“Clarity precedes competence.”

The title quote is from DuFour, DuFour, Eaker (Solution Tree 2014, p. 90), and nowhere may it ring more true than the school improvement process.

Each school in our district has a School Success Team (SST). It is a formal group of teachers that meet regularly with the principal to help lead the school improvement process. In turn, those SST members meet regularly with smaller teacher teams. Throughout the process, the School Improvement Plan is drafted, implemented, evaluated, and amended, if need be. As we enter our fourth week of school, SSTs are working to bring their respective school improvement goals "to life." But what does all of that really mean, especially for the teacher who is not at that meeting? We need “clarity” before we can be “competent.”

In Michigan, every public school must draft and submit an SIP to the Michigan Department of Education. It encompasses requirements for both state and federal mandates. In addition, each district also submits a District Improvement Plan. The SIP is intended to be an ongoing, continuous cycle:

Michigan Department of Education (http://www.michigan.gov/mde/0,1607,7-140-28753_38959---,00.html)

The SIP is done in a three-year cycle, but an updated version is submitted to the state each June, for the following school year. The SIP is typically drafted by the SST and principal, but some schools also bring other teachers into the drafting process.  Goals for improvement are articulated (e.g., all students will be proficient in writing), and a measurable objective is stated (e.g., 70% of the bottom 30% will demonstrate proficiency in writing in ELA by June 2015, as measured by pre-assessment and post-assessment). The measurable objective is formulated by past performance on state benchmark assessments and the bar all schools must meet by 2022. Then, one or more strategies are chosen to achieve the goal (e.g., use of clear learning goals and monitoring progress), as well as activities within each strategy (e.g., teachers will learn how to draft clear learning goals and how to effectively monitor them). Each strategy is research-based.

The number of goals per school varies, but is generally determined by the SST, principal, and other teachers brought into the process. However, all Title I schools must have a goal in each of the four core content areas. In addition, some schools have chosen to have a goal in each grade level or department. Every school must post a copy of its SIP on either its own website or the district website.

Regardless of the number of goals, the structure is based on the premise of collective responsibility: “A shared belief that the primary responsibility of each member of the organization is to ensure high levels of learning for every child” (Buffum, Mattos, & Weber, 2012, p.15).  Within the smaller teacher teams, usually based on grade level or content area, the teachers work collaboratively and assume collective responsibility to ensure that every student learns the essential knowledge and skills for that grade or course. The Instructional Framework, now in its second year of implementation, is the vehicle through which so much of this work is done. Domains 2 and 4 (intentional planning and collaboration) help bring Domain 1 to life. That type of work can only be done by those smaller teacher teams (often formed as professional learning communities), for some very good reasons:

·         The teachers are highly trained and credentialed in their subject.

·         The teachers know the content best.

·         The teachers, through creation, administration, and scoring of common formative assessments, have the freshest assessment data.

·         The teachers know their students best.

(Buffum, Mattos, & Weber, 2012, p.33)

In other words, even if there is not a goal explicitly written for every content area or grade level, there are strategies and activities within each goal that pertain to all teachers, and every teacher is implementing the Instructional Framework.

As the school year progresses, collaborative teacher teams and the SST will review data to monitor progress toward the school improvement goals. The data is best gathered through the use of common formative assessments (also part of the Instructional Framework), so that there can be a change in strategy is needed, and thus, a chance to improve, for both students and teachers. In addition, a school may decide to amend its SIP within the school year, to clarify goals, strategies, and/or activities to better serve students.

So, to hopefully bring some clarity to the process, school improvement is not a one-time event, or even a weekly meeting. It is an ongoing process that lives every day, in every classroom. It is also our commitment to measure success by results, not intentions. Go back and look at the center of the cycle graphic: student achievement. School improvement is about every student, and making decisions that are best for them, to help each one of them learn at high levels.