educational improvement, system effectiveness, and

achievement. They serve as a foundation for planning and implementing improvement strategies and activities

and for measuring success. AdvancED Standards were developed by a committee comprised of talented

educators and leaders from the fields of practice, research, and policy who applied professional wisdom, deep

knowledge of effective practice, and the best available research to craft a set of robust standards that define

institutional quality and guide continuous improvement. Prior to implementation, an internationally recognized

panel of experts in testing and measurement, teacher quality, and education research reviewed the standards

and provided feedback, guidance and endorsement.

The AdvancED External Review Team uses AdvancED Standards, associated indicators and criteria related to

student performance and stakeholder engagement to guide its evaluation. The Team examines adherence to

standards as well as how the institution functions as a whole and embodies the practices and characteristics

expected of an accredited institution. The Standards, indicators and related criteria are evaluated using

indicator-specific performance levels. The Team rates each indicator and criterion on a scale of 1 to 4. The

final scores assigned to the indicators and criteria represent the average of the External Review Team

members' individual ratings.

The External Review is the hallmark of AdvancED Performance Accreditation. It energizes and equips the

institution's leadership and stakeholders to achieve higher levels of performance and address those areas that








-

-

-

-

may be hindering efforts to reach desired performance levels. External Review is a rigorous process that

includes the in-depth examination of evidence and relevant data, interviews with all stakeholder groups, and

extensive observations of learning, instruction, and operations.

Use of Diagnostic ToolsA key to examining the institution is the design and use of diagnostic tools that reveal the effectiveness with

which an institution creates conditions and implements processes and practices that impact student

performance and success. In preparation for the External Review the institution conducted a Self Assessment

that applied the standards and criteria for accreditation. The institution provided evidence to support its

conclusions vis a vis organizational effectiveness in ensuring acceptable and improving levels of student

performance.

an indicator-based tool that connects the specific elements of the criteria to evidence gathered by the

team;

a student performance analytic that examines the quality of assessment instruments used by the

institution, the integrity of the administration of the assessment to students, the quality of the learning

results including the impact of instruction on student learning at all levels of performance, and the

equity of learning that examines the results of student learning across all demographics;

a stakeholder engagement instrument that examines the fidelity of administration and results of

perception surveys seeking the perspective of students, parents, and teachers;

a state-of-the-art, learner-centric observation instrument, the Effective Learning Environments

Observation Tool (eleot™) that quantifies students' engagement, attitudes and dispositions organized

in 7 environments: Equitable Learning, High Expectations, Supportive Learning, Active Learning,

Progress Monitoring and Feedback, Well-Managed Learning, and Digital Learning. All evaluators

must be trained, reach acceptable levels of inter-rater reliability, and certified to use this research-

based and validated instrument.

The External Review Team's findings and critical observations are shared in this report through the IEQ™

results as well as through the identification of Powerful Practices, Opportunities for Improvement, and

Improvement Priorities.

Index of Education QualityIn the past, accreditation reviews resulted in an accreditation recommendation on status. Labels such as

advised, warned, probation, or all clear were used to describe the status of a school relative to the AdvancED

Standards and other evaluative criteria. Beginning in the 2013-14 school year, AdvancED introduced a new

framework to describe the results of an accreditation review. Consistent with the modern focus of accreditation

on continuous improvement with an emphasis on student success, AdvancED introduced an innovative and

state-of-the-art framework for diagnosing and revealing institutional performance called the Index of Education

Quality (IEQ™). The IEQ™ comprises three domains of performance: 1) the impact of teaching and learning

on student performance; 2) the capacity of leadership to guide the institution toward the achievement of its








vision and strategic priorities; and 3) use of resources to support and optimize learning. Therefore, your

institution will no longer receive an accreditation status. Instead, your institution will be accredited with an

IEQ™ score. In the case where an institution is failing to meet established criteria, the accreditation will be

under review thereby requiring frequent monitoring and demonstrated improvement.

The three domains of performance are derived from the AdvancED Standards and associated indicators, the

analysis of student performance, and the engagement and feedback of stakeholders. Within each domain

institutions can connect to the individual performance levels that are applied in support of the AdvancED

Standards and evaluative criteria. Within the performance levels are detailed descriptors that serve as a

valuable source of guidance for continuous improvement. Upon review of the findings in this report and

building on their Powerful Practices, institutional leaders should work with their staff to review and understand

the evidence and rationale for each Opportunity for Improvement and Improvement Priority as well as the

corresponding pathway to improvement described in the performance levels of the selected indicator(s).

The IEQ™ provides a new framework that recognizes and supports the journey of continuous improvement. An

institution's IEQ™ is the starting point for continuous improvement. Subsequent actions for improvement and

evidence that these have had a positive impact will raise the institution's IEQ™ score.

Benchmark DataThroughout this report, AdvancED provides benchmark data for each indicator and for each component of the

evaluative criteria. These benchmark data represent the overall averages across the entire AdvancED Network

for your institution type. Thus, the AdvancED Network average provides an extraordinary opportunity for

institutions to understand their context on a global scale rather than simply compared to a state, region, or

country.

It is important to understand that the AdvancED Network averages are provided primarily to serve as a tool for

continuous improvement and not as a measure of quality in and of itself. Benchmark data, when wisely

employed, have a unique capacity to help institutions identify and leverage their strengths and areas of

improvement to significantly impact student learning.

Powerful PracticesA key to continuous improvement is the institution's ability to learn from and build upon its most effective and

impactful practices. Such practices serve as critical leverage points necessary to guide, support and ensure

continuous improvement. A hallmark of the accreditation process is its commitment to identifying with

evidence, the conditions, processes and practices that are having the most significant impact on student

performance and institutional effectiveness. Throughout this report, the External Review Team has captured

and defined Powerful Practices. These noteworthy practices are essential to the institution's effort to continue

its journey of improvement.








Opportunities for ImprovementEvery institution can and must improve no matter what levels of performance it has achieved in its past. During

the process of the review, the External Review Team identified areas of improvement where the institution is

meeting the expectations for accreditation but in the professional judgment of the Team these are

Opportunities for Improvement that should be considered by the institution. Using the criteria described in the

corresponding rubric(s) to the Opportunity for Improvement, the institution can identify what elements of

practice must be addressed to guide the improvement.

Improvement PrioritiesThe expectations for accreditation are clearly defined in a series of the rubric-based AdvancED Standards,

indicators and evaluative criteria focused on the impact of teaching and learning on student performance, the

capacity of the institution to be guided by effective leadership, and the allocation and use of resources to

support student learning. As such, the External Review Team reviewed, analyzed and deliberated over

significant bodies of evidence provided by the institution and gathered by the Team during the process. In the

professional judgment of the Team as well as the results of the diagnostic process, the Team defined, with

rationale, Improvement Priorities. The priorities must be addressed in a timely manner by the institution to

retain and improve their accreditation performance as represented by the IEQ™. Improvement Priorities serve

as the basis for the follow-up and monitoring process that will begin upon conclusion of the External Review.

The institution must complete and submit an Accreditation Progress Report within two years of the External

Review. The report must include actions taken by the institution to address the Improvement Priorities along

with the corresponding evidence and results. The IEQ™ will be recalculated by AdvancED upon review of the

evidence and results associated with the Improvement Priorities.

The ReviewThe Decatur County Schools External Review Team visit was held November 2-5, 2014. The five member

team was onsite at the Decatur County Schools district office in downtown Decaturville to serve for this system

review. The preliminary process began early in the fall with communications between the Lead Evaluator and

the Director of Schools at that time. The initial discussions included the system accreditation contact and

focused on the status of the system in their continuous improvement efforts, as well as the current AdvancEd

system accreditation expectations. The required reports were discussed, including the stakeholder feedback

surveys and student performance data. The district had gone through a Readiness Review in 2013 to review

standards for the system and was working to move forward on documentation and logistics for the external

review. Ongoing communications were held with the system contact. The Director of Schools retired

approximately two weeks prior to the visit and an interim Director was appointed. The district was committed to

moving forward with the visit.

During this time the External Review Team members and Lead Evaluator had multiple contacts. The team

reviewed initial system and school level reports and websites prior to arrival onsite. The members were

engaged in review, study, and analysis of these reports prior to arrival. Additional evidence was provided by

the system upon request. As part of the system review process, the team visited all four school sites,








observing classrooms and engaging with staff and students. The team was able to conduct a thorough review

through the analysis of documentation, conducting staff and stakeholder interviews, and completing classroom

observations.

On behalf of the entire Decatur County Schools External Review Team, the review team would like to thank the

school system, schools, and community for their generosity and hospitality during the system accreditation

external review visit. The system has experienced a tremendous transition, as the Director of Schools has

retired and the interim Director has only been on site for a few weeks. The system has embraced the

AdvancEd process of continuous improvement as evidenced by their response to the readiness visit in 2013,

the internal review of the system and schools, and the initial effort for stakeholder feedback through the

ASSIST surveys. The system did a tremendous job arranging for stakeholders to meet and talk with the team.

With 127 different stakeholders engaged in the interviews and school visit conversations, the team was able to

gain a wealth of information. The team was very appreciative of the time and sincere participation of all in the

process.

Stakeholders were interviewed by members of the External Review Team to gain their perspectives on topics

relevant to the institution's effectiveness and student performance. The feedback gained through the

stakeholder interviews was considered with other evidences and data to support the findings of the External

Review. The following chart depicts the numbers of persons interviewed representative of various stakeholder

groups.

Stakeholder Interviewed Number

Superintendents 1

Board Members 6

Administrators 23

Instructional Staff 23

Support Staff 9

Students 39

Parents/Community/Business Leaders 26

Total 127








ResultsTeaching and Learning ImpactThe impact of teaching and learning on student achievement is the primary expectation of every institution.

The relationship between teacher and learner must be productive and effective for student success. The

impact of teaching and learning includes an analysis of student performance results, instructional quality,

learner and family engagement, support services for student learning, curriculum quality and efficacy, and

college and career readiness data. These are all key indicators of an institution's impact on teaching and

learning.

A high-quality and effective educational system has services, practices, and curriculum that ensure teacher

effectiveness. Research has shown that an effective teacher is a key factor for learners to achieve their highest

potential and be prepared for a successful future. The positive influence an effective educator has on learning

is a combination of "student motivation, parental involvement" and the "quality of leadership" (Ding & Sherman,

2006). Research also suggests that quality educators must have a variety of quantifiable and intangible

characteristics that include strong communication skills, knowledge of content, and knowledge of how to teach

the content. The institution's curriculum and instructional program should develop learners' skills that lead them

to think about the world in complex ways (Conley, 2007) and prepare them to have knowledge that extends

beyond the academic areas. In order to achieve these goals, teachers must have pedagogical skills as well as

content knowledge (Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voxx, T., Jordan, A., Klusmann, U.,

Krauss, S., Nuebrand, M., & Tsai, Y., 2010). The acquisition and refinement of teachers' pedagogical skills

occur most effectively through collaboration and professional development. These are a "necessary approach

to improving teacher quality" (Colbert, J., Brown, R., Choi, S., & Thomas, S., 2008). According to Marks, Louis,

and Printy (2002), staff members who engage in "active organizational learning also have higher achieving

students in contrast to those that do not." Likewise, a study conducted by Horng, Klasik, and Loeb (2010),

concluded that leadership in effective institutions "supports teachers by creating collaborative work

environments." Institutional leaders have a responsibility to provide experiences, resources, and time for

educators to engage in meaningful professional learning that promotes student learning and educator quality.

AdvancED has found that a successful institution implements a curriculum based on clear and measurable

expectations for student learning. The curriculum provides opportunities for all students to acquire requisite

knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Teachers use proven instructional practices that actively engage students in

the learning process. Teachers provide opportunities for students to apply their knowledge and skills to real

world situations. Teachers give students feedback to improve their performance.

Institutions with strong improvement processes move beyond anxiety about the current reality and focus on

priorities and initiatives for the future. Using results, i.e., data and other information, to guide continuous

improvement is key to an institution's success. A study conducted by Datnow, Park, and Wohlstetter (2007)

from the Center on Educational Governance at the University of Southern California indicated that data can

shed light on existing areas of strength and weakness and also guide improvement strategies in a systematic

and strategic manner (Dembosky, J., Pane, J., Barney, H., & Christina, R., 2005). The study also identified six










key strategies that performance-driven systems use: (1) building a foundation for data-driven decision making,

(2) establishing a culture of data use and continuous improvement, (3) investing in an information management

system, (4) selecting the right data, (5) building institutional capacity for data-driven decision making, and (6)

analyzing and acting on data to improve performance. Other research studies, though largely without

comparison groups, suggested that data-driven decision-making has the potential to increase student

performance (Alwin, 2002; Doyle, 2003; Lafee, 2002; McIntire, 2002).

Through ongoing evaluation of educational institutions, AdvancED has found that a successful institution uses

a comprehensive assessment system based on clearly defined performance measures. The system is used to

assess student performance on expectations for student learning, evaluate the effectiveness of curriculum and

instruction, and determine strategies to improve student performance. The institution implements a

collaborative and ongoing process for improvement that aligns the functions of the school with the expectations

for student learning. Improvement efforts are sustained, and the institution demonstrates progress in improving

student performance and institution effectiveness.

Standard 3 - Teaching and Assessing for LearningThe system's curriculum, instructional design, and assessment practices guide and ensure teacher

effectiveness and student learning across all grades and courses.

Indicator Description Review TeamScore

AdvancEDNetworkAverage

3.1 The system's curriculum provides equitable and challenginglearning experiences that ensure all students have sufficientopportunities to develop learning, thinking, and life skills thatlead to success at the next level.

2.00 2.69

3.2 Curriculum, instruction, and assessment throughout the systemare monitored and adjusted systematically in response to datafrom multiple assessments of student learning and anexamination of professional practice.

2.00 2.55

3.3 Teachers throughout the district engage students in theirlearning through instructional strategies that ensureachievement of learning expectations.

2.20 2.54

3.4 System and school leaders monitor and support theimprovement of instructional practices of teachers to ensurestudent success.

2.20 2.70

3.5 The system operates as a collaborative learning organizationthrough structures that support improved instruction and studentlearning at all levels.

1.80 2.57

3.6 Teachers implement the system's instructional process insupport of student learning.

2.80 2.48

3.7 Mentoring, coaching, and induction programs supportinstructional improvement consistent with the system's valuesand beliefs about teaching and learning.

2.40 2.67










Standard 5 - Using Results for Continuous ImprovementThe system implements a comprehensive assessment system that generates a range of data about student

learning and system effectiveness and uses the results to guide continuous improvement.

Student Performance DiagnosticThe quality of assessments used to measure student learning, assurance that assessments are administered

with procedural fidelity and appropriate accommodations, assessment results that reflect the quality of



3.8 The system and all of its schools engage families in meaningfulways in their children's education and keep them informed oftheir children's learning progress.

2.20 2.97

3.9 The system designs and evaluates structures in all schoolswhereby each student is well known by at least one adultadvocate in the student's school who supports that student'seducational experience.

2.40 2.46

3.10 Grading and reporting are based on clearly defined criteria thatrepresent the attainment of content knowledge and skills andare consistent across grade levels and courses.

2.60 2.57

3.11 All staff members participate in a continuous program ofprofessional learning.

1.80 2.60

3.12 The system and its schools provide and coordinate learningsupport services to meet the unique learning needs of students.

3.00 2.63



5.1 The system establishes and maintains a clearly defined andcomprehensive student assessment system.

2.00 2.67

5.2 Professional and support staff continuously collect, analyze andapply learning from a range of data sources, includingcomparison and trend data about student learning, instruction,program evaluation, and organizational conditions that supportlearning.

1.00 2.48

5.3 Throughout the system professional and support staff aretrained in the interpretation and use of data.

1.80 2.14

5.4 The school system engages in a continuous process todetermine verifiable improvement in student learning, includingreadiness for and success at the next level.

2.00 2.45

5.5 System and school leaders monitor and communicatecomprehensive information about student learning, schoolperformance, and the achievement of system and schoolimprovement goals to stakeholders.

1.00 2.85










learning, and closing gaps in achievement among subpopulations of students are all important indicators for

evaluating overall student performance.

Evaluative Criteria Review TeamScore

AdvancED NetworkAverage

Assessment Quality 4.00 3.32

Test Administration 4.00 3.62

Equity of Learning 1.00 2.52

Quality of Learning 3.00 3.06










Effective Learning Environments Observation Tool (eleot™)Every learner should have access to an effective learning environment in which she/he has multiple

opportunities to be successful. The Effective Learning Environments Observation Tool (eleot™) measures the

extent to which learners are in an environment that is equitable, supportive, and well-managed. An

environment where high expectations are the norm and active learning takes place. It measures whether

learners' progress is monitored and feedback is provided and the extent to which technology is leveraged for

learning.

Observations of classrooms or other learning venues are conducted for a minimum of 20 minutes per

observation. Every member of the External Review Team is required to be trained and pass a certification

exam that establishes inter-rater reliability. Team members conduct multiple observations during the review

process and provide ratings on 30 items based on a four-point scale (4=very evident; 3=evident; 2=somewhat

evident; and 1=not observed). The following provides the aggregate average score across multiple

observations for each of the seven learning environments included in eleot™ as well as benchmark results

across the AdvancED Network.

Four of the five review team members completed 44 observations using the eleot observation tool in two

elementary schools, one middle school and one high school. Students were generally provided with

challenging expectations as revealed in the eleot Supportive Environment and Well-Managed Learning

Environment both with a rating of 3.02. Students were observed interacting with each other and the teachers

in a most respectful manner. The Digital Learning Environment was rated at a level of 1.43. Students were

eleot™ Results

Review Network

A. E

quita

ble

Lear

ning

B. H

igh

Expe

ctat

ions

C. S

uppo

rtive

Lea

rnin

g

D. A

ctiv

e Le

arni

ng

E. P

rogr

ess

Mon

itorin

g an

d

Feed

back

F. W

ell-M

anag

ed L

earn

ing

G. D

igita

l Lea

rnin

g

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

Per

form

ance

Lev

els

2.512.68 2.73 2.81

3.02 3.052.84 2.95 2.91 2.76

3.02 3.11

1.43

1.88










actively engaged in the learning activities with the teachers using various technology tools, but they were not

observed using digital technology themselves. The environmental overall ratings were within the averages of

the AdvancED network averages.

Students were observed in whole group instruction during many observations. They were engaged through the

use of teacher directed questioning. In classrooms where students were engaged in small groups,

collaboration was at a high level. Students had access to classroom discussion, activities, resources,

technology and support but had few opportunities to learn of their own and others backgrounds, differences

and cultures. The team noted that the eleot Supportive Learning Environment does align closely with Standard

3, Indicator 3.12. The school system does provide services to meet the education and personal/social needs

of its students at a high level. This promotes an environment in which students are made to feel confident and

valued.

In most classrooms, students knew learning expectations and worked to meet the expectations. They

demonstrated positive behaviors, especially in terms of showing respect for the teachers and each other.

During instruction there was positive interaction as teachers often asked and students responded to questions

requiring higher level thinking skills. Students were provided an environment that is safe, supportive, and

promotes learning.










eleot™ Data Summary

A. Equitable Learning %

Item Average Description

Ver

yE

vid

ent

Evi

den

t

So

mew

hat

Evi

den

t

No

tO

bse

rved

1. 2.14 Has differentiated learning opportunitiesand activities that meet her/his needs

20.45% 20.45% 11.36% 47.73%

2. 3.18 Has equal access to classroomdiscussions, activities, resources,technology, and support

31.82% 56.82% 9.09% 2.27%

3. 3.18 Knows that rules and consequences arefair, clear, and consistently applied

29.55% 61.36% 6.82% 2.27%

4. 1.55 Has ongoing opportunities to learnabout their own and other'sbackgrounds/cultures/differences

9.09% 4.55% 18.18% 68.18%

Overall rating on a 4 point scale: 2.51

B. High Expectations %


Ver

yE

vid

ent

Evi

den

t

So

mew

hat

Evi

den

t

No

tO

bse

rved

1. 3.07 Knows and strives to meet the highexpectations established by the teacher

29.55% 50.00% 18.18% 2.27%

2. 3.05 Is tasked with activities and learning thatare challenging but attainable

27.27% 50.00% 22.73% 0.00%

3. 2.07 Is provided exemplars of high qualitywork

9.09% 27.27% 25.00% 38.64%

4. 2.82 Is engaged in rigorous coursework,discussions, and/or tasks

18.18% 50.00% 27.27% 4.55%

5. 2.66 Is asked and responds to questions thatrequire higher order thinking (e.g.,applying, evaluating, synthesizing)

20.45% 38.64% 27.27% 13.64%











C. Supportive Learning %


Ver

yE

vid

ent

Evi

den

t

So

mew

hat

Evi

den

t

No

tO

bse

rved

1. 3.18 Demonstrates or expresses thatlearning experiences are positive

25.00% 68.18% 6.82% 0.00%

2. 3.23 Demonstrates positive attitude about theclassroom and learning

31.82% 61.36% 4.55% 2.27%

3. 3.18 Takes risks in learning (without fear ofnegative feedback)

34.09% 50.00% 15.91% 0.00%

4. 3.30 Is provided support and assistance tounderstand content and accomplishtasks

36.36% 56.82% 6.82% 0.00%

5. 2.23 Is provided additional/alternativeinstruction and feedback at theappropriate level of challenge for her/hisneeds

13.64% 22.73% 36.36% 27.27%


D. Active Learning %


Ver

yE

vid

ent

Evi

den

t

So

mew

hat

Evi

den

t

No

tO

bse

rved

1. 2.93 Has several opportunities to engage indiscussions with teacher and otherstudents

36.36% 29.55% 25.00% 9.09%

2. 2.48 Makes connections from content to real-life experiences

20.45% 34.09% 18.18% 27.27%

3. 3.11 Is actively engaged in the learningactivities

34.09% 45.45% 18.18% 2.27%











E. Progress Monitoring and Feedback %


Ver

yE

vid

ent

Evi

den

t

So

mew

hat

Evi

den

t

No

tO

bse

rved

1. 2.98 Is asked and/or quizzed about individualprogress/learning

29.55% 50.00% 9.09% 11.36%

2. 3.14 Responds to teacher feedback toimprove understanding

29.55% 54.55% 15.91% 0.00%

3. 3.09 Demonstrates or verbalizesunderstanding of the lesson/content

25.00% 61.36% 11.36% 2.27%

4. 2.45 Understands how her/his work isassessed

11.36% 43.18% 25.00% 20.45%

5. 2.89 Has opportunities to revise/improvework based on feedback

29.55% 45.45% 9.09% 15.91%


F. Well-Managed Learning %

Item Average DescriptionV

ery

Evi

den

t

Evi

den

t

So

mew

hat

Evi

den

t

No

tO

bse

rved

1. 3.48 Speaks and interacts respectfully withteacher(s) and peers

50.00% 47.73% 2.27% 0.00%

2. 3.34 Follows classroom rules and works wellwith others

40.91% 52.27% 6.82% 0.00%

3. 2.91 Transitions smoothly and efficiently toactivities

27.27% 52.27% 4.55% 15.91%

4. 2.05 Collaborates with other students duringstudent-centered activities

13.64% 22.73% 18.18% 45.45%

5. 3.32 Knows classroom routines, behavioralexpectations and consequences

43.18% 47.73% 6.82% 2.27%











FindingsImprovement PriorityDevelop and implement a comprehensive professional learning plan focused on the needs of professional and

support staff in order to address the student learning targets and goals of the system.

(Indicators 3.11, 5.3)

Evidence and Rationale

There was evidence throughout the system documentation and school interviews that there is not a

comprehensive professional learning plan aligned to the needs of students or the needs of the professional

staff. The schools' self assessment summaries identified professional learning as an area of need across the

system. Current offerings are focused on specific state and locally mandated initiatives. During stakeholder

interviews, teachers and principals voiced a need for professional learning opportunities that are aligned with

specific student learning needs, including the use of formative and summative data for instructional

adjustments. The importance of professional learning as part of the continuous improvement process also

supports the need for a comprehensive approach to professional learning that is ongoing and part of the

collaborative work across the system.

Improvement PriorityEstablish and implement systematic processes to communicate with various stakeholders across the system.

(Indicators 1.2, 2.5, 3.8)


In the artifacts reviewed and through interviews with internal and external stakeholders, there was little

evidence that communication connected stakeholders in a meaningful way. Additionally, the interviews and

G. Digital Learning %


Ver

yE

vid

ent

Evi

den

t

So

mew

hat

Evi

den

t

No

tO

bse

rved

1. 1.70 Uses digital tools/technology to gather,evaluate, and/or use information forlearning

4.55% 25.00% 6.82% 63.64%

2. 1.48 Uses digital tools/technology to conductresearch, solve problems, and/or createoriginal works for learning

4.55% 15.91% 2.27% 77.27%

3. 1.11 Uses digital tools/technology tocommunicate and work collaborativelyfor learning

2.27% 2.27% 0.00% 95.45%











stakeholder survey results indicated a need for the system to engage all stakeholders through a systematic

process for communication. Fewer than 20% of parents across the system responded to the stakeholder

feedback diagnostic survey.

Improvement PriorityFormulate a structure for collection, analysis, sharing and use of student academic and non-academic data

that supports the system purpose.



Based on observations throughout the schools, as well as system documentation, there is evidence of some

level of data collection and use. This is not systemic in nature and therefore limits the intentional use of data

for instructional decision making. In order to address the subgroup performance and achievement gaps, there

is a need for a comprehensive collection, analysis, sharing and utilization of formative and summative data,

especially as it impacts student achievement.

Improvement PriorityImplement a strategic planning process which engages all stakeholders in the regular review, monitoring and

revision of the system’s purpose, continuous improvement efforts and achievement goals.

(Indicators 1.4, 2.5, 5.5)


The review of documentation and stakeholder interview information revealed a lack of cohesiveness in the

continuous improvement planning process. Additionally, there was little to no evidence that stakeholders

(teachers, parents, community members) had any input into the review and development of the continuous

improvement efforts. The absence of a data profile indicates a lack of evidence for data driven decision

making for continuous improvement.

It will be important for the system and school leaders to develop, monitor and communicate comprehensive

information about student learning, school performance and the achievement of goals with stakeholders.

Leadership should implement a continuous improvement process that provides clear direction for improving the

conditions that support student learning. When stakeholder groups work in a collaborative manner, programs

and resources can be better directed to the needs of the entire system.

Opportunity for ImprovementEstablish and formalize routine norms and processes for collaborative student-centered interaction among staff

across the system to support learning for all students.

(Indicators 3.5)


There was evidence in the high school report that some staff were engaged in conversations regarding student










needs, I.e. professional learning communities, across grade levels and content areas. There was little evidence

across the system that this type interaction was in place in terms of using the results of individual student

achievement data, the examination of student work, and/or modifications to instruction. The focus of the

current structure identified by the external review team was more one of sharing ideas, such as strategies for

writing across the curriculum.

It is important for the district to continue to build on a collaborative process focused on student achievement.

By establishing routine norms and processes and building on cross curricular, interdisciplinary instruction; the

subgroup achievement gaps may be addressed. Staff members can implement a formal process that

promotes productive discussion about student learning and the conditions that support learning. By doing so

the schools can enhance collaboration and improve efforts in modifying instructional practice, as well.

Opportunity for ImprovementExamine and modify the process and documentation used for reporting student progress (i.e., formative

assessments, standards based report cards).

(Indicators 3.10)


Parents and community leaders interviewed reported that the language and grading system used in the

standards based report card was confusing and used educator language unfamiliar to parents. Additionally,

district staff reported that there were written procedures regarding the implementation of the standards based

report card provided to teachers and principals; however, the school staff was not involved in the development

of any of these. As a result, the district staff also reported that they have received concerns regarding how to

score and use the standards based report card from schools. Many staff noted that they believe the standards

based report card has value as a tool, but the implementation has been stressful. The current documents

require multiple reporting sheets per student each six weeks and the process for demonstrating mastery has

become cumbersome.

Evaluating and modifying processes based on feedback from stakeholders could enhance the effectiveness of

the standards based report cards and ensure their institutionalization. It is important to evaluate and modify

early in the beginning stages of the process and limit the number of unintended consequences. There are

many examples of standards based report cards that have been implemented in public school systems that

could be examined. Ensuring that teachers are clear on what the reports are designed to share and that

parents can understand what the reports mean provides better communication and stakeholder engagement

across the system.

Opportunity for ImprovementProvide necessary staffing, support and resources in conjunction with the Response to Intervention initiative to

ensure program effectiveness and alignment with district initiatives and the mission of the system.












Students at the elementary level have been provided a diagnostic screening to determine their individual level

of tiered intervention as required by the Response to Intervention program. Skills instruction is to be provided

based on student need. Students are assessed again for mastery and movement between tiers. Principals

reported that the number of students in Tier 2 and 3 (below the 25th quartile) is large. This makes it difficult to

schedule students for intervention as there are more students needing an intervention than staffing available.

Principals and teachers noted no alignment between Response to Intervention with other district initiatives.

Students are expected to learn certain skills in Read Well, other skills in Response to Intervention, and other

skills as indicated on the standards based report card.

New programs are often difficult to implement. New programs are layered on top of other existing programs.

Response to Intervention, if implemented with fidelity, has a proven record of success in supporting all

students. When new programs are implemented it is important to collect baseline data so that decisions about

modifications can be made based on data. This is the first year for Response to Intervention, and the second

year for Read Well and the standards based report card. Resources necessary for program fidelity as

discussed in the research for each of the three programs must be carefully analyzed to determine if the system

is able to provide these. The programs should be reviewed for alignment according to content, meaning, and

skill sets, to allow for teaching and learning across the three programs in a more focused manner. By aligning

the curriculum and then evaluating the effectiveness of the interventions, decisions about time and staff will be

more effective.

Powerful PracticeThe system and schools have partnered with institutions of higher education to provide opportunities for

postsecondary academic credit.

(Indicators 3.12)


In an effort to fulfill the mission of the system to provide education to ensure that students become successful

and productive citizens, the system recognized the need to increase the graduation rate at their only high

school. After reviewing artifacts, analyzing data, and completing interviews with various stakeholders, it was

determined that the high school dual enrollment program implemented through a partnership with higher

education enhances the work toward the mission. As a result of this work, the graduation rate has increased to

95%. Stakeholders from the business and community consider this dual enrollment program a key element in

providing students an avenue for beginning their postsecondary experience. Examples of this were shared as

students have graduated from Riverside High School with as many as 15 college credits. The high school has

also partnered with Tennessee College of Applied Technology to pilot an Advanced Manufacturing Technology

program for students on a vocational pathway.

As systems develop and implement new programs, it is not only important to consider academic data, but data

relating to the needs of students outside of the academic arena. For example, the system has taken into

consideration the economic conditions of families throughout the community. By developing and implementing

programs for students to earn college credits while in high school and receive industry certification in areas like










manufacturing technology, the system has provided students with a positive start to their postsecondary

career. These opportunities are open to any student who works to achieve success.










Leadership CapacityThe capacity of leadership to ensure an institution's progress towards its stated objectives is an essential

element of organizational effectiveness. An institution's leadership capacity includes the fidelity and

commitment to its institutional purpose and direction, the effectiveness of governance and leadership to enable

the institution to realize its stated objectives, the ability to engage and involve stakeholders in meaningful and

productive ways, and the capacity to enact strategies to improve results of student learning.

Purpose and direction are critical to successful institutions. A study conducted in 2010 by the London-based

Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) reported that "in addition to improving performance,

the research indicates that having a sense of shared purpose also improves employee engagement" and that

"lack of understanding around purpose can lead to demotivation and emotional detachment, which in turn lead

to a disengaged and dissatisfied workforce."

AdvancED has found through its evaluation of best practices in more than 32,000 institutions around the world

that a successful institution commits to a shared purpose and direction and establishes expectations for

student learning that are aligned with the institutions' vision and supported by internal and external

stakeholders. These expectations serve as the focus for assessing student performance and overall institution

effectiveness.

Governance and leadership are key factors in raising institutional quality. Leaders, both local administrators

and governing boards/authorities, are responsible for ensuring all learners achieve while also managing many

other facets of an institution. Institutions that function effectively do so without tension between the governing

board/authority, administrators, and educators and have established relationships of mutual respect and a

shared vision (Feuerstein & Opfer, 1998). In a meta-analysis of educational institution leadership research,

Leithwood and Sun (2012) found that leaders (school and governing boards/authority) can significantly

"influence school conditions through their achievement of a shared vision and agreed-on goals for the

organization, their high expectations and support of organizational members, and their practices that

strengthen school culture and foster collaboration within the organization." With the increasing demands of

accountability placed on institutional leaders, leaders who empower others need considerable autonomy and

involve their communities to attain continuous improvement goals. Leaders who engage in such practices

experience a greater level of success (Fink & Brayman, 2006). Similarly, governing boards/authorities that

focus on policy-making are more likely to allow institutional leaders the autonomy to make decisions that

impact teachers and students and are less responsive to politicization than boards/authorities that respond to

vocal citizens (Greene, 1992).

AdvancED's experience, gained through evaluation of best practices, has indicated that a successful institution

has leaders who are advocates for the institution's vision and improvement efforts. The leaders provide

direction and allocate resources to implement curricular and co-curricular programs that enable students to

achieve expectations for their learning. Leaders encourage collaboration and shared responsibility for school

improvement among stakeholders. The institution's policies, procedures, and organizational conditions ensure

equity of learning opportunities and support for innovation.










Standard 1 - Purpose and DirectionThe system maintains and communicates at all levels of the organization a purpose and direction for

continuous improvement that commit to high expectations for learning as well as shared values and beliefs

about teaching and learning.

Standard 2 - Governance and LeadershipThe system operates under governance and leadership that promote and support student performance and

system effectiveness.



1.1 The system engages in a systematic, inclusive, andcomprehensive process to review, revise, and communicate asystem-wide purpose for student success.

1.80 2.67

1.2 The system ensures that each school engages in a systematic,inclusive, and comprehensive process to review, revise, andcommunicate a school purpose for student success.

1.40 2.69

1.3 The school leadership and staff at all levels of the systemcommit to a culture that is based on shared values and beliefsabout teaching and learning and supports challenging, equitableeducational programs and learning experiences for all studentsthat include achievement of learning, thinking, and life skills.

2.00 2.87

1.4 Leadership at all levels of the system implement a continuousimprovement process that provides clear direction for improvingconditions that support student learning.

1.00 2.64



2.1 The governing body establishes policies and supports practicesthat ensure effective administration of the system and itsschools.

2.00 2.96

2.2 The governing body operates responsibly and functionseffectively.

2.00 2.99

2.3 The governing body ensures that the leadership at all levels hasthe autonomy to meet goals for achievement and instruction andto manage day-to-day operations effectively.

2.00 3.20

2.4 Leadership and staff at all levels of the system foster a cultureconsistent with the system's purpose and direction.

1.40 3.00

2.5 Leadership engages stakeholders effectively in support of thesystem's purpose and direction.

1.00 2.69










Stakeholder Feedback DiagnosticStakeholder Feedback is the third of three primary areas of evaluation in AdvancED's Performance

Accreditation model. The AdvancED surveys (student, parent, and teacher) are directly correlated to the

AdvancED Standards and indicators. They provide not only direct information about stakeholder satisfaction

but also become a source of data for triangulation by the External Review Team as it evaluates indicators.

Institutions are asked to collect and analyze stakeholder feedback data, then submit the data and the analyses

to the External Review Team for review. The External Review Team evaluates the quality of the administration

of the surveys by institution, survey results, and the degree to which the institution analyzed and acted on the

results.

FindingsImprovement PriorityCreate and engage in a systemic culture of shared leadership throughout the system.

(Indicators 2.4)


Interviews indicated that there were limited opportunities for stakeholder input into the development and

implementation of system programs and processes, to include curricular decisions and reporting of student

learning. The limited strategic planning artifacts did not provide evidence of stakeholder engagement in the

continuous planning process. Review of school artifacts demonstrated few opportunities for shared leadership

in the development of the schools’ improvement plans, especially through involvement of varied stakeholder

groups. The parent participation in the stakeholder surveys at nine percent also demonstrated a lack of

engagement by these stakeholders in decision making input.

Creating processes to engage stakeholders in the strategic planning and continuous improvement efforts

provides an avenue for systemic work. Shared leadership can then consistently support and encourage

innovation, collaboration and rigorous professional growth across the district. When leaders deliberately and



2.6 Leadership and staff supervision and evaluation processesresult in improved professional practice in all areas of thesystem and improved student success.

2.00 2.78

Evaluative Criteria Review TeamScore


Questionnaire Administration 1.00 3.43

Stakeholder Feedback Results and Analysis 2.00 3.12










consistently align their decisions and actions toward continuous improvement to achieve the system’s purpose

and allow for input from all stakeholders, a sense of community and ownership will exist.

Improvement PriorityEstablish and implement systematic processes to communicate with various stakeholders across the system.

(Indicators 1.2, 2.5, 3.8)


In the artifacts reviewed and through interviews with internal and external stakeholders, there was little

evidence that communication connected stakeholders in a meaningful way. Additionally, the interviews and

stakeholder survey results indicated a need for the system to engage all stakeholders through a systematic

process for communication. Fewer than 20% of parents across the system responded to the stakeholder

feedback diagnostic survey.

Improvement PriorityFormulate a structure for collection, analysis, sharing and use of student academic and non-academic data

that supports the system purpose.



Based on observations throughout the schools, as well as system documentation, there is evidence of some

level of data collection and use. This is not systemic in nature and therefore limits the intentional use of data

for instructional decision making. In order to address the subgroup performance and achievement gaps, there

is a need for a comprehensive collection, analysis, sharing and utilization of formative and summative data,

especially as it impacts student achievement.

Improvement PriorityImplement a strategic planning process which engages all stakeholders in the regular review, monitoring and

revision of the system’s purpose, continuous improvement efforts and achievement goals.

(Indicators 1.4, 2.5, 5.5)


The review of documentation and stakeholder interview information revealed a lack of cohesiveness in the

continuous improvement planning process. Additionally, there was little to no evidence that stakeholders

(teachers, parents, community members) had any input into the review and development of the continuous

improvement efforts. The absence of a data profile indicates a lack of evidence for data driven decision

making for continuous improvement.

It will be important for the system and school leaders to develop, monitor and communicate comprehensive

information about student learning, school performance and the achievement of goals with stakeholders.

Leadership should implement a continuous improvement process that provides clear direction for improving the










conditions that support student learning. When stakeholder groups work in a collaborative manner, programs

and resources can be better directed to the needs of the entire system.










Resource UtilizationThe use and distribution of resources must be aligned and supportive of the needs of an institution and the

students served. Institutions must ensure that resources are aligned with the stated mission and are distributed

equitably so that the needs of students are adequately and effectively addressed. The utilization of resources

includes an examination of the allocation and use of resources, the equity of resource distribution to need, the

ability of the institution to ensure appropriate levels of funding and sustainability of resources, as well as

evidence of long-range capital and resource planning effectiveness.

Institutions, regardless of their size, need access to sufficient resources and systems of support to be able to

engage in sustained and meaningful efforts that result in a continuous improvement cycle. Indeed, a study

conducted by the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory (Pan, D., Rudo, Z., Schneider, C., & Smith-

Hansen, L., 2003) "demonstrated a strong relationship between resources and student success... both the

level of resources and their explicit allocation seem to affect educational outcomes."

AdvancED has found through its own evaluation of best practices in the more than 32,000 institutions in the

AdvancED Network that a successful institution has sufficient human, material, and fiscal resources to

implement a curriculum that enables students to achieve expectations for student learning, meets special

needs, and complies with applicable regulations. The institution employs and allocates staff members who are

well qualified for their assignments. The institution provides a safe learning environment for students and staff.

The institution provides ongoing learning opportunities for all staff members to improve their effectiveness and

ensures compliance with applicable governmental regulations.

Standard 4 - Resources and Support SystemsThe system has resources and provides services in all schools that support its purpose and direction to ensure

success for all students.



4.1 The system engages in a systematic process to recruit, employ,and retain a sufficient number of qualified professional andsupport staff to fulfill their roles and responsibilities and supportthe purpose and direction of the system, individual schools, andeducational programs.

2.40 2.98

4.2 Instructional time, material resources, and fiscal resources aresufficient to support the purpose and direction of the system,individual schools, educational programs, and systemoperations.

2.00 2.98

4.3 The system maintains facilities, services, and equipment toprovide a safe, clean, and healthy environment for all studentsand staff.

2.40 3.05

4.4 The system demonstrates strategic resource management thatincludes long-range planning in support of the purpose anddirection of the system.

1.80 2.67










FindingsOpportunity for ImprovementDevelop and implement a focused instructional technology plan that includes hardware, software, and

professional development that will enhance teaching and learning needs of staff and students.

(Indicators 4.6)


There was evidence during classroom observations of technology devices in classrooms for teacher and

student use. Teachers were using SmartBoards to provide students with information and to enhance

engagement. Student interaction with the technology was more program based (i. e., Accelerated Reader,

Study Island). During interviews the school staff and leaders voiced the need for more hands on use of

technology for teachers and students. Teachers are in need of technology based options to support their data

collection and monitoring of student learning. Students are in need of more opportunities to use the technology

for higher order thinking skill development. Access to the internet at the school level was noted; however,

many students do not have access at home. This is a challenge when considering research and online

opportunities for students.

The 21st Century world of today is technology rich. Student opportunities to engage with others in research,

collaboration, and higher order thinking activities is greatly enhanced through the use of technology. The use

of technology resources expands the classroom to a more broad learning environment and helps prepare

students for higher education experiences. Technology as a tool for students is evidenced across all avenues

of postsecondary education and work. Organizational effectiveness is also impacted by the use of technology

in sharing data. Teaching and learning are both enhanced with the proper technological resources and

training.

Opportunity for ImprovementExamine the requirements to implement district initiatives (i.e., Read Well, Response to Intervention, standards



4.5 The system provides, coordinates, and evaluates theeffectiveness of information resources and related personnel tosupport educational programs throughout the system.

2.20 2.82

4.6 The system provides a technology infrastructure and equipmentto support the system's teaching, learning, and operationalneeds.

2.00 2.64

4.7 The system provides, coordinates, and evaluates theeffectiveness of support systems to meet the physical, social,and emotional needs of the student population being served.

2.80 2.65

4.8 The system provides, coordinates, and evaluates theeffectiveness of services that support the counseling,assessment, referral, educational, and career planning needs ofall students.

2.20 2.64










based report cards, Study Island) to determine what resources are necessary for effective implementation and

how these will be provided without sacrifice to other services.

(Indicators 4.5)


The system has initiated a variety of programs. Each of these requires specific inputs. For example, Read

Well requires two staff per classroom for two hours daily. In order to meet this requirement, principals report

that there is currently not enough available staff to fulfill this without impacting other services. Other staff,

including counselors, media staff and computer based teachers must be pulled from their normal duties during

the two hour time frame. Parents reported that there are many resources such as Study Island that are used

by students. Teachers provide Study Island assignments for homework; however, parents stated that they do

not all have the internet connectivity needed to access the program. Principals report that during Response to

Intervention, certain teachers leave the building for coaching responsibilities at other schools, leaving less than

the number of teachers needed during this time. With regard to evaluating the effectiveness of the program, it

is impossible for principals to determine what factors did or did not contribute to the expected versus actual

outcomes of these initiatives when they are unable to be implemented with fidelity.

It is important to evaluate the effectiveness of programs. Program reviews are a first step to ensure

implementation has been with fidelity and that resources required for the program are in place. Program

evaluation without integrity of implementation would provide unreliable data. In addition, setting targeted

expectations/outcomes at short intervals provides for monitoring and opportunities for adjustments. This

formative feedback can then be used to adjust and monitor processes to meet the goals of the system.

Powerful PracticeThe system has designed and implemented community programs that support the physical, social, and

emotional needs of students and then selects the program or intervention to meet the needs of these students.

(Indicators 4.7)


The system provides for the needs of children through a variety of community based support programs. Based

on interviews with external stakeholders and staff, the examination of documents and the standards

presentation provided by the district leadership, the system has a variety of resources and programs in place to

address student needs. Principals contact the liaison at the central office when a child has a physical, social,

or emotional need that cannot be provided for by the school. The liaison then contacts resources available in

the community and ensures that the student’s needs are met. Examples of these include the Lion’s Club, the

Chamber of Commerce, the Family Resource Center, the Decatur County Voluntary PreKindergarten Program,

AYERS Scholarships and SAILS Math.

Certain physical, social and emotional needs of students must be met in order for students to engage in the

learning process. The community plays an important role in making sure that these needs are met. The

schools and system must work closely with others in the community to ensure certain resources that students

need are identified and accessed in order to enhance the students' capacity to learn. By bringing these










resources to students, the school and system ensure that barriers to learning are minimized and student

learning is maximized.










ConclusionThe Decatur County School System is currently embarking on a period of transition with the recent change in

leadership. The interim Director of Schools was focused on receiving feedback from the visit to enhance the

continuous improvement efforts across the district. This is an area of capacity building that was identified as

critical, especially as the district looks at utilizing a comprehensive improvement process that involves all

stakeholders. A collaborative process to focus the efforts of the system was noted by all stakeholder groups

as important. The development of processes for review, monitoring, and adjustments to this work was

recognized as a needed step. The continuous improvement process from a district focus will enable the

schools to become more collaborative and will provide for a more systemic process.

The use of systemic processes will also be important when evaluating staff, providing professional learning,

implementing new curricular initiatives and determining the use of resources. There were positive efforts in

place that were supported by community agencies as part of the current process for meeting staff and school

needs. There were also resources provided to individual students when the system was able to identify

specific needs of students. The communication and engagement of all stakeholders throughout this process

will be important in building organizational effectiveness.

The Decatur County Public Schools are not engaging in an annual review or discussion regarding the district

purpose and mission. In developing and monitoring the strategic plan for the system there was not evidence of

regular review, revision, and communication of the system purpose and mission. This will be important to set

the stage for any ongoing work. There is a strong need to ensure a shared approach to this work, as all

stakeholders should be involved in this process when it is conducted.

The governing body does have policies and practices that support the effective operation of its schools. Most

policies and practices promote conditions that support student learning, promote effective instruction and

require assessment of learning. The governing body has established limited policies and practices regarding

the professional growth of staff. Additionally, evaluation processes have not been utilized to determine needs

for improved professional practice. New instructional programs have been put in place through the budget

process, but the allocation of human resources to support these programs, as well as professional

development has been limited. In addition to the areas of limited resources to support the new programs,

there has been a minimal degree of collaboration and a limited sense of community as implementation has

occurred. The governing body should encourage shared leadership throughout the system to consistently

support and encourage innovation, collaboration, and rigorous professional growth.

The district's curriculum, assessment and instructional practices are not systematically monitored and

adjusted. No evidence exists to suggest that learning from professional development programs has been

embedded in the instructional practices in the classroom, or that there has been any monitoring for needed

ongoing professional development. Teachers and administrators reported that they had self-selected to

participate in meaningful and useful professional development activities outside the system on their own.

The effort made to implement mandated programs and initiatives with no school staff input has created an












uncomfortable environment among many internal stakeholders. Schools have attempted to comply with these

mandates. Unfortunately, these are time intensive and are requiring schools to sacrifice other services. An

example of this was noted in the READ WELL program which requires two adults in the classroom for two hour

periods for implementation. All personnel are being used to implement the program at elementary schools.

This leaves programs such as counseling and other enrichment programs experiencing a reduction of service

to students. The opportunity to collaborate on these initiatives was not present. This has resulted in teachers

feeling the premises of the programs are good, but needing to be involved in how certain components need to

be reviewed and adjusted to fit the needs of the schools and students.

The system has seen a positive increase in the graduation rate at the high school. The system has opened

many avenues to assist students in being college and career ready. The implementation of the block

schedule, credit recovery courses, and a focus on ACT preparation courses have given hope to students who

would not have graduated. The partnerships with community agencies and higher education institutions have

provided students many opportunities to participate in dual enrollment courses, where they can enter college

as a sophomore. These partnerships also provide an opportunity for students to achieve industry certification

in career technical education programs which have been implemented by the school system.

The system provides resources, support services, and a variety of community based support programs to meet

the needs of students, as well as enhance their educational experience. The system employs family support

personnel whom the principals contact when a child has a physical, social or emotional need that is beyond the

scope of service at the school site. In addition, after school programs have been established to assist students

with academic needs.

As the district looks to enhance their continuous improvement efforts, there is a need for a systematic and

systemic comprehensive improvement plan. This should have measurable goals and targets based directly on

student, school and district data for continuous improvements. Communication and collaboration among

stakeholders in this work will be imperative for the district's effectiveness. System leaders are encouraged to

establish regular means of communicating performance and effectiveness information as a way of building

broad stakeholder understanding and support for system goals, programs and initiatives.

The improvement priorities shared by the External Review Team focus the district on developing more shared

leadership opportunities in the continuous improvement work across the system. This includes involving all

stakeholders at the various stages of this work, to include the review, revision and communication of strategic

planning and continuous improvement efforts. Program evaluation, comprehensive professional learning and

focused initiatives should be understood by all stakeholders. Decatur Public Schools development and

implementation of collaborative strategies for continuous improvement from a systemic and systematic

perspective will provide a way for all stakeholders to participate in the mission and purpose of providing all

students opportunities for success.

Improvement PrioritiesThe institution should use the findings from this review to guide the continuous improvement process. The

institution must address the Improvement Priorities listed below:












-

-

-

-

-

Create and engage in a systemic culture of shared leadership throughout the system.

Develop and implement a comprehensive professional learning plan focused on the needs of

professional and support staff in order to address the student learning targets and goals of the system.

Establish and implement systematic processes to communicate with various stakeholders across the

system.

Formulate a structure for collection, analysis, sharing and use of student academic and non-academic

data that supports the system purpose.

Implement a strategic planning process which engages all stakeholders in the regular review, monitoring

and revision of the system’s purpose, continuous improvement efforts and achievement goals.












Accreditation RecommendationIndex of Education QualityThe Index of Education Quality (IEQ™) provides a holistic measure of overall performance based on a

comprehensive set of indicators and evaluative criteria. A formative tool for improvement, it identifies areas of

success as well as areas in need of focus.

The IEQ™ comprises three domains: 1) the impact of teaching and learning on student performance; 2) the

leadership capacity to govern; and 3) the use of resources and data to support and optimize learning.

The overall and domain scores can range from 100-400. The domain scores are derived from: the AdvancED

Standards and indicators ratings; results of the Analysis of Student Performance; and data from Stakeholder

Feedback Surveys (students, parents, and staff).

The IEQ™ results include information about how the institution is performing compared to expected criteria as

well as to other institutions in the AdvancED Network. The institution should use the information in this report,

including the corresponding performance rubrics, to identify specific areas of improvement.

Consequently, the External Review Team recommends to the AdvancED Accreditation Commission that the

institution earn the distinction of accreditation for a five-year term. AdvancED will review the results of the

External Review to make a final determination including the appropriate next steps for the institution in

response to these findings.

External Review IEQScore


Overall Score 206.34 282.79

Teaching and Learning Impact 224.76 274.14

Leadership Capacity 163.33 296.08

Resource Utilization 222.50 286.32












AddendaIndividual Institution Results (Self-reported)

Institution Name Teaching andLearning Impact

LeadershipCapacity

ResourceUtilization

Overall IEQScore

Decatur County Middle School 271.43 290.91 257.14 274.36

Decatur County Riverside HighSchool

280.95 309.09 314.29 294.87

Decaturville Elementary School 247.62 272.73 228.57 251.28

Parsons Elementary School 247.62 281.82 257.14 258.97














Team Roster

Member Brief Biography

Dr. Kathy Spencer In serving K-12 public education in North Carolina for over 30 years, Dr. Spencerhas had opportunities to serve in the classroom as a teacher, as well asadministratively in schools and at the district level. Dr. Spencer has alwaysfocused her work on high expectations for teaching and learning, and mostrecently led her district in digital learning and global education initiatives. Herwork as a superintendent for one of the top 15 largest districts in the Stateprovided for experiences and contributions in all the AdvancEd Standards forQuality Schools and Systems, resulting in her receipt of the 2013 Excellence InEducation Award given by AdvancEd. She has also recently become active inworking with East Carolina University in their Educational Leadership Program.

Laura Harper Retired educator with experience in teaching and administration at theelementary, middle, secondary, central office, and university levels. Laura hasserved as Lead Evaluator on External ReviewTeams for schools, and asAssociate Lead Evaluator for school district reviews in both the public and non-public sector. She currently serves as an external facilitator and field consultantguiding schools and school districts through the accreditation process. In additionto her service to AdvancED Laura has worked as an independent educationconsultant in the area of school improvement for many schools and schooldistricts across the state of Tennessee. She also serves as an adjunct instructorand supervisor of student teachers at the university level.

Mrs. Maureen Ryff Mrs. Maureen Ryff is a retired secondary school social studies instructor andadministrator. Mrs. Ryff holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in American History andFrench, and a Master’s Degree in Political Science from the University ofWyoming. Her administrative endorsements include principal for grades K-12and curriculum director. Mrs. Ryff taught social studies and French for 30 yearsat the middle and high school levels and served as a high school principal for 10years. She earned several awards for excellence in education. She is currentlythe State Director of the Wyoming Academic Decathlon program. She is amember of the Wyoming AdvancED State Council and serves as a leadevaluator for AdvancED. She has led accreditation visits to schools and districtsthroughout the United States, Europe, and Asia.

Dr. Betty J Johnson Dr. Betty Johnson is a retired "teacher educator" and administrator. Shecontinues to work as an Adjunct Faculty member in the Graduate StudiesProgram in the Department of Education at Christian Brothers University. Hermore than 40 years of experience in education includes research, grant writing,and teaching at both the graduate and undergraduate college levels, junior highschool art teacher, and elementary school classroom teacher. She has manyyears experience working with accreditation of schools (SACS-CASI) and nowwith AdvancED as a team member and lead evaluator. She received her Ed.Ddegree in Curriculum and Instruction with a focus in Early Childhood Educationfrom Memphis State University, now The University of Memphis, M.S. degree inElementary Education from Jackson State University, Jackson, MS, B.S. degreein Elementary Education, Tougaloo College, Tougaloo, MS.














Member Brief Biography

Dr. Kathleen Marie Smith Dr. Kathleen M. Smith has been an educator since 1975. She is currently theDirector for AdvancEd Virginia in the division of accreditation. Her work as theDirector of the Office of School Improvement with the Virginia Department ofEducation has provided experience in school and district improvement. Her pastexperience as a special educator, alterative education specialist, career andtechnical director, pre-school specialist, and school improvement specialistprovide a diverse background as a reference point to support schools anddistricts. Her career in the public school system as well as public education hasbeen working with diverse student populations. She received her doctorate fromThe College of William and Mary. Her dissertation, The Impact of DistrictClimate on Student Achievement, was a culmination of her desire to supportdistricts in finding systemic avenues to improve outcomes for students.

Dr. Donna G. Youree Donna G. Youree has been an educator for 45+ years, serving in public schoolsthroughout Missouri and Tennessee. She has extensive experience working withlarge urban Title 1 student populations PreK-Grade 6 as a classroom teacherand building principal. As an elementary school principal, her focus has beenworking with high needs schools and children living in poverty areas.

Dr. Youree recently retired after 10 years of service in higher education as anAssociate Professor. She taught in graduate programs in teaching andleadership. Professor Youree also served as a faculty dissertation advisor forEdD graduate students. Donna Youree has had the opportunity to shareclassroom experiences and expertise with pre-service teachers in her role asprofessor and as a presenter at National Conferences. She strives to instill thebelief that all children can learn and deserve teachers committed to providingquality instruction for all. Dr. Youree has served as a Lead Evaluator and teammember on External Review Teams in both public and non-public sector.Additionally, Dr. Youree has served as an External Review Team member on aDistrict accreditation visit.

Donna G. Youree received an Undergraduate degree in Elementary Educationfrom the University of Missouri in Columbia. MO, a Master's degree inAdministration and Supervision from Middle Tennessee State University, and anEdD in Administration and Supervision from Tennessee State University.














1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

Next StepsReview and discuss the findings from this report with stakeholders.

Ensure that plans are in place to embed and sustain the strengths noted in the Powerful Practices

section to maximize their impact on the institution.

Consider the Opportunities for Improvement identified throughout the report that are provided by the

team in the spirit of continuous improvement and the institution’s commitment to improving its capacity

to improve student learning.

Develop action plans to address the Improvement Priorities identified by the team. Include methods for

monitoring progress toward addressing the Improvement Priorities.

Use the report to guide and strengthen the institution's efforts to improve student performance and

system effectiveness.

Following the External Review, submit the Accreditation Progress Report detailing progress made

toward addressing the Improvement Priorities. Institutions are required to respond to all Improvement

Priorities. The report will be reviewed at the appropriate state, national, and/or international levels to

monitor and ensure that the system has implemented the necessary actions to address the

Improvement Priorities. The accreditation status will be reviewed and acted upon based on the

responses to the Improvement Priorities and the resulting improvement.

Continue to meet the AdvancED Standards, submit required reports, engage in continuous

improvement, and document results.














About AdvancEDAdvancED is the world leader in providing improvement and accreditation services to education providers of all

types in their pursuit of excellence in serving students. AdvancED serves as a trusted partner to more than

32,000 public and private schools and school systems – enrolling more than 20 million students - across the

United States and 70 countries.

In 2006, the North Central Association Commission on Accreditation and School Improvement (NCA CASI),

the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Council on Accreditation and School Improvement (SACS

CASI), both founded in 1895, and the National Study of School Evaluation (NSSE) came together to form

AdvancED: one strong, unified organization dedicated to education quality. In 2011, the Northwest

Accreditation Commission (NWAC) that was founded in 1917 became part of AdvancED.

Today, NCA CASI, NWAC and SACS CASI serve as accreditation divisions of AdvancED. The Accreditation

Divisions of AdvancED share research-based quality standards that cross school system, state, regional,

national, and international boundaries. Accompanying these standards is a unified and consistent process

designed to engage educational institutions in continuous improvement.














-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

ReferencesAlwin, L. (2002). The will and the way of data use. School Administrator, 59(11), 11.

Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voxx, T., Jordan, A., Klusmann, U., Krauss, S.,

Nuebrand, M., & Tsai, Y. (2010). Teachers' mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the

classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 133-180.

Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. (2012). Shared purpose: the golden thread?

London: CIPD.

Colbert, J., Brown, R., Choi, S., & Thomas, S. (2008). An investigation of the impacts of teacher-driven

professional development. Teacher Education Quarterly, 35(2), 134-154.

Conley, D.T. (2007). Redefining college readiness (Vol. 3). Eugene, OR: Educational Policy

Improvement Center.

Datnow, A., Park, V., & Wohlstetter, P. (2007). Achieving with data: How high-performing school

systems use data to improve instruction for elementary students. Los Angeles, CA: Center on

Educational Governance, USC.

Dembosky, J., Pane, J., Barney, H., & Christina, R. (2005). Data driven decision making in

Southwestern Pennsylvania school districts. Working paper. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

Ding, C. & Sherman, H. (2006). Teaching effectiveness and student achievement: Examining the

relationship. Educational Research Quarterly, 29 (4), 40-51.

Doyle, D. P. (2003). Data-driven decision making: Is it the mantra of the month or does it have staying

power? T.H.E. Journal, 30(10), 19-21.

Feuerstein, A., & Opfer, V. D. (1998). School board chairmen and school superintendents: An analysis

of perceptions concerning special interest groups and educational governance. Journal of School

Leadership, 8, 373-398.

Fink, D., & Brayman, C. (2006). School leadership succession and the challenges of change.

Educational Administration Quarterly, 42 (62), 61-89.

Greene, K. (1992). Models of school-board policy-making. Educational Administration Quarterly, 28

(2), 220-236.

Horng, E., Klasik, D., & Loeb, S. (2010). Principal time-use and school effectiveness. American

Journal of Education 116, (4) 492-523.

Lafee, S. (2002). Data-driven districts. School Administrator, 59(11), 6-7, 9-10, 12, 14-15.

Leithwood, K., & Sun, J. (2012). The Nature and effects of transformational school leadership: A meta-

analytic review of unpublished research. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48 (387). 388-423.

Marks, H., Louis, K.S., & Printy, S. (2002). The capacity for organizational learning: Implications for

pedagogy and student achievement. In K. Leithwood (Ed.), Organizational learning and school

improvement (p. 239-266). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

McIntire, T. (2002). The administrator's guide to data-driven decision making. Technology and

Learning, 22(11), 18-33.

Pan, D., Rudo, Z., Schneider, C., & Smith-Hansen, L. (2003). Examination of resource allocation in

education: connecting spending to student performance. Austin, TX: SEDL.














Documents

Report of the External Review Team for Decatur … Novembe… · External Review Team for Decatur County School System ... Effective Learning Environments Observation Tool (eleot™)