EQAO Guide to School and Board Improvement Planning · promote an Ontario network of powerful data-driven improvement planning. In addition, this guide links to two provincial resources

EQAO Guide to

School and Board

Improvement Planning

April 2002

Table of Contents

Introduction......................................................................................................................................... 1

EQAO’s Role in Assessing for Improvement....................................................................................... 2

School and Board Improvement Planning ............................................................................................ 3Step 1. Seeking to Engage All Educational Partners in the Improvement Process............................. 4Step 2. Analyzing and Interpreting the Data..................................................................................... 4Step 3. Reporting Results to the Community.................................................................................... 9Step 4. Creating/Reviewing/Updating the Improvement Plan ......................................................... 10Step 5. Monitoring the Implementation of the Improvement Plan................................................... 14

Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................ 16

Appendix A – Sample Process of Analyzing the Data........................................................................ 17

Appendix B – Communications Planning Worksheet......................................................................... 24

Appendix C – Analysis of Lessons Learned in the Review of the 2000/2001 Plans ............................ 25

Appendix D – Summary of Board Improvement Plans, 2000-2001 .................................................... 28

.

EQAO — GUIDE TO SCHOOL AND BOARD IMPROVEMENT PLANNING 1

Introduction

The primary emphasis of improvement planning is to increase learning for all students. Improvementin student learning or achievement comes only when it is planned for, supported and implemented.Improvement planning is a strategy to bring about educational change by enhancing students’outcomes and increasing district school boards’ and schools’ capacity to design and manage change.

Research indicates that while factors such as socio-economic status and preparedness to learn affectstudent achievement, schools can also have a significant influence on student growth. Planning forimprovement is a process by which school communities and boards reflect on relevant informationabout context and achievement and design strategies for the areas they can affect. Improvementplanning is successful when it identifies strategies that will make a positive change in studentachievement and growth over time.

This report and guide is intended to support improvement planning processes by� outlining the characteristics of successful improvement planning,� summarizing the analysis of last year’s board improvement plans,� making recommendations for improvement planning for 2001-2002 at the elementary and

secondary levels.

For the first time, in early 2002, through its Education Quality Indicators Program (EQUIP), EQAOprovides contextual information about a wide range of factors, both inside and outside the school, thatinfluence student achievement. As well, since EQAO now reports on student achievement in Grade 9Assessment of Mathematics and the Ontario Secondary School Literacy Test, secondary schools andboards can include these data and appropriate improvement strategies in their planning.

As of March, 2002, the Ministry of Education will require that schools and boards set targets forimprovement in reading, through its Early Reading Initiative. The Ministry continues to supportboards in the implementation of secondary school reform and elementary curriculum implementation.These components should all be linked in one board or school improvement plan, so that staff andcommunity see one coherent and integrated approach to implementation and improvement.

In addition to providing coherence between plans at the school and board level, policies at the boardand school should foster improvement by providing a unique blend of pressure and support.

2 EQAO — GUIDE TO SCHOOL AND BOARD IMPROVEMENT PLANNING

EQAO’s Role in Assessing for Improvement

Ontario’s Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO) was established in 1996. Its purpose isto ensure greater accountability and to contribute to the enhancement of the quality of education ofpublicly funded education in Ontario. EQAO’s responsibilities are� to design and implement a comprehensive program of student assessment within government-

established guidelines,� to advise the Minister of Education on assessment policy,� to develop and implement a system for measuring the quality of education in Ontario,� to lead Ontario’s participation in national and international assessments,� to promote research in best practices in assessment and accountability,� to conduct quality reviews in consultation with school boards and� to report to the Minister of Education.

EQAO also makes recommendations for improvement that students, parents, educators, policy makersand others in the education community can use to improve teaching and learning. Each school boarddevelops and releases a board-wide plan for fostering and supporting improved achievement. Parents,school councils and other community members are partners who help analyze the achievement andcontextual data and participate in the development of the boards’ and schools’ plans for improvement.Local and provincial assessment results are critical data in this planning process.

By illustrating practice and sharing successful strategies, EQAO seeks to build on the foundation ofgood improvement planning that Ontario schools and boards have established in previous years. Manyeducators and administrators use the strategies and techniques describedhere and have done so for some time. Their expertise is acknowledged and respected.Others may be looking for suggestions to modify or replace previous approaches that have not, overtime, produced the improvement intended. This guide provides examples of exemplary practice topromote an Ontario network of powerful data-driven improvement planning.

In addition, this guide links to two provincial resources that complement the improvement planningprocess.� The Education Improvement Commission (EIC) published The Road Ahead IV− A Report on

Improving Schools Through Greater Accountability in April, 2000. The report describes the use ofa wide variety of data in profiling schools and planning for their improvement.

� In November 2000, the EIC published School Improvement Planning: A Handbook for Principals,Teachers and School Councils, an additional resource for schools in their improvement planningprocesses.


School and Board Improvement Planning


Step 1. Seeking to Engage All Educational Partners in the Improvement Process

Shared responsibility and shared decision-making are the cornerstones of successful planning. If boardand school staff develop their improvement plans collaboratively with representatives of their schoolcommunities and school councils, they are more likely to develop a sense of shared responsibility anda determination to bring about the required changes.

Each member of the home and school communities makes an important contribution to studentlearning; the planning process needs their participation. In seeking participation in the planningprocess, boards and schools should look for broad representation and willing support. Possibleparticipants might be:� board officials, including superintendents and consultants� trustees� school principals and personnel� teachers� school council members� parents� students, especially at the secondary level� community representatives

In the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board, for example, the plan was developed by acommittee struck for this purpose with representation from board consultants, teachers, principals, viceprincipals, special education staff, parents and school councils. In the District School Board ofNiagara, the committee also included a trustee and a superintendent, and all committee members wereinvolved in data analysis as well as the identification of improvement strategies.

The Catholic District School Board of Eastern Ontario also developed an inclusive process. To avoidthe problem of “participaralysis”, involvement was introduced during regularly scheduled meetings inprogressive stages over several months. Participants included� members of the curriculum team, executive council, central support staff,� EQAO Improvement Committee (representatives of executive council, central support staff, and

principals),� principals at school leadership meetings,� trustees at board meetings,� media representatives, interested parents and community members.

Involving a diverse group of representatives from the school or board community requires skilledleadership. The above-mentioned resource School Improvement Planning: A Handbook for Principals,Teachers and School Councils is helpful in identifying processes that will ensure equal participationand contributions by all members of a planning committee.

Step 2. Analyzing and Interpreting the Data

Schools and schools boards have many sources of data that will support the improvement planningprocess. Many of these data sources are discussed in the above mentioned The Road Ahead IV − AReport on Improving Schools Through Greater Accountability and in School Improvement Planning: AHandbook for Principals, Teachers and School Councils.


Schools have access to a wide range of data that include report card data, attendance and suspensiondata, behavior incident data, etc. Non-standard data, gathered at the school level for specific purposes,can also support the school planning process. Data such as homework completion, number of booksread, etc. can be gathered by school staff and from parents. One school began the improvement processby administering a standardized assessment instrument. The school then examined profiles of thelowest-performing students. The data indicated that for these students “the single biggest detriment tostudent achievement was the non-completion of work”1.

In addition to school-based data, schools have access to achievement from EQAO’s assessments.Achievement in different curriculum areas is measured in Grades 3,6, 9 and 10. This data sourcesupports effective school and board planning.

Some boards also gathered additional information to direct their improvement efforts. The Algonquinand Lakeshore Catholic District School Board, for example, reported, “Only 50 per cent of schoolshave an experienced EQAO marker on staff.” Such information can be used to determine professionaldevelopment needs or to direct resource acquisition. Similarly, this board conducted a survey to findout how many teachers were using the Impact Math resources for Grades 7 and 8 at each school. Suchdata are helpful in deciding what is working, what needs to be adjusted or discontinued, whatprofessional development has been useful and what still remains to be done.

In improvement planning, gathering contextual information, which supports the understanding andinterpretation of assessment results, is an important function. The contextual framework is referred toas the school and board profile. The EIC publication, The Road Ahead − IV outlines a school and boardprofile process that provides this context. Data from the Education Quality Indicators Program(EQUIP) support the development of school and board profiles. The goal of EQUIP is to provide a setof widely accessible education quality indicators to be used consistently across the system and overtime to describe Ontario education at the school, board and provincial levels. The indicators chosen forinclusion in EQUIP were selected on the basis of what the research says about their influence onstudent achievement.

The EQUIP report organizes indicators under nine theme areas:� Community, Student and Family Demographics� Education Financing� Preparedness to Learn and Early Learning Support� School Leadership� School Climate� Community–School Relationships� Teaching and Learning Environment� Perception and Satisfaction of General Public, Parents, Students and Teachers� Student Achievement2

1 Charlton, John (201) “Making the Most of Accountability Policies: It’s a Matter of Attitude”,

Orbit Vol. 32, No. 1, 2001, p. 412 In the technical paper, “Education Quality Indicators Program (EQUIP): The Framework”, the research base for thechosen indicators is outlined.


Schools and boards can develop profiles on the basis of EQUIP data along with board- or school-baseddata. Integrating the school profile into the planning process allows school and board planning teams tofocus strategies for improvement on meeting the needs of the students and parents in their uniquecommunity.3

Training may be necessary. Not all administrators, teachers or parents are acquainted with thetechnicalities of statistical interpretation. For example, mistakes may occur in over-emphasizing smallfluctuations in scores or drawing conclusions based on sampling artifacts rather than real changes.

One effective strategy was a series of workshops to make learning ongoing and cumulative, rather thana single event. The Waterloo Catholic District School Board details the following components in theirstrategy: “provide training to school leaders with respect to research skills, data collection strategies,statistics, creation of monitoring and feedback mechanisms, and creation of school plans that lead tocontinuous improvement. School leaders will apply these new skills to the EQUIP data and to theirown locally-developed quality indicator measures.”

Some boards have also developed resources to help in data interpretation. For example, the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board provides a resource manual, Making the Most Effective Use of Statisticsand Test Results. It explains technical terms; provides suggestions for interpreting, explaining andreporting test results; and gives advice on questionnaire design and analysis.

Accumulating the relevant data is the beginning of an effective planning process. Data are used topaint a picture that tells a story about the Board, the school and the students. Developing anunderstanding of the data is the next critical step. The EIC publication School Improvement Planning:A Handbook for Principals, Teachers and School Councils outlines a process planning teams can useto develop an understanding of all of the data that might be used. In addition, data management toolssuch as the Fathom software program can help to organize data in ways that make it easier to analyzeand interpret.

Setting the Context – Developing an Understanding of the School ProfileBelow are some suggestions to consider in analyzing EQUIP data in order to set the context for theachievement results. Once the EQUIP data are compiled, the planning team could use a series ofquestions to focus their understanding.

1. Is there anything in the EQUIP data that you do not understand?2. If so, what would you like clarified?3. For each of the themes, how does the school’s and board’s indicator data compare to the

provincial EQUIP data?4. What patterns are evident in the school’s or board’s EQUIP data? For example, are the board’s

data for certain indicators particularly high or low relative to the provincial data?5. How do the current indicator data compare with the previous year’s data? Do there appear to be

any trends in the indicator data?6. Is there anything about the information that you find surprising? If there are inconsistencies in

the indicator data, how can they be explained?

3 For a more in-depth discussion of how a school might use the EQUIP data to support effective school planning, please seeAppendix A.


7. Considering the relationship between each of the indicators and student achievement, is thereanything that concerns you? What does the literature say about the relationship between thisindicator and student achievement?

8. How closely does the EQUIP data match the other school-based school profile data you haveaccumulated?

9. Do any of the indicator data point to a need to review or re-evaluate decisions, policies orprocedures?

10. On the basis of all of the data, which two or three elements of the profile should be consideredmost carefully in developing the school/board plan?

Achievement Data: What does it mean?The planning team should undertake an examination of all of the achievement data: class-based data,report card data and EQAO data. Once the data are accumulated, the planning team could use a seriesof questions to focus their understanding.

1. Is there anything in the data that you do not understand?2. If so, what would you like clarified?3. What is the relationship between the class-based report card and the EQAO data? Are they

similar or different?4. How do you explain any differences?5. Is there anything about the information that you find surprising?6. Is there anything that concerns you?7. How does the data align with your impression of how the students at this school/in this board

are doing?8. Are the students doing as well as you expected them to do?

The planning team might also examine trends in the data that they have available. To understand thetrends, the team might compare this year’s results with last year’s and those of the year before. A seriesof questions may be used to focus the discussion.

1. In what areas are the results the same and in what areas have there been changes?2. In what areas do you note improvement?3. In what areas have the results declined?4. Are you surprised by any of the results?5. What are the possible causes of the changes - both improvements and declines?

Once the planning team understands the current data and the trends in achievement data, they canbegin to identify strengths and weaknesses. This is the beginning of a priority-setting activity.4

Having examined the data in isolation, the planning team is now ready to probe the relationshipbetween the school profile and the achievement data – to put the achievement data in context.Assessment results can be related to contextual data from the following sources: EQUIP; the EQAOstudent and teacher questionnaires; national and international assessments; board assessments; localresearch initiatives; and feedback from board staff, principals, teachers school councils, parents andstudents. Asking questions will support this process.

4 cf. School Improvement Planning: A Handbook for Principals, Teachers and School Councils, Education ImprovementCommission, November 2000, p. 22


1. How do the board’s or school’s EQUIP data and other contextual information relate to itsEQAO assessment results? Are there similar relationships between the provincial EQUIP dataand the provincial EQAO assessment results?

2. How might the board’s or school’s assessment results have been influenced by specificcontextual factors, including board policies, improvement plans, program emphases, staffdevelopment programs and resource and personnel allocations?

3. How do strengths and weaknesses in the assessment results relate to the various contextualfactors identified above?

4. What does the literature say about the relationships you have noticed?5. What are the implications for decision-making and planning at the board and school levels and

for teacher and parent practices?

School and board results might also be compared with those of other schools and boards that havesimilar demographics and other factors. For example, the Upper Grand District School Board planincluded the following section:

Action: Identify and communicate best practicesProgram Department Responsibilities:� Arrange visits to classrooms and schools in other jurisdictions that are… successful and

identify strategies that may be transferable to our system.Year 2000:� Visited other jurisdictions and shared best practices in Early Literacy and Grades 1, 2,

and 3.� Adapted our writing in-services using the Peel Board’s Writing Scales for system use.� Conducted in-services on the Writing Scales in October (Curriculum Management Team).

Year 2001:� Establish Writing Team to create Grade 1 and 2 Writing Scales for system use.� Conduct in-services on Writing Scales in January for Grades 3 to 8 .� Offer similar workshops at Summer Institute 2001.

Schools or boards could then begin a process to enhance student achievement with the goal of creatingan environment in which all students can learn.

To support the process, training in data interpretation and strategic planning for both school and boardstaff has proven helpful. For example, the Lakehead District School Board conducted comprehensivetraining to support principals in school improvement. The training included: interpretation of data,reporting on assessment results, developing the school plan, and communicating the plan to parentsand the public.

For a detailed example of analysis and interpretation of data, see Appendix A.


Step 3. Reporting Results to the Community

EQAO results are released annually in the form of individual, school, board and provincial reports.Assisting parents in understanding these results and their implications is an important step in buildingan effective partnership between the board, the school and the community. As such, boardcommunications should include background information regarding EQAO’s assessments, the rationalefor such assessments in Ontario and the board’s belief statements around improving studentachievement. Informing the community of the board’s mission and vision statements sets a context forthe release of the test results; communicating information from the EQAO assessments and EQUIPthen allows the board to tell its own students’ stories and to support them with evidence. It allows theboard to point out problems it may have encountered over the year, such as extreme population growth,as well as opportunities for future achievements.

Many school boards across Ontario have a communication plan in place. Using this plan for the releaseof EQAO data ensures that the community receives all of the information it requires. One such planfrom the York Region District School Board is included in Appendix B.

The Brant Haldiman and Norfolk communication plan includes strategies for both internal and externalcommunications. The goal of the internal communication is to provide directions and expectations toteachers and administrators to guide the implementation of school plans. The aim of the externalcommunication is to reach parents, school councils and the community.

Individual schools must also release their EQAO results. Every school community and board inOntario has unique features and schools should use all the information gathered from the EQAOassessments, EQUIP and the school profile to set a context for the school and its EQAO results. Theinformation gathered by EQUIP allows the school community to examine the results on variousindicators in comparison with those at the board or provincial levels. This information will assistparents in understanding the conditions within each school and will assist them in analyzing the results.

Once the community partners have been informed of the EQAO results by the board and the school,the parent community should be invited to participate in the creation of the school improvement plan.Including parents in the critical analysis of the data, as outlined in the section of this documentregarding analyzing and interpreting data will give them the tools necessary to offer input into the plan.

Upon completion of the school improvement plan it is vital that the entire school community beinformed of its contents. Schools communicate their improvement plans in a variety of ways includingnewsletters, web postings and school council minutes. Making the improvement plan a key area offocus for every school council meeting will ensure that parents and community members remaininformed of improvement efforts throughout the year.


Step 4. Creating/Reviewing/Updating the Improvement Plan

Once all of the relevant data on EQAO and EQUIP have been analyzed, the school and board mustdetermine the priorities on which to focus their improvement efforts. It has been suggested in the EICpublication School Improvement Planning: A Handbook for Principals, Teachers, and School Councilsthat three planning areas be addressed:

� Curriculum delivery� School environment� Parental/community involvement

Many boards have developed their own processes for creating improvement plans and determiningspecific goals on which to focus. A detailed process for establishing school improvement plans isoutlined in the above-mentioned EIC publication. All effective improvement plans should identifyclear goals and should specify:

� strategies that will take place to achieve those goals� indicators of success� timelines with status updates or progress notes� resources needed to accomplish the goals� responsibilities� performance targets

The York Region District School Board has established a template for schools which includes settingpriorities, a goal statement, strategies to reach the goals, indicators to address desired results, resourcesallocated, responsibility, timelines, process comments, data collected to support improvement and dateof review.

StrategiesChoosing the strategies that will make a difference to student achievement is a critical step inimprovement planning. Some of the questions a school team might ask to determine appropriatestrategies are:� What specific actions will we take to improve student achievement in this area?� What does current research say about instruction that might be helpful to us?� What specific teaching strategies must we focus on to improve student achievement?� What specific professional development is needed to assist teachers in the curriculum area?� What specific teaching strategies have proven successful?� What do we need to do in the classroom or at the system level that is different from what we are

currently doing in order to improve student achievement?� What strategies will move our students currently achieving at level two to the provincial standard

of level three?

Strategies for improvement must be very specific and focused; they should take the form ofactions that will occur in the school or at the board level that will make substantial difference tostudent achievement. Although it was not a requirement during the previous planning cycle,many school boards have already begun to include the secondary panel in order to provide aseamless continuum of improvement. The plan for the Hastings and Prince Edward DistrictSchool Board, for example, addresses Grades 1 through 12.


Similarly, in Peel, “The District is also developing a five-stage literacy plan that will support studentsand schools in preparing for success on the Ontario Secondary School Literacy Test. The plan willaddress the strategies and training necessary for middle schools and secondary schools.”

Strategies must be reviewed on a regular basis to determine whether or not they are successful inimproving student achievement or the conditions for students to achieve.

The Toronto District School Board plan’s strategy is to create a central database containing reports anddata for all elementary schools, students, subjects and grades, together with information about otherfactors that influence achievement, such as absenteeism, mobility and intervention programming. Thisstrategy for monitoring student achievement includes the Developmental Reading Assessment, EQAOassessments and report card data and will allow the board to track student achievement over severalyears to identify consistent patterns at the student, school and board levels.

Strategies need to address the needs of those students already scoring at acceptable and high levels, aswell as those within the bottom quartile. Some boards have identified specific strategies to meet theneeds of students with low levels of achievement.

The Greater Essex District School Board’s plan identifies schools with scores in the lowest third in theEQAO tests. These schools will participate in an intensive professional development program for bothteachers and administrators and will receive additional resources to support their participation in thetrainer model for schools based in service from Grades 1 through 7.

Action research is another strategy that has been incorporated by a number of school boards as a usefulway of assisting teachers in the process of change. Through action research, teachers can tryinnovations and determine their practical usefulness. Action research offers classroom teachers theopportunity to become innovators and researchers in the familiar context of their own schools and withtheir own students. If the innovation is successful in promoting increased student achievement, localteachers can become change advocates and can encourage other teachers to adopt the practice. Peerteachers’ experience is often more persuasive than expert theory. Both the York Region District SchoolBoard and the Grand Erie District School Board have a multitude of action research projects at localschools.

For example, the Grand Erie District School Board reported: “School Board Action Researchprojects …resulted in a remarkable improvement in Grade 6 mathematical problem solving.The percentage of students in Levels 3 and 4 went from 24 per cent to 42 per cent. In Grade 3problem solving, there was an increase in the percentage of students in Levels 3 and 4 from 21per cent to 77 per cent. A focus on improving girls’ attitudes towards mathematics in Grade 6 resultedin improved attitudes of over 22 per cent.”


Indicators of SuccessIndicators of success provide schools and boards with standards against which they can measure theirprogress towards a goal. These should be measurable, observable and performance based. To helpdetermine indicators of success, a planning team might ask:

� How will we know that we have achieved our goal?� What will be different for the student?� What evidence must we gather to determine our success in meeting the goal?

EQAO data, report card data and any other data that the school or board may have will all be useful inanalyzing the success of a school or board plan. Ongoing formative and summative evaluation can beused to measure progress throughout the course of implementation.

Indicators of success must be linked to a specific strategy in order to determine whether or not it hasaccomplished what it was intended to do.

The Toronto Catholic District School Board plan provides this example:Strategy: The Fifth Block initiative addresses the needs of our youngest learners in Grades 1 and 2.It is an early intervention program designed to provide additional support to students who need toimprove their word study and reading skills. This program compliments the Balanced Literacyframework used for instruction in the regular classroom. It is a short-term intervention program inwhich students receive (within a small group setting) one hour of intensive direct instruction in WordStudy and Guided Reading. Grade 1 students participate from February to May. Grade 2 studentsparticipate from September to January.� Fifth Block teachers have a month of in-service training on teaching strategies, student selection

and implementation process� Fifth Block principals have in-service training on the selection and implementation process in

their school communities.Indicators of Success:� Fifth Block assessment information including Running Records (gathered from Fifth Block staff

and the Research Department) demonstrates improvement� Feedback from parents (the Research Department institute a detailed plan to collect data on

student achievement connected with Fifth Block)� Classroom and Fifth Block teachers work in partnership to select, teach and support program

participants� Key practices in Fifth Block classrooms are included in regular instruction

Timelines and Status Updates or Progress NotesIt is important to remember that change takes time. Timelines must allow for data collection andanalysis, reflection, implementation, professional development, status updates and, finally, revisions.Specific timelines allow staff to have an overview of the entire plan and to not feel overloaded with toomany strategies to implement at once. This also allows the community to understand that improvingstudent achievement is a multi-faceted task that takes time.

Teachers, parents and the principal need opportunities to review the status or progress of the variousstrategies in the plan. All stakeholders must have the opportunity to express their views and offer theiropinions on the progress made. Status updates throughout the year allow the school and board to trynew strategies and remain focused on student improvement.


The London Catholic District School Board sets out a series of time-lines with reflection points,evaluations of impact and mid-point corrections. The board provides status updates in June andDecember and a summary report is presented in March.

ResourcesDetermining what resources may be needed to accomplish the goal has an impact on many decisionsmade at the school and board levels. Both staff and community need to understand the implicationsthat improvement planning has on budget decisions. Improvement in an area of weakness might meanadditional resources are needed to implement the appropriate strategies. For example, this might meanthat both staffing and budget issues must be filtered through the school improvement plan, which willallow the school and parents to focus discussions around fundraising issues and to determine wheremoney will be allocated. In this way, resources are dispersed by the school and board in an informed,focused manner.

ResponsibilitiesAssigning responsibility will ensure that strategies have a champion to support their ongoingimplementation. Improvement plans should include a specific identification of who will do what bywhen. Assigning responsibility to broad staff categories such as “all teachers and principals” may notbe specific enough to be effective. All partners should see themselves and the importance of their rolesin encouraging improvement. In some board plans, specific staff members were identified by name foreach stage of the implementation. For example, the District School Board of Niagara plan articulatedresponsibilities for all partners, including students and superintendents.

Performance TargetsTarget setting allows the school and the board to determine the level of student achievement believedpossible after the strategies in the plan have been implemented. Schools will need to analyze theirEQAO results over a number of years to identify possible trends in student achievement and use thisinformation in conjunction with available classroom and school data to set targets. The improvedachievement of students remains the primary measure of success for improvement efforts.

The Bruce-Grey Catholic District School Board included a strategy to develop a tracking and recordingmechanism to support the Safe Schools initiative. They have set a target of a 10 percent decrease insuspensions and expulsions from the second to the third year of the program.

The York Region District School Board requires all schools to include performance targets in schoolplans. The board plan that focuses on literacy includes a numerical performance target for all studentsin the system.

This year, the Ministry of Education introduced the Early Reading Strategy, a provincial focus for allboards of education in Ontario. An important element in the Early Reading Strategy is the setting oftargets for students from Junior Kindergarten to Grade Three. The success of the improvement plan ismeasured by the results of the annual EQAO Grade 3 Assessment of Reading, Writing andMathematics.

Aggregated data tracking the progress of a class or cohort, classroom data and board data will assist inthis target-setting exercise. The Ontario Ministry of Education’s publication Early Reading: A Guide toSetting Targets for Student Achievement is a useful document for setting targets in early literacy.


Review/UpdateWhile the improvement efforts of the school and board are monitored throughout the school year, ayear-end evaluation or review is an important step in the improvement cycle. Staff, school councils andparents should be given the opportunity to re-examine the data that has been gathered throughout theyear and to discuss the effectiveness of the strategies that have been implemented. It is a time for theschool and board to look at the indicators and evaluate if the strategies have made a difference tostudent achievement. If it is found that a strategy has made no difference to the success of students, adiscussion must take place to determine what the reasons for this may be. It is at this time that thefollowing question should be discussed:

� What should we do that is different than we are currently doing to help us reach our goal andtarget in this area?

This is a time for critical analysis of what might look different in the future to assist students inreaching the goals set for them. Evaluating progress and changing strategies should be viewed as fine-tuning. It is essential that changes to the plan involve revisions to the strategies rather than a rewritingof the goals. A school or board plan is a working document and strategies should be adjusted along theway until the desired results have been attained.

Step 5. Monitoring the Implementation of the Improvement Plan

Improvement takes time. Innovations should be given sufficient time to take hold before making adecision to abandon them because it seems they are not producing instant positive results. Evidenceneeds to be gathered over time to determine if strategies are having the intended result. Ongoingformative evaluation can be used to measure progress throughout the course of implementation. Forexample, indicators of success for an initiative to improve parental involvement could includeincreased response rate to parental surveys, increased parental attendance at board functions, increasednumber of hits on the board’s parental information web page, greater numbers of parent volunteers,more positive parental participation in home and school functions or fewer parental complaints loggedin the board office.

Other applications of these indicators include the identification of shortcomings so that the strategiescan be altered or, if the strategy is not working, to discontinue it. In addition to formative evaluation,many board plans use the EQAO assessment results and contextual data in summative evaluation todetermine the success of various initiatives in improving student learning.

Not all improvements will be immediately apparent in provincial student test scores. For example,improvements in school facilities, school safety or the acquisition of new learning materials willinfluence learning but may not be reflected in test results over the short term. Changes in the EQUIPdata should also be tracked and reported to the community. Capturing and reporting measurableimprovements such as lower student mobility or fewer suspensions or expulsions is important sincethese changes will result in enhanced student achievement results over the long term.

Each indicator must be closely related to a particular strategy, since the indicator is used to trackprogress in the implementation of a strategy. Some examples of indicators might include aggregateboard or school data on such factors as higher student attendance at tutoring sessions, fewer detentionsand disciplinary interventions, or increased student use of library resources.


The Toronto Board provided the following rationale for the selection of the measurement andmonitoring strategy: “Measuring and monitoring student achievement and success allows the system todetermine what progress is being made towards the standards and targets that have been established.Monitoring performance is most effective when trends are measured over several years and whenmultiple sources of information are used. … Teachers also use these sources of data to plan instructionfor the whole class, to meet the needs of individual students, and to work toward annual improvementson the EQAO assessments.”

The Algonquin Lakeshore Catholic District School Board includes monitoring progress with a regularmonthly activity of the Curriculum and Review and Development and Implementation ManagementCommittee. For each improvement strategy, the plan details “Action Taken” and “Next Steps” tochart progress over time, and lists steps both underway and planned for the upcoming year. The London Catholic District School Board sets out a series of time-lines, with reflection points, tochart progress, evaluate impact and make mid-point corrections. The board provides status updates inJune and December and the summary report is presented in March.

The Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board uses a number of approaches to monitor progressand hold schools accountable for implementation.“Implementation is recognized through:� School leadership development sessions� Principals’ cluster meetings� Presentations to trustees at Administrative Council� Board newsletters and Internet postings� Action team activities developed through the System Strategic Planning process� Mentoring program for new principals and vice-principals� Communication with school Community Councils� Professional development initiatives with other boards and professional groups� Data collection of student achievement results� Superintendent/principal meetings to monitor indicators of success”

To enable evaluation and revision, it is advisable to build frequent reflection points into the time frameand initiate a formal process for gathering feedback and adjusting the plan.


Conclusion

As Rick Dufour and Robert Eaker have pointed out5, perhaps because of the factory model thathas had a pervasive influence on the twentieth century, there is a tendency, to think of improvement interms of production: develop a design, identify the sequential steps and follow the blueprint until theproduct is finished and subjected to stringent quality assurance scrutiny. These educators havedeveloped a more useful metaphor:“The processes involved in school improvement are analogous to farming. We must plant the seeds ofschool improvement, cultivate, nurture, and care for them. We must practice patience and celebrate theunfolding of each blossom. We must believe the quality of the lives of our families, friends, andneighbours depends on the success of each harvest – because it does! We must realize one profitablecrop will not be grounds for retirement. We must continually plan, monitor, and model the bestbehaviours and practices known. This will only happen if the process is cyclical, if it becomesinternalized, and if improvement is how we do business every day.”6

5 Dufour, Richard and Eaker, Robert (1998). “Professional Learning Communities at Work: Best Practices for Enhancing

Student Achievement. National Educational Service, Bloomington, Indiana, Reston, Virginia.

6 Dufour, R., Eaker, R., & Ranells, M. (1992) School Improvement and the Art of Visioning, Tennessee EducationalLeadership, XXIV (1), 6-12.


Appendix A – Sample Process of Analyzing the Data

The following sample is intended to illustrate the process that planning teams might use in analyzingand interpreting data. The sample uses data from sources that are available to all school administrators.The school profile is based on the EQUIP data. Student achievement data is based on report card andEQAO data. The data is drawn from a secondary school and reflects the minimum data that would beavailable to a planning team at the school level. A similar profile of data would be available to allschool districts in the province. The planning process for district planning would be similar. While thissample represents data from a secondary school, the planning process and data sources for elementaryschools would be the same.

Secondary School Profile

This Secondary school has the following profile, according to the EQUIP data.

Socio-Economic Status

0 %

5 %

10 %

15 %

20 %

25 %

30 %

35 %

Under $20 $20 - 39.9 $40 - 59.9 $60 - 79.9 $80 - 99.9 $100 +

Income of Family

Per

cen

t o

f S

tud

ents

SchoolBoardProvince

Educational Attainment

0 %

5 %

10 %

15 %

20 %

25 %

30 %

35 %

40 %

45 %

Under 9 Under 12 Finish HS Some Post-sec B.A.

Level of Education Attained

Per

cen

t o

f S

tud

ent

En

roll

men

t b

y n

um

ber

o

f y

ea

rs s

inc

e e

ntr

y i

nto

Ca

na

da

SchoolBoardProvince


Language Background

0.0 %

0.5 %

1.0 %

1.5 %

2.0 %

2.5 %

3.0 %

1 year 2 years 3 years

Number of Years in ESL Program

Per

cen

t o

f S

tud

ents

SchoolBoardProvince

The following questions would be used to focus a group discussion around all of this data:

1. Is there anything in the EQUIP data that you do not understand?2. If so, what would you like clarified?3. For each of the themes, how does the school and board’s indicator data compare to the provincial

EQUIP data?4. Is there anything about the information that you find surprising?5. Is there additional information that the school needs in order to complete the school profile.6. Considering the relationship between each of the indicators and student achievement, is there

anything that concerns you? i.e. what does the literature say about the relationship between thisindicator data and its connection to student achievement.

7. How does the EQUIP data fit with the other school-based school profile data which you haveaccumulated?

8. On the basis of all of the data, which two or three elements of the profile are important to considerin developing the school/board plan?

The discussion around questions 1 and 2 would serve to clarify the data presented. This discussion willpromote the development of a common understanding of the data on the part of the participants. If thisdiscussion does not occur, the danger exists that different people in the group will see the same dataand draw different conclusions. Everyone involved in the planning process needs to be working from ashared understanding of the data.

Questions 3 and 4 begin the process of building the story from the data. The socio-economic dataindicates that this school has a higher proportion of students in lower socio-economic levels than theboard or province. While educational attainment is consistent with board and provincial data, theschool would appear to have a disproportionate number of students who would be classified as ESL,when compared to the proportion in the board. While perhaps not surprising, the socio-economic andlanguage background data would appear to differ somewhat from the board and Provincial profile dataand thus might serve as a focus for the planning process. As the team builds an understanding of thedata, it might choose to focus on other data that would be seen to be more important. A broad-basedapproach to school planning, where all the system partners are involved enhances the possibility that


the team will plan from locally generated data which is important in the context of schoolimprovement.

Question 5 begins to focus the school planning process. In examining the data, the school may generateadditional questions that might support the planning process. As an example, if the school has a higherproportion of students from lower income homes, how many students are working at jobs outside ofschool and how much time are the students, on average, working. Research indicates that students whoworked more then 20 hours per week while in high school are more than twice as likely to leavecollege or university without a degree or diploma compared to students who worked less than 20 hoursper week.7

With respect to socio-economic status, there has been a widening gap in university participation byfamily socio-economic (SES)” when compared to data from 19868.

Research has also examined the questions of expectations for post-secondary school participation bysocio-economic group for both parents and teachers. The research question asked of parents andteachers whether the child would complete university. The following chart summarizes this research.

Higher SES Lower SES

% of Teachers indicating YES 90% 21%

% of Parents indicating YES 78% 62%

*The percentages are extracted from a bar graph and are approximations of the data displayed.

While there was agreement of parents and teachers for higher SES students, teachers did not expectlower SES students to complete university9. If the research on the relationship between teacherexpectation and students success is to be believed, if teachers have high expectations for studentsuccess, then students will attain at a high level; the reverse is also true. Thus the school might focuson setting high expectations for success for all students , as one of its goals for improvement.

Schools might look at the EQUIP data from several different perspectives. Question 7 invited theschool to compare the EQUIP data with other school profile data. Question 8 invites the planning teamto begin to focus the issues. Many issues may arise from the data. If the planning process is to beeffective in enhancing student achievement, the planning team must prioritize the issues and providefocus for action

7 “Determinant of university and community college leaving”, Education Quarterly Review, 2000, Vol. 6 no. 4, p. 148 “University Education, Recent Trends”, Education Quarterly Review, 2000, Vol. 6, no. 4, p. 289 “Parents and Schools: The involvement, participation, and expectations of parents in the education of their children”,Education Quarterly Review, 1999, vol. 5, no. 4, p. 76


Student Achievement Data

As was discussed previously, schools have many sources of achievement data. The most available datais report card and EQAO data. These two data sets illustrate the process that schools might use inexamining student achievement data.

Report Card DataGrade 9 Mathematics

0 %

5 %

10 %

15 %

20 %

25 %

30 %

35 %

80+ 70 - 80 60 - 70 50 - 60 Below 50

Report Card Grade

Per

cen

t o

f S

tud

ents

AcademicApplied

Report Card DataGrade 9 English

0 %

5 %

10 %

15 %

20 %

25 %

30 %

35 %

40 %

45 %

80+ 70 - 80 60 - 70 50 - 60 Below 50

Report Card Grade

Per

cen

t o

f S

tud

ents

AcademicApplied


The questions outlined in Section 2 serve to focus the work of the planning team.

1. Is there anything in the data that you do not understand?2. If so, what would you like clarified?3. What is the relationship between the class-based, report card and EQAO data? Are they

similar/different?4. How do you explain the differences?5. Is there anything about the information that you find surprising?6. Is there anything that concerns you?7. How does the information fit with your feelings about how the students at this school (in this

board) are doing?8. Are the students doing as well as we expected them to do?

School and EQAO Comparison Grade 9 Applied Mathematics

0 %

5 %

10 %

15 %

20 %

25 %

30 %

35 %

40 %

45 %

80+ 70 - 80 60 - 70 50 - 60 Below 50

Report Card Grade

Per

cen

t o

f S

tud

ents

SchoolEQAO

School and EQAO Comparison Grade 9 Academic Mathematics

0 %

5 %

10 %

15 %

20 %

25 %

30 %

35 %

40 %

45 %

80+ 70 - 80 60 - 70 50 - 60 Below 50

Report Card Grade

Per

cen

t o

f S

tud

ents

SchoolEQAO


The discussion around questions 1 and 2 would serve to clarify the data presented. This discussion willensure that all of the participants in the planning process share a common understanding of the data. Ifthis discussion does not occur, the danger exists that different people in the group will see the samedata and draw different conclusions. Everyone in the planning process needs to be working from acommon understanding of the data.

Questions 3 and 4 begin to process of building the story from the data. The planning team might beginby focusing on the difference between the scores in mathematics and english. It might also focus on thesignificant difference in achievement between the Academic and Applied students, responding to thequestions:

Are they similar/different?How do you explain the differences?

Considering the difference between the Mathematics and English report card marks the planning teamexamining this data set might discuss whether the applied program is meeting the needs of this groupof students. The team may wish to consider some of the school profile data at this stage and askquestions such as:

• Is there additional available data which might help develop an understanding of why appliedstudents are not being as successful as academic students?

• Are the programs geared to the population that they are intended to serve?• Are applied students disproportionately represented in the group of students who are working

longer hours in after school jobs, etc.? (recalling the research cited in the discussion of the EQUIPdata.

Recalling the article by John Charlton cited in Section 2, that school concluded that “the single biggestdetriment to student achievement was the non-completion of work”10.This school then developed strategies to ensure that students did do the work assigned. Implementationof this plan had a significant impact on student achievement.

The team could then focus on the difference in achievement as indicated by report card and EQAOdata. Remembering that these are the same students the team might spend some time responding tothe question:

How do you explain the differences?

The next set of questions serves to increase an understanding of the data as well as focus the planningprocess.

Considering the difference between report card and EQAO results in mathematics for the same groupof students, schools might discuss a set of questions such as1. Did the students do as well as you expected on the EQAO tests?2. What are some of the differences between the EQAO results and the report card marks?3. What are some of the differences between the work the students did for the EQAO assessment and

the class-based work in mathematics?

10 Charlton, John (201) “Making the Most of Accountability Policies: It’s a Matter of Attitude”, Orbit Vol. 32, No. 1, 2001p. 41


An examination of the anchor booklets published for the EQAO assessment would be important inorder to answer some of these questions.

Before a focus for improvement is created, there must be an understanding of the data that is beingused and confidence in that data. The very large difference in the report card and EQAO data for thisschool would be a concern. Unless the planning team takes the time to reconcile these differences, theteam could decide on areas for improvement that may not be the real issues requiring focus. Forexample, without reconciling the differences, the planning team might accept the school-based dataand decide to work on an area of mathematics, or focus on a particular group of students. However, thereal issues might relate to whether the teaching staff has a clear understanding of the standards that arereflected in the new curriculum. Moreover, helping students to understand the standards is animportant feature of assisting students to be successful. If the issue is developing fuller understandingof the standards, working on another area for improvement, in the absence of an understanding of thestandards would probably not lead to enhanced student achievement. Spending the time to ensureconfidence in the data, to ensure that the picture that the data creates is authentic will ensure that theultimate school plan is centered on the real needs of the students, providing a clear focus for schoolimprovement.

Having developed an understanding of the data, the team is now ready to focus on goals and strategies.This process is outlined in the EIC publication, School Improvement Planning: A Handbook forPrincipals, Teachers and School Councils and will not, therefore be discussed in this appendix.However, one final illustration might serve to support the development of an understanding of how allof the pieces fit together to support enhanced student achievement. The handbook recommends thatschools plan in three areas simultaneously:

1. Curriculum Delivery2. School Environment3. Parental Involvement

The handbook and this appendix have discussed the data sets which support this planning process.


Appendix B – Communications Planning Worksheet

Issue:

Background:

Problem or Opportunity:

Communications Objective:

Target Audience:

Positioning Statement:

KEY MESSAGE SUPPORTING EVIDENCE QUOTE OR STORY1.

2.

3.


Appendix C – Analysis of Lessons Learned in the Review of the 2000/2001 Plans

Each year there has been an improvement in the nature and scope of the board submissions. Last year,board plans were significantly more comprehensive, including most of the components suggested inthe EQAO template for the last planning cycle. The following section details the lessons learnedrelated to each of the steps of improvement planning suggested as part of the 2000 – 2001 planningcycle.

Classroom/School/ School Board AlignmentThere was a range in the degree of school autonomy or centralized board control. Some schoolboards began with a grass-roots approach. School plans were compiled first, and then the boardplan was developed to respond to the needs schools identified.

Another approach was for school boards to develop an overall system plan first, together withrepresentatives of key stakeholder groups, including school-level personnel. The board planestablished major system priorities, strategies, and resource allocations. School planning couldthen proceed once these parameters were known.

Involving the PartnersIn some boards, a small board team took on the responsibility for developing the plan. Anotherapproach involved representatives drawn from board staff and trustees, schools, parents andschool councils and the community.

Timing of the involvement of partners also varied. In some cases, a small board-level team firstdrafted the plan and feedback from other representatives was sought later. Others included theinput of these representatives from the outset, either through a series of meetings with thevarious groups or by including their representatives in the planning team.

Analyzing the DataSome boards concentrated on comparing their EQAO assessment results with provincialaverages, determining where their students met or exceeded that benchmark. Most reports alsohighlighted increases in student scores over the previous year. One useful approach was to usecomparisons of student results for particular areas (for example, if problem solving inmathematics has always been the weakest area of achievement) over the years to evaluate theeffectiveness of improvement strategies (namely those related to improving this skill).

During the last planning cycle, there was also an increased emphasis on training for staff instatistical analysis and how to use data to determine appropriate improvement planningstrategies.

In addition to the analysis of provincial assessment results and contextual data, some boardsdeveloped their own surveys and feedback forms to provide more extensive internal data onwhich to base their decisions. Some boards also compiled additional school-level information tomonitor program effectiveness and track students’ progress.


Identifying and Sharing Successful PracticeSome boards delegated the identification of examples of successful practice to schoolprincipals. These practices were then discussed among principals at their regular meetings.

Other plans outlined a number of methods for identifying exemplary practice. These plansestablished formal opportunities for practitioners to share their insights and provided trainingon the transfer of successful practice to more classrooms across the system. Some boards alsobroadened their network to share information and resources on exemplary programs with otherboards and community partners.

Selecting StrategiesA few board plans relied primarily on continuing their current activities. While it is importantto establish continuity and provide adequate time for implementation, including a process foridentifying and abandoning strategies that are not producing improvement is also important. Amore proactive approach was to make changes to the status quo, research and try alternativeinstructional methods.

In order to acknowledge the advantages of continuity and innovation, some boards categorizedinitiatives in their plans as completed, continuing, or new. Such an approach indicates progresson the continuum of improvement and demonstrates how new initiatives are building on thefoundation of those in progress, or already completed.

This year, to a greater extent than previously, the focus of new strategies went beyond Grades 3and 6 students and Grades 3 and 6 test results. There were still some plans that proposedlimited initiatives such as “Give Grade 3 and 6 students practice with multiple-choicequestions”; but for most, the goal was improved learning for all students, a goal which goeswell beyond test-taking skills and higher provincial test scores.

Assigning ResponsibilitySome board plans were vague, assigning responsibility to broad staff categories such as“Administration”. Some plans were very clear about specifically which board staff memberswere responsible for each aspect of implementation.

As a sense of ownership is critical to the success of the overall planning process, a sense ofpersonal responsibility is critical to the success of each component. In some plans, differentboard staff members were responsible for each aspect with, for example, training delivered byone team and monitored by another.

Determining Time LinesAs with responsibility, some plans were highly specific. Some boards staged implementation sothat progress could be monitored closely and slippage could be identified early and corrected.In the more comprehensive plans, time lines were given, not only for implementation but alsofor monitoring and particularly for reporting on progress.

Selecting Indicators of SuccessThe objective of these indicators is to provide criteria for ongoing formative evaluation,throughout the process of implementation. However, some boards chose only indicators ofsuccess that could be used at the very end of the planning cycle, such as improved provincial


test scores. The more detailed plans used indicators that answered the question “Is it working?”rather than “Did it work?”, which could only be answered when it was too late for mid-yearadjustments.

Monitoring and EvaluationIn future planning cycles more attention needs to be paid to monitoring and evaluation. Someplans were vague about who was responsible for monitoring, when it would occur, and how itwould be reported, for example, “Schools will review the effectiveness of their plans from timeto time”.

Some board plans assigned this responsibility to specific staff members and included a formalmechanism for reporting regularly on progress and (if required) for supporting initiatives thatwere faltering.

While the monitoring function differed from one component of a plan to another, the lessconcrete approaches tended to be process (rather than result) oriented. For example, oneproposed strategy to address the gender gap in achievement had as its indicator of effectivenessthat teachers would simply become more aware of gender issues. A more ambitious goal wouldhave been to select an indicator related to reducing the gender gap in student learning. In thisexample, monitoring could include data – such as greater use of library resources by boys orimprovement in male students’ reading scores in classroom assessment.

Many boards had set measurable targets for improvement. There were various approaches totarget setting. In some boards, these targets were expressed as a percentage of students whowill achieve at the provincial standard in EQAO assessments. In others, these targets wereexpressed as a percentage shift from the baseline. For example, “there will be a 10 percentdecrease in the number of reported bullying incidents”. The use of targets helps to shift thefocus of improvement planning from process to impact.

CommunicationCommunication has also received a greater emphasis in this year’s plans. The activeinvolvement of a broad spectrum of participants provided an avenue of communication bothinternally within the system and externally to the community. In the more comprehensiveplans, board communications networks used multiple approaches: providing information innewsletters, posting the plan on the web site, distributing plan summaries, and presenting theplan at public meetings. To engage public and parental support, many plans were presented innon-technical language that could be readily understood.

In summary, with each year of improvement planning, there has been a steady improvement in thecomplexity and comprehensiveness of board plans. As we look ahead to the next planning cycle, thegoal will be to continue building on the established foundation, maintaining the tabular formatpreferred by the majority of boards and continuing to be more concise and focused on results.


Appendix D – Summary of Board Improvement Plans, 2000-2001

Algoma District School Board

Director of Education:Ray Rosario

Number of Grade 3 and Grade 6 students participating in EQAO testing:1,882

Number of schools involved:39

Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� Preparations to extend action planning from the elementary to the secondary panel to establish a

continuum of improvement� Use of a common template and guidelines for school action planning to promote the alignment of

school and system initiatives� Focus on broad, systemic initiatives to support school-based strategies

Areas for Future Attention:� More detailed time lines� Inclusion of measurable, quantified indicators of success

Algonquin and Lakeshore Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Gregory Cosgrove



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� monitoring on a monthly basis to ensure implementation and chart progress� researching to collect information for data-driven decision making� using action research at the school level to promote change in instructional practice� establishing linkages with other learning communities� implementing broad-based systemic initiatives with clear linkages to school improvement efforts� providing formal procedures for schools to apply for assistance for implementation� developing a comprehensive, detailed communications strategy

Areas for Future Attention:� providing specific support for students achieving in the bottom quartile


Avon Maitland District School Board

Director of Education:Lorne Rachlis



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� preparations to extend action planning from the elementary to the secondary panel to establish a

continuum of improvement� provision of support for staff in the interpretation of data and test results

Areas for Future Attention:� describing your board’s system wide initiatives, rather than school-based strategies� including time lines and the assignment of specific responsibilities at the board level

Bluewater District School Board

Director of Education:Janet Glasspool



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� comprehensive improvement initiatives extending from Grade 1 through 9� a formal process to identify and share successful practices� initiatives to meet the needs of students achieving at level 1 or below� use of multiple sources of information, such as: Balanced Literacy measures, Canadian Test of

Cognitive Skills, Early Years Development Instrument, and classroom assessment results that allcontribute to data-driven decision making

Areas for Future Attention:� a process for parental input into the plan� procedures for aligning the school improvement planning process with the board plan� communicating the plan at the school and board levels


Brant Haldimand Norfolk Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Joseph Rapai



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� detailed school and system tracking/monitoring templates� extensive chart providing comprehensive information� summaries of responsibilities outlining what teachers, principals, and he board will undertake� specific information on required resources

Areas for Future Attention:� use of a common template format in 2002

Bruce-Grey Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Vern Batte

Number of Grade 3 and Grade 6 students participating in EQAO testing:624


Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� strategies to promote parental involvement to support children’s learning at home, such as

information sessions, packages, and student agendas� selection of measurable indicators of success, such as the 80% of parents initialling children’s

agenda books

Areas for Future Attention:� description of the new initiatives undertaken at the board level to support improved student

learning


Catholic District School Board of Eastern Ontario

Director of Education:Gregory McNally



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� highly specific strategies for improvement with clearly defined assignment of responsibility and

time lines for implementation� extended action planning from the elementary to the secondary panel to establish a continuum of

improvement� an inclusive planning process, involving all participants� support for participants in the interpretation and analysis of data� clear progression from last year’s planning cycle to this year’s� clear linkages from the school to the board action plan� procedures for collecting additional contextual data to enable data-driven decision making� initiatives to support students achieving in the bottom quartile� a detailed plan for communication

Areas for Future Attention:� use of a common template format in 2002

District School Board of Niagara

Director of Education:William McLean



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� provision of research materials and resources to support school action planning� school visits to review progress on school level implementation� support for principals relating to school planning initiatives and assessment literacy

Areas for Future Attention:� strategies to address the learning needs of low-achieving students� measurable indicators of success� specific assignment of responsibilities at the board level� detailed time lines� processes for linking the system wide board plan with school plans


District School Board Ontario North East

Director of Education:Mark Hall



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� a formal process to coordinate school and board level planning processes� a focus on increased parental involvement� identification of resource needs to support implementation� strategies to address the gender gap in achievement

Areas for Future Attention:� more detailed time lines� strategies to meet the needs of low-achieving students

Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Michael Bator



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� monitoring on a monthly basis to ensure implementation and chart progress� researching to collect information for data-driven decision making� using action research at the school level to promote change in instructional practice� establishing linkages with other learning communities� implementing broad-based systemic initiatives with clear linkages to school improvement efforts� providing formal procedures for schools to apply for assistance for implementation� developing a comprehensive, detailed communications strategy

Areas for Future Attention:� providing specific support for students achieving in the bottom quartile


Durham Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Grant Andrews



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� networking with other organizations, such as the Peel District School Board, the Dufferin-Peel

Catholic District School Board, and the Catholic Curriculum Cooperative� establishing initiatives to promote greater parental involvement� providing training for principals and a template to support school level improvement planning

Areas for Future Attention:� include a description of strategies to support low-performing students

Durham District School Board

Director of Education:Grant Yeo



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� a comprehensive and inclusive process for the development of the board plan� alignment of the system and school level initiatives� support for schools in improvement planning� a formal procedure for sharing successful practice� a thorough analysis of all relevant information to promote data-driven decision making� attention to the gender gap� the web-based information management system� the planned extension of initiatives to include the secondary panel providing a continuum of

improvement� the determination of “statistical neighbour” schools� remediation strategies to support low-performing students

Areas for Future Attention:� include a description of time lines for implementation� include the board process for monitoring the effectiveness of these improvement initiatives


Grand Erie District School Board

Director of Education:Peter Moffatt



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� promotion of action research at the school level with board funding support� application of principles for short, medium and long-term goals for improvement� gathering of additional sources of board level information to support data-driven decision makingAreas for Future Attention:� description of initiatives undertaken at the board level to support school level strategies and the

process used to monitor implementation

Greater Essex County District School Board

Director of Education:Mary Jean Gallagher



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� extending action planning from the elementary to the secondary panel to establish a continuum of

improvement� supporting schools in planning to ensure the alignment of school and board level initiatives� considering contextual information to support data-driven decision making� establishing initiatives to address the needs of schools with particular challenges� promoting a strong focus on parental involvement� providing specific, clear assignment of responsibility for implementation� outlining the detailed resource allocation to support implementation

Areas for Future Attention:� inclusion of measurable, quantified indicators of success


Halton Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Fred Sweeney



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� provision of professional development activities for teachers with a direct focus on areas of

concern identified in the assessment results� involvement of a broad range of participation in the action planning process� establishment of a formal process to share best practice

Areas for Future Attention:� including detailed time lines for implementation; and� selecting indicators of success to determine the effectiveness of the identified strategies

Halton District School Board

Director of Education:Dusty Papke



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� a process to establish links between the school and board level action planning processes to ensure

alignment of strategies and resources� extension of planning from the elementary to the secondary panel to establish a continuum of

improvement� tracking of learning gains for a sample of students in grade levels not participating in the provincial

assessment program� follow-up on professional development activities to promote a lasting impact and changes in

practice� establishment of teams with specific responsibilities related to implementation� collection of additional information to enable data-driven decision making

Areas for Future Attention:� detailing the time lines for implementation


Hamilton-Wentworth Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Marcel J. Castura



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� development of system resources, such as the workbooks for math and writing;� development of strategies to assist students working at lower achievement levels; and� support for professional development opportunities

Areas for Future Attention:� detailing the time lines for implementation; and� describing the board level procedures used to monitor and support the school improvement process

Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board

Director of Education:Merv Matler



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� the collection of additional survey information, such as the School Council survey, to enhance

data-driven decision making;� board strategies to support at-risk readers;� the Peel-Wentworth Numeracy Project, which combines board resources;� comprehensive monitoring strategies for implementation;� provision of current research information on gender differences in achievement across subject

areas;� designation of tasks in the gradient of “completed,” “continuing,” and “new” tasks provides a

continuum of improvement; and� specific strategies and resources to meet the needs of ESL learners

Areas for Future Attention:� describing the board methodology for identifying and generalizing successful practice


Hastings and Prince Edward District School Board

Director of Education:Larry Langdon



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� extending action planning from the elementary to the secondary system to establish a continuum of

improvement;� supporting schools in the interpretation of data, action planning, and implementation;� coordinating system, school and school council initiatives;� emphasising the role of parental involvement; and� researching to identify effective instructional practice

Areas for Future Attention:� detailing time lines, including detailed time lines for implementation; and� selecting indicators of success to help determine the effectiveness of selected strategies

Huron-Perth Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Gaetan Blanchette



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� a process to establish links between the school and board level action planning processes� the extension of planning from the elementary to the secondary panel providing for a continuum of

improvement� tracking learning gains for a sample of students in grade levels not participating in the provincial

assessment program� follow-up on professional development activities to promote a lasting impact and changes in

practice� establishment of teams with specific responsibilities related to implementation of the plans� collection of additional information to support data-driven decision makingAreas for Future Attention:� detailing time lines for implementation


Huron-Superior Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Cecile Somme



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� extension of action planing from the elementary to the secondary panel to promote a continuum of

improvement across the system� the consideration of resources required for implementation of the action plan in the budget

allocation process

Areas for Future Attention:� describing system wide initiatives, time lines, and indicators of success at the board level to

support the school-based strategies

Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board

Director of Education:Dick Malowney



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� a strong focus on improving students’ literacy skills� inclusion of all elementary subject areas� clear identification of professional development provision;� an evaluation component to determine the effectiveness of strategies� utilization of community partnerships

Areas for Future Attention:� specific assignment of responsibilities� more detailed time lines for implementation� the inclusion of measurable, quantified indicators of success


Keewatin-Patricia District School Board

Director of Education:David McLeod



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� specific strategies to address the needs of at-risk students, such as the Reading Recovery program� developing community partnerships with, for example, the Health Unit, Literacy Association,

Friendship Centre, and the Rotary Club� collection of evaluation information to assess the effectiveness of strategies such as the survey on

the Grades 3, 4, and 5 resource material

Areas for Future Attention:� provide specific assignment of responsibilities for board-level strategies and time lines for

implementation

Kenora Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Craig Allan



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� support for schools in improving students’ literacy skills� strategies to improve parental involvement� provision of additional support for low-performing students� development of templates to assist principals in developing action plans

Areas for Future Attention:� include more detailed time lines for implementation


Lakehead District School Board

Director of Education:Marilyn Gouthro




improvement� comprehensive, ongoing professional development planning with a process to monitor progress

(including pre- and post-test provisions together with surveys to track improvements)� comprehensive strategies for parental communication� specific strategies for low-performing students� inclusion of all elementary curriculum areas� a procedure to address gender issues, with particular reference to the university research project� establishment of linkages with other partners, such as the Thunder Bay Art Gallery, the

Conservatory of Music, and district health to forge larger educational and community connections� support for school-based action planning, including both training for principals and a consistent

template to promote alignment with board level strategies� a formal procedure for monitoring implementation of school plans� development of a range of broad, systemic initiatives to support school-based strategies

Areas for Future Attention:� submit action plans for improvement using a common template format in 2002

Lambton Kent District School Board

Director of Education:Paul de Sadeleer



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� a review of completed initiatives of last year’s plan� a comprehensive process to include all elementary subject areas� procedures for monitoring implementation at the classroom, school and district levels� communication of improvement plans at each level� forums for review to involve teachers, principals, and school councils, culminating with the Board

Report in April


Areas for Future Attention:� assigning specific responsibility for initiatives at the board level with time lines to chart progress

and indicators of success to evaluate effectiveness

Limestone District School Board

Director of Education:Barry O’Connor



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� an inclusive process used by the board to involve senior staff, the elementary curriculum

department, principals, school council committee, school administrators, and teacherrepresentatives

� coordination of board assessments and the provincial assessment program in a continuum ofimprovement

� establishment of a culture of assessment through a number of related strategies� development of targeted initiatives for students achieving below the provincial standard� addressing the gender gap in achievement� development of a formal procedure for monitoring implementation of the improvement planAreas for Future Attention:� more detailed time lines� inclusion of measurable, quantified indicators of success to determine effectiveness

London Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Patrick Dunne



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� detailed and specific assignment of responsibilities and identification of resources for each strategy� development of a proposal to increase action research and evaluation projects� networking with other boards and the adaptation of resource materials, such as the Peel Board

Continuum document� a series of linked strategies to address the gender gap� a process for providing additional support for low-achieving schools


� provision of formal support for parental involvement� provision of a template for schools to promote the co-ordination of school and board action

planning� focus on monitoring the implementation of the board action plan� in particular, the board process for supporting school action planning and implementation

Areas for Future Attention:� describing the board’s strategies to address the learning needs of low-achieving students� including measurable, quantified indicators of success

Niagara Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Angelo Di Ianni



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� detailed and specific assignment of responsibility for each strategy� a comprehensive plan for providing professional development� data-driven decision making using information from a variety of sources, such as the board survey

of current classroom materials� strategies to address the gender gap

Areas for Future Attention:� specific strategies to address the learning needs of low-achieving students� measurable, quantified indicators of success� a process for monitoring implementation� processes for linking the board plan with school plans


Nipissing-Parry Sound Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Gerard H. Gadhoury



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� use of action research to identify best practice� a process to coordinate school and board level action planning� use of data to inform decision making� strategies to promote parental involvement to support their children’s learning at home� targeted strategies to identify and provide support for high-needs students

Areas for Future Attention:� use of action research to identify best practice� a process to coordinate school and board level action planning� use of data to inform decision making� strategies to promote parental involvement to support their children’s learning at home� targeted strategies to identify and provide support for high-needs students

Northeastern Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Larry Yaguchi



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� a comprehensive communications strategy� a formal process to involve education partners to support student learning� expanded professional development provisions

Areas for Future Attention:� include a description of strategies to support low-achieving students


Near North District School Board

Director of Education:M.B. Moore

Number of Grade 3 and Grade 6 students participating in EQAO testing:

Number of schools involved:

Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� inclusion of elementary and secondary initiatives to provide a continuum of improvement� targeted strategies to address the needs of at-risk students� provision of a resource handbook to help parents support their children’s learning at home� development of a process to ensure that the school and board improvement planning processes are

coordinated� development of partnerships, such as the linkages with the Toronto Dominion Bank and Canadore

College

Areas for Future Attention:� inclusion of measurable, quantified indicators of success� specific assignment of responsibilities at the board level� detailed time lines

Northwest Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Carol-Lynne Oldale



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� a comprehensive process for involvement in the planning process� establishment of the Student Achievement Committee with a focus on action planning� development of partnerships, for example, with the Rainy River District School Board and the

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education� formal system strategies to share and promote best practices� strategies to promote parental involvement to support their children’s learning at home

Areas for Future Attention:� describing more system level initiatives rather than strategies for implementation at the school and

classroom levels� specific time lines� targeted strategies to support low-achieving students


Northern District School Authority Board

Director of Education:Robert G. Pearce



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� a comprehensive process for involvement in developing the plan� strategies to promote parental involvement to support their children’s learning at home� specific strategies to identify and provide support for high-needs students which pose a significant

challenge for your board� linkages between goals, progress, and follow-up to ensure continuity in implementation� use of measurable indicators of success to monitor progress� establishment of community partnershipsAreas for Future Attention:

� provide more detail in the time lines for implementation

Ottawa-Carleton Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Phillip A. Rocco



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� use of a range of assessment data, such as results of the provincial assessment program, Canadian

Achievement Tests CAT/2, and System Testing� provision of a number of resources relating to assessment, such as the Testing Program Handbook

for Parents, the Testing program binder, System Examinations: A Practical Guide for Students, andothers

� strategies for improvement in both the elementary and secondary panels for a continuum ofimprovement

� training for teachers and staff and the development of implementation teams at the school level� remediation strategies to meet the needs of low-achieving students� regular training on curriculum initiatives for principals and superintendents to support the

implementation of action plans

Areas for Future Attention:� describing the board approach to monitoring and evaluation


Ottawa-Carleton District School Board

Director of Education:James P. Grieve



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� use of a range of contextual and other data to inform decision making� extending action planning from the elementary to the secondary panel to establish a continuum of

improvement� support for the school planning process to ensure the alignment of school and board level

initiatives� training in the analysis of assessment results and corrective action through school improvement

planning� development and distribution of resources to assist school improvement planning, such as the

School Improvement Planning Guide and Making Effective Use of Statistics and Test Results� provision of funding and training to support school level implementation� the development of partnerships with business, health, training consortia, and provincial

organizations such as AERO and OAME� use of action research to identify and promote successful practice� a detailed process to monitor progress, with clearly defined responsibilities and time lines� inclusion of specific initiatives to address the needs of schools and students with particular

challenges, for example, early literacy and numeracy interventions, split grades, and ESL� family support for newcomers through the Reception Centre

Areas for Future Attention:� inclusion of measurable, quantified indicators of success

Peel District School Board

Director of Education:Harold Braithwaite



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� provision of multi-year plans for identified schools with declining or static results� a process to monitor and revise these plans according to future results� coordination of elementary and secondary initiatives to provide consistency and follow through in

the improvement of reading and writing achievement


� clear and specific identification of board staff responsibilities� training initiatives to support, coordinate, and assist in the alignment of school and board planning at

the system, field office, and individual school levels

Areas for Future Attention:� identification of a more extensive range of indicators of success in addition to the use of assessment

and survey data

Peterborough Victoria Northumberland andClarington Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Michael Langois



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� support to schools in planning to ensure the alignment of school and board level initiatives;� training for principals on data analysis and action planning� provision of a board template to guide the school level process� linkage of improvement strategies with assessment results� a focus on in-service and staff development� inclusion of an ESL focus to respond to student needs� clear and specific assignment of responsibilities, time lines, and the allocation of resources required

for implementation� collection of board-specific data to inform professional development needs and extend data-driven

decision making

Areas for Future Attention:� measurable indicators of success� a process for monitoring and evaluation� strategies to meet the needs of low-performing students


Rainbow District School Board

Director of Education:Gord Ewin



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� specific time lines to chart progress� a strong focus on professional development to support system priorities� initiatives, such as the conference “For Parents by Parents” and the board resource “Tips for

Parents” to promote parent involvement� expansion of the pilot World Class Schools initiative to disseminate best practice� Administrative Council monitoring of plans for designated “target schools”� a comprehensive process for gathering feedback on plan implementation involving program staff,

superintendents, principals, and school councils� collection of contextual information, such as the school parents’ surveys, to enhance data-driven

decision making

Areas for Future Attention:� using measurable indicators of success� including strategies focussed on the needs of low-achieving students

Rainy River District School Board

Director of Education:Lorne Keon




improvemen� promoting parental involvement initiatives, such as the book-bag program� establishing connections with community partners� implementing strategies to meet the needs of low-achieving students, such as the Reading

Recovery Program

Areas for Future Attention:� assigning responsibility to specific board staff for the implementation of each strategy together

with time lines� developing a process for monitoring and evaluating impacts


Renfrew County Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:John Stunt



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� drawing on other networks, such as the Eastern Ontario Staff Development and Eastern Ontario

Catholic Curriculum Cooperative members to identify successful practices� identification of helpful research, such as the Reaching Higher Foundation documents and OECTA

units� use of multiple indicators, such as provincial assessment, CCC mid-year results, and qualitative

measures such as surveys and dialogue in data-driven decision making

Areas for Future Attention:� developing initiatives to address the needs of low-performing students� establishing a formal process for monitoring and evaluating impacts of your strategies for

improvement

Renfrew County District School Board

Director of Education:Peter Hiscott



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� an inclusive process for the development of the board action plan� a focus on parental involvement to support their children’s learning at home� specific strategies with clearly defined responsibilities, resources, time frames, indicators, and a

process for monitoring implementation� identification of both short and long term goals.

Areas for Future Attention:� development of strategies to address the needs of low-performing students


Simcoe County District School Board

Director of Education:Sharon Bate



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� support for the school planning process to ensure the alignment of school and board level

initiatives� specific strategies to support students performing at low levels of achievement, such as the Reading

Recovery program in eight schools� professional development to enhance instruction and assessment.

Areas for Future Attention:� assigning specific responsibilities to board staff for implementation� determining time lines� developing a process to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of strategies for improvement

Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Kevin J. Kobus



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� initiatives to meet the needs of low-achieving students, such as the Reading Recovery program� comprehensive strategies to identify and implement successful practices� detailed communications strategies� parental involvement in the planning process� alignment of school and board level planing processes

Areas for Future Attention:� inclusion of measurable indicators of success


St Clair Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Margaret Nelson



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� specific strategies to meet the needs of low-achieving students� sharing successful practices, for example through the electronic Assessment and Evaluation

Conference� development of board resources to support improvement such as “Building Literacy”

Areas for Future Attention:� development of indicators of success and strategies to monitor the effectiveness of the

improvement initiatives

Sudbury Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Robert Richer



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� a comprehensive process for developing the board action plan and aligning school-based planning

efforts� provision of resources to support implementation� promotion of parental involvement to support student learning, for example the feasibility study on

parental training for home tutoring� detailed time lines to monitor implementation� a broad communications strategy

Areas for Future Attention:� development of specific strategies to support low-achieving students


Superior North Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Len Bishop



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� professional development provisions to improve instruction and assessment� support in the analysis of EQAO data and identifying curriculum issues for action� provision of a support network on assessment� emphasis on parental involvement in their children’s education� liaison with community-based professional agencies and organisations

Areas for Future Attention:� assigning specific responsibilities to board staff for implementation� determining time lines� developing a process to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of these initiatives

Superior-Greenstone District School Board

Director of Education:Heather Wilson-Boast



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� detailing the resources to be used (generally listed under the heading “Strategies”)� initiatives to promote parental support for their children’s learning at home

Areas for Future Attention:� selecting systemic board level strategies for improvement� assigning specific responsibilities to board staff for implementation� determining time lines� developing a process to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of these initiatives


Thames Valley District School Board

Director of Education:W. John Laughlin



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� a comprehensive process for the review and analysis of assessment results� training and resources to support teachers in mathematics, reading, and writing instruction� specific strategies to assist at-risk and ESL/ELD students� use of a range of contextual and other data to inform decision making� consultation with schools to provide system level support for school initiatives� recognition of both the cognitive and affective domains in remediation strategies� establishment of partnership commitments with agencies and community organizations� strategies to reinforce the alignment of school and board action plans� a formal set of procedures to identify practices that contribute to school improvement

Areas for Future Attention:� dissemination of information� training to broaden the implementation of successful practices

Thunder Bay Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Kevin Debnam



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� specific strategies to meet the needs of low-achieving students� sharing successful practices, for example through the electronic Assessment and Evaluation

Conference� the development of board resources such as “Building Literacy”

Areas for Future Attention:� the development of indicators of success� strategies to monitor the effectiveness of the improvement initiatives


Toronto Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Johanne Stewart



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� specific board strategies for improvement with detailed time lines, clear assignment of

responsibility, and indicators of progress to monitor implementation� collection of board level information (such as feedback forms) to promote data-driven decision

making� strategies to promote parental involvement to support their children’s learning , such as the parent

brochure and curriculum night on mathematics� strategies to address the needs of low-achieving students, such as the Fifth Block Initiative and the

Supports for Higher Achievement, and the teacher in-service to support them� strategies to address the gender gap, such as the non-fiction reading resources to appeal to boys� linking improvement planning with the budget process to provide the resources necessary for

implementation

Areas for Future Attention:� submit action plan for improvement using a common template format in 2002

Toronto District School Board

Director of Education:Marguerite Jackson



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� specific board strategies to address the differences in achievement by gender, ESL, and special

education� a focus on the importance of equity issues, such as socio-economic status and culture� board training to support school improvement planning� strategies to promote partnerships with home and community� identifying statistical neighbours, through the ‘Schools like us’ project to promote sharing of

effective practices� the combination of new initiatives and the maintenance of those which have worked well to

provide continuity� a formal process to align school and system action planning processes


� provision of staff training on interpreting assessment results� a comprehensive support strategy for improvement planning, review, and implementation� promotion of active learning cultures within the education community� collection of additional student data to enhance data-driven decision making

Areas for Future Attention:� submit action plan for improvement using a common template format in 2002

Trillium Lakelands District School Board

Director of Education:Evelyn Brown



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� specific initiatives to meet the needs of students identified as at-risk in literacy� program evaluation in initiatives, such as Early Reading Intervention and First Steps, to monitor

their effectiveness� use of a broad range of resources to enhance instruction� a formal follow-up process for teachers in Grades 4 and 7 to address the EQAO assessment

findings� strategies to address the gender gap in achievement in reading and mathematics� strategies to encourage parents to support their children’s learning at home, such as the Family Fun

Night

Areas for Future Attention:� a formal process for linking the board and school improvement planning processes to ensure

consistency in priorities, strategies, and resource allocation for implementation at the school level


Upper Canada District School Board

Director of Education:Gino Giannandrea



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� extending action planning to include the secondary panel for a continuum of improvement� selecting measurable targets� including consultation with parents in the action planning process� training in data analysis, monitoring, and communication� aligning school and board action plans� developing a comprehensive approach to identifying successful practice� implementing strategies to monitor implementation

Areas for Future Attention:� initiatives to address the needs of low-achieving students� a formal process for monitoring and evaluating the impacts of your strategies for improvement

Upper Grand District School Board

Director of Education:Martha Rogers



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� an informative report on the progress of implementation on last year’s plan (which has been

successful in achieving improved assessment results) together with new initiatives for the nextplanning cycle

� details on specific initiatives with a clear assignment of responsibility for each� initiatives for both elementary and secondary schools to establish a continuum of improvement

Areas for Future Attention:� identification of indicators of success to enable the board to monitor, document, and report

progress� detailed time lines for implementation


Waterloo Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Roger Lawler



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� extending action planning to include the elementary and secondary systems for a continuum of

improvement� completing board surveys in order to collect additional information to enhance data-driven decision

making� defining specific, clear assignment of responsibilities for implementation� using action research to improve instruction� establishing formal procedures to coordinate the development and implementation of school and

board action planning� implementing initiatives to support students with low achievement levels� providing supports for students with additional challenges, such as ESL and special education

needs� incorporating comprehensive improvement planning across the curriculum� drawing on community resources, such as “The Learning Partnership of Waterloo Region”� providing training to support schools in data-based improvement planning� establishing detailed strategies for monitoring implementation� identifying “statistical neighbours” to focus resources and efforts

Areas for Future Attention:� include the communications plan on how the board will share this information

Waterloo Region District School Board

Director of Education:Cec Omand



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� clear, quantifiable improvement goals� a formal process to align school and board level improvement planning� support for parental involvement in their children’s learning at home

Areas for Future Attention:� include the assignment of responsibility for system wide initiatives with time lines; and� include an evaluation component to review effectiveness


Wellington Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Don Drone



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� extending improvement planning to include all grade levels across the elementary curriculum� liaising with other boards, universities, and community organizations� providing ongoing professional development opportunities for teachers and administrators� supporting principals in action planning at the school level

Areas for Future Attention:� development of specific strategies to meet the needs of low-performing students� assignment of responsibility for board initiatives with a time line for implementation

Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Michael Moher

Number of Grade 3 and Grade 6 students participating in EQAO testing:

Number of schools involved:

Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� a comprehensive assessment strategy using multiple measures extending from elementary through

secondary school� a formal process to align school and board action planning� board support for school level implementation� an inclusive process for developing and communicating action plans� a strategy to address the gender gap in achievement

Areas for Future Attention:� development of strategies to meet the needs of low-performing students


York Catholic District School Board

Director of Education:Susan LaRosa



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� a comprehensive process for the development of the board plan� attention to the gender gap� a focus on the role of parents and guardians in supporting children’s learning at home� broad system wide strategies to support schools� the inclusion of input from school councils in the planning process� training and support for teachers, administrators, and school councils in data analysis and

interpretation

Areas for Future Attention:� description of strategies to support low-performing students

York Region District School Board

Director of Education:Bill Hogarth



Major Improvement Planning Strengths:� initiatives to address the gender differences in achievement� the Performance-Plus Program to support “high needs” communities� alignment of the board and school improvement planning processes� a formal process to identify and disseminate information on successful practice, particularly the

Instructional Intelligence initiative� formal evaluation of program effectiveness, through the Research and Evaluation Services� encouragement of innovation through the Fund grants� use of action research to effect the transfer of research into changes in instructional practice

Areas for Future Attention:� indicators of success board will use to monitor and evaluate effectiveness

© 2002 Queen’s Printer for Ontario

Education Quality and Accountability Office2 Carlton Street, Suite 1200Toronto, ON M5B 2M9

Telephone: 1-888-327-7377Web site: www.eqao.com

Printed on recycled paper.

Documents

EQAO Guide to School and Board Improvement Planning · promote an Ontario network of powerful data-driven improvement planning. In addition, this guide links to two provincial resources