Innovation Study

7/30/2019 Innovation Study

1/27

Running Header: Ongoing Curriculum Alignment Innovation 1

Ongoing Curriculum Alignment Innovation

William Rodick

George Mason University

EDUC 615

Dr. Shanon Hardy

April 2013


2/27

Ongoing Curriculum Alignment Innovation 2

Abstract

To address the additional work that occurs each time our school goes

through various processes

PYP visitation, MYP visitation, AdvancED

accreditation that are actually very similar in nature, and require similar

processes from faculty and staff, I wished to create a curriculum review process

that ensures the preparation for visitations from reviewing agencies works to

our benefit. I also wish for such a process to ensure continual progress on a

continuum of development, so that the processes are not simply for achieving

certain scores, but are purposeful in school improvement. The aspects of the

curriculum review process will ensure improvement in areas that need

addressing, such as finding greater consistency, establishing greater

communication, improving accountability, and increasing the involvement of all

stakeholders.


3/27


Problem Identification

During the fall semester, the school improvement coordinator guided

other administrators through a process of self-evaluation. This process had

administrators examine standards developed by AdvancED, our accreditation

agency, which will visit the campus in 2014. During this self-evaluation,

administrators considered the programs and policies in place, and in some ways,

considered changes in programs and policies that could be made. Months later,

chairpersons led self-evaluation teams designated by standard, and each of these

teams were made up of parents, students, teachers, staff, and administrators. I

was asked to participate in the group that focused on standard 3, which deals

with curriculum. In this meeting, I became concerned about substandard 3.2:

Curriculum, instruction, and assessment are monitored and adjusted

systematically in response to data from multiple assessments of student learning

and an examination of professional practice. As a group, we determined that

this is an area that needs great consideration. We discussed the MAP test, which

being new, was given to students for the first time in December 2012. However,

we have not received training in the use of data from this test. I then looked at

other documentation regarding AdvancED and their recommendations from the

past visitation of 2009. That year, they dictated required action necessary for our

reaccreditation (the past level achieved was Accredited on Advisement):

Required Action: Develop and implement a systemic and systematic

process for gathering, analyzing, and using data to improve teaching and

learning.


4/27


Evidence: While efforts have been made to administer standardized and

national tests, interviews reveal that such efforts generate little

meaningful information used to improve teaching or students learning.

Rationale: School quality is directly related to the degree to which all

members of the school community are able to make decisions, both on a

day to day and on a long term basis, guided by performance measures,

including student learning data.

In 2011, AdvancED responded to updates inserted into their system by the

director: Information included in the APR indicate[s] the school has taken

significant steps to meet this required action. The school must further develop

and implement a comprehensive assessment that uses student achievement data

to inform instruction and curriculum development.

During the 2009 visit and the 2011 interim update, the school had been

using the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) as a method for testing and gathering

information about student growth. The ITBS also provides a detailed data report

for each student, and teachers generally receive this report to examine during

the in-service period that begins each school year. The ITBS does have its faults.

Since it is only used once per year, it may not be a valid indicator of a students

strengths and weaknesses. Since it is given in the spring and the report isnt

made available to teachers until the fall, the information is too distanced from

the learning levels indicated through that assessment.

The Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) was introduced to the school,

and it was decided that this test would replace the ITBS. The MAP can be given

multiple times during the year, data on student performance is available quickly,

and the test is adaptive the difficulty level of questions adjusts based on each


5/27


correct or incorrect response so that it more accurately identifies a students

strengths and weaknesses. However, although the test was given in December,

and data was given to teachers at the start of the spring semester, teachers still

have not been trained on how to use the data to inform instruction.

It seemed evident to me that the school needs more than the

improvements that the MAP test offers. Curriculum is still pulled in many

directions at the school although standards have been adopted, many teachers

are not using standards to inform instruction; the International Baccalaureate

(IB) frameworks of the Primary Years Programme (PYP) and the Middle Years

Programme (MYP) inform grades 1-10, but the Brazilian program, EAL, specials

classes, and courses delivered to students in 11th and 12th grades seem distant

from the instructional practices, planning requirements, and the assessment

formats of those programs.

I recalled the AERO Conference, which I attended in the summer of 2011.

During one of the sessions, Gail Seay, the curriculum coordinator of the American

School of Doha, shared with us her process for curriculum alignment (Seay

Appendix A). The process is interesting, because unlike many others, the method

is not solely standard-focused and guided by discipline, but it is whole school

focused and ongoing. The process begins with a revisit to the large aims of the

school the mission, vision, and values. Each department then aligns their own

mission, vision, and values, creating essential agreements that advance those

foundational beliefs of departments under the umbrella of school-wide beliefs.

Working from a larger perspective ensures commonality, and from there

departments align learning goals and assessments, units of study,

transdisciplinary skills, scope and sequence documents, and resources. When I


6/27


first looked at this model, I found it fascinating, but almost impossible to

implement at our school. Back in 2011, the school did not have standards,

shallowly understood the IB, and had a faculty that was just too small to

overburden with additional duties. Two years can change a great deal. The

school now has standards, teachers are far more open to learning about and

following IB philosophy, and although faculty is still small, there are more

opportunities now for collaboration. Also, I realized there is no need to split

teachers into subject referent departments this work can be done through the

department designations already in place: IB PYP, IB MYP, high school, and

Brazilian program.

I shared the American School of Doha framework with other

administrators in a curriculum meeting, which involved the PYP coordinator, the

MYP coordinator, and the director. The conversation was positive, especially

since it seems that so many of the regular processes that the school undergoes

seemingly begin from scratch every few years or so. It is time to work smarter.

A curriculum alignment process can ensure a commitment to the

processes that AdvancED requires. If the curriculum alignment process includes

planned action for testing students, analyzing those testing results, and including

those testing results within other methods for evaluating and analyzing

instruction and assessment, then that process will be a sufficient response to

demands imposed upon the school in 2009: Develop and implement a systemic

and systematic process for gathering, analyzing, and using data to improve

teaching and learning. Additionally, a curriculum alignment process helps align

all the wandering parts of the curricular system. Finally, it can force wheels to be

put in motion that can make the curriculum more effective. If the process is well


7/27


known, and all stakeholders are familiar with expectations, then there is greater

accountability of all members for following those expectations.

Literature Review

American School of Doha: Strategically Speaking. (n.d.).American School of Doha.

Retrieved April 15, 2013, fromhttp://www.asd.edu.qa/page.cfm?p=943

This resource is a collection of materials that guide and explain the

curriculum alignment process at the American School of Doha (ASD). Gail Seay,

the curriculum coordinator of ASD, made these documents available to me and

other school leaders at the AERO Leadership Conference workshop in June 2011.

The documents were created by Gail Seay and her faculty at ASD, and are all

protected by the Creative Commons License, but Gail gave us permission to reuse

these in our schools, so long as we provide credit to the American School of Doha.

The collection is an overview of the ongoing curriculum alignment

process in place at ASD, along with documents about norms for professional

collaboration and foundational documents to which the review process connects.

The ongoing curriculum alignment process, is most easily discerned from this

graphic:
http://www.asd.edu.qa/page.cfm?p=943http://www.asd.edu.qa/page.cfm?p=943http://www.asd.edu.qa/page.cfm?p=943http://www.asd.edu.qa/page.cfm?p=943


8/27


The process is cyclical and ongoing, centering at the end and beginning of each

cycle upon big picture ideas foundational elements of the school and student

learning. This ensures broad scopes through which to view the process,

providing a link to all aspects of the review process. Rather than viewing

curriculum as standards, this process ensures that all aspects of teaching,

learning, and assessing are intertwined and understood.

Britton, M., Letassy, N., Medina, M., & Er, N. (2008). A Curriculum Review and

Mapping Process Supported by an Electronic Database System.American Journal

of Pharmaceutical Education, 72(5), 1-6.

Although this study is of a curriculum review process at a college of

pharmacy, and their work was successful with the aid of curriculum mapping

technology, the lessons here about the purposes for a curriculum alignment

process and what such a process should focus upon are relevant to my own

study. Similar to the purposes for such a process in my school, the curriculum

!

!

" #$%&' $()* $#+!, +-%$'. #/'$!

! "#$%& ' %(!01!' 2#!3%) -#4' !35#46764!8 6$$60/ 9!: 6$60/ !; !

*. #? 0>H!

" #$%&'$() *$#+!, +-%$'. #/' $!

! "#$%& ' %(!01!B2#!B>*/ $(+6$465&6/*>E!I 0>H!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

J K$' !L#/' %>E!3H6&&$!; !F 6$50$6'60/ $!

" #$%&'$() *$#+!, + -%$'. #/'$!

! "#$%& ' %(!10>!3405#!; !3#M%#/4#9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

N*5$!; !" #+%/+*/ 46#$!

" #$%&'$() *$#+!, + -%$'. #/'$!

! "#$%& ' %(!01!" #$0%>4#$!!!!!!!O/!3%550>'!01!3'%+#/' !

C#*>/6/=!

!!

! "#$%&'( %) '*+, -$. %

! "#$$%&' () *+

, (-- ($. +

/ (-($. +

/ 0%1*- +!


9/27


review for this study aims to increase common understanding of the curriculum,

to make that curriculum more transparent for all stakeholders, and to ensure

linkage of the curriculum throughout different courses. A major element of this

studys process for meeting their objectives was to define the specific learning

outcomes of courses, which were then cross-referenced to ensure connectivity.

Fortunately for my school, this can begin with established learning outcomes, via

IB PYP scope and sequence and MYP objectives along with school standards, that

simply require understanding and buy-in. Through the process, faculty involved

in this study had to present evidence of what students actually learned in the

courses as opposed to assumptions of what could have been learned based on

delivered content. This is something to pay attention to for my process; since we

are beginning with standards and objectives in place, the major task will be to

create a curriculum alignment process that helps instructors become aware that

standards and objectives are for ensuring student progress, and not just for

ensuring teaching coverage.

Carpenter, D., & Carpenter, M. (2009). All Aboard!. Learning & Leading with

Technology, January, 18-23.

This study is an overview of the curriculum review process at an

international school in Hong Kong. This school relied on a curriculum mapping

tool, which would not work for my institution, because this was previously

denied in my budget proposals. However, there are other aspects of their process

that I should consider. The process of curriculum review in this study was highly

organized: school administrators put teachers at the center of the curriculum-

development process. Ensuring that teachers, and other stakeholders, are

consistently involved in the process is crucial to ensure buy-in and consistency.


10/27


While the process in this study focused on using data and reflection on the

effectiveness of the attainment of objectives and the understanding of essential

questions, they also zeroed in on specific subjects. This would be difficult at my

school, because some subjects are entirely taught by one or two teachers, and

even if many teachers focused on one subject at a time to assist those teachers, a

discipline-focused process may create distance from foundational beliefs,

shifting the very perspective that would unite all subjects into broken

perspectives that might not unite any subject.

Curriculum and Instruction - Curriculum & Instruction Documents. (n.d.).

Academy School District 20. Retrieved April 15, 2013, from

http://asd20.org/education/components/scrapbook/default.php?sectiondetaili

d=12492&&PHPSESSID=ca4cf6eaf449f351525db37ca465ac6d

This document outlines the curriculum review process of Academy

District Twenty. This process cycles through subject areas like Science and

Career & Tech Ed, reviewing standards, evaluating vertical articulation, selecting

materials, reviewing evidence of learning outcomes and assessments, selecting

materials and resources, and determining professional development from the

process. The process is cyclical, involves many stakeholders, and is centered on

student growth, but the focus on student growth seems loosely connected and

implicit, whereas I would like for this to be an explicit focus of our process. Prior

to examining this document, I had not considered the importance of using this

process to determine professional development needs, but this seems like a

logical addition to the process, and would address another standard of the

AdvancED review process.
http://asd20.org/education/components/scrapbook/default.php?sectiondetailid=12492&&PHPSESSID=ca4cf6eaf449f351525db37ca465ac6dhttp://asd20.org/education/components/scrapbook/default.php?sectiondetailid=12492&&PHPSESSID=ca4cf6eaf449f351525db37ca465ac6dhttp://asd20.org/education/components/scrapbook/default.php?sectiondetailid=12492&&PHPSESSID=ca4cf6eaf449f351525db37ca465ac6dhttp://asd20.org/education/components/scrapbook/default.php?sectiondetailid=12492&&PHPSESSID=ca4cf6eaf449f351525db37ca465ac6dhttp://asd20.org/education/components/scrapbook/default.php?sectiondetailid=12492&&PHPSESSID=ca4cf6eaf449f351525db37ca465ac6d


11/27


Dolence, M. (2004). The Curriculum-Centered Strategic Planning Model.

Educause Center for Applied Research Research Bulletin,2004(10), 1-11.

The Curriculum-Centered Strategic Planning Model is a framework for

systemic strategic planning in higher education, but follows processes that could

work on any academic level. The process follows five interlocking planning

activities: identifying Key Performance Indicators, detailing a Learner-Centered

Curriculum Framework, conducting an external environmental scan, conducting

continuous self-study, and developing an action plan process and

implementation. The authors consider Key Performance Indicators to be any

measures of performance that can guide the curricular process. For my school,

this could relate to standards and objectives, but can also be suitable reference to

focusing on institutional level goals, like our foundational documents mission,

vision, etc. The Learner-Centered Curriculum Framework takes into

consideration learning populations, learning objectives, learning providers,

learning theory and methods, curriculum architecture, and curriculum

configuration. The element that immediately seems suitable to the aims of a

process at this school that I had not previously considered is the inclusion of

learning population analysis. Due to the size of the school, learning populations

within a grade level may vary wildly, or may be inconsistent with expectations

for that grade level. An evaluation of these levels could lead to a greater

connection to resources that help us achieve our curricular aims through this

process. The final three stages of the process are actually somewhat vaguely

described in this document or already integrated in a draft of the process that I

have created.


12/27


Innovation

The primary purpose for this curriculum alignment process was to

address AdvancED requirements for reaccreditation: Develop and implement a

systemic and systematic process for gathering, analyzing, and using data to

improve teaching and learning. The delivery and collaborative review of the

MAP is an integrated component of the curriculum alignment process, along

with a set process for incorporating professional development related to the use

of data (MAP Testing CycleAppendix B).

As a multi-pronged method for maintaining alignment between the

curriculum and core beliefs of the school, the curriculum alignment process will

also assist in improving other aspects of curriculum development and school

improvement. Britton, Letassy, Medina, & Er (2008) make it evident through

their process that curriculum alignment can increase common understanding of

the curriculum, can ensure linkage of the curriculum across disciplines, and can

ensure that standards for learning are used to measure progress rather than

dictate teacher coverage. This innovation increases common understanding by

establishing all review under the umbrella of school-wide foundational elements

(Two-Year Review CycleAppendix C). Furthermore, the understanding of the

curriculum comes from transparency that results from having all stakeholders

take part in program and school-wide evaluation processes (External Evaluation

ProcessAppendix D). Linkage of curriculum extends beyond foundational

documents through collaborative review of learning targets and unit plans.

Finally, the MAP results should make it clear to trained teachers that learning

gaps are areas for directing instruction, and that not all students will equally

obtain achievement of each years learning objectives at the same rate.


13/27


Carpenter & Carpenter (2009) point out how important it is that teachers and

other stakeholders are at the center of the process. For this reason, committees created

for each External Evaluation Process consist of stakeholders from all areas of the

school, and are led by teacher chairpersons. By including all stakeholders, the entire

process is more transparent to the community. Furthermore, this Ongoing Curriculum

Alignment Process will also be made transparent to the community, so that they are

aware when certain processes will occur (Ongoing Curriculum Alignment Process

OverviewAppendix E).

As is directly understood by Academy District 20 (Curriculum and Instruction,

2013), professional development need evaluation runs synchronistical with

curriculum development. The very process reveals need. As a result, professional

development need is examined along with resource need as one of the six integral

tasks of the process. These needs are also examined within each of the External

Evaluation Processes (Ongoing Curriculum Alignment Process ModelAppendix F).

Dolence (2004) notes the importance of considering school improvement

plans and analyzing learning populations. Although each of the External

Evaluation Processes require the creation of school improvement goals, these

processes have never considered how these goals might be repeated when other

plans have not been considered. Built into this curriculum alignment process is

the expectation that External Evaluation Process leaders will rely on and extend

the goals created through the other two External Evaluation Processes. As

teachers evaluate data from MAP, they will also grow in their understanding of

how the learning populations of their students are unique, and there will be

students in a classroom that are not reflective of the norm of the class, and the

norm of the class may not be reflective of grade level expectations.


14/27


Outcome

The director has decided that the finalized version of the Ongoing

Curriculum Review Process will be included in the handbook for next school year.

I designed this process so that once it became transparent to the community it

would inherently add a sense of accountability for administration to ensure that

procedures of the process are conducted properly. I am elated that this will be

shared with the community now. I do hope that school leaders are able to live up

to the elements of accountability stated in the process. I am concerned that

eagerness over making the plan available now may be excitement about making

AdvancED is aware of our effort. I hope that eagerness extends to administrative

follow-through of the procedures within this process.

This innovation aligns the External Evaluation Processes that the school

regularly goes through so that the processes inform one another, and so that

administrators in charge of these processes conduct thorough preparations that

involve all stakeholders in evaluating the school regularly. The process directly

addresses at least two standards of AdvancED evaluation, but also ensures

continual progress that can help the school achieve all standards related to

curriculum for AdvancED review and for PYP and MYP reviews. The Two-Year

Review Cycle will ensure continual progress on a continuum of development,

aligning foundational values to all processes of curriculum. The aspects of the

curriculum alignment process will ensure improvement in areas that need

addressing, such as finding greater consistency, establishing greater

communication, improving accountability, and increasing the involvement of all

stakeholders. A defined process for incorporating data in the analysis of


15/27


curriculum need and professional development will guide the school toward a

path of continual improvement.

The process does have the potential to not be followed by administration.

In requests for review of the plan, the MYP coordinator and director provided no

feedback, only saying that the plan seemed great. I expected resistance about

accomplishing all aspects of the Two-Year Review Cycle in only two years, but no

administrator has made any comment about the timing of the processes. It may

be that each administrator is fully on-board, but there is the possibility that they

have not considered how all aspects of the process will impact their routines.

Details about each particular action within the plan, such as a protocol for

how goal statements will be written during the External Evaluation Process, how

each department will review standards, or guidelines for how professional

development need will be assessed are absent. It will be necessary that

administrators develop the protocols for these processes as they conduct them.

This may increase the likelihood that aspects of the process will not see follow-

through.

Despite the excitement of the director about this process, I am hoping to

make it apparent just what this process will entail for the routines of each

administrator, so that if there are any doubts about the ability to remain

accountable for follow-through, adjustments can be made before revealing the

plan to the public.


16/27


References

American School of Doha: Strategically speaking. (n.d.).American School of Doha.

Retrieved April 15, 2013, from http://www.asd.edu.qa/page.cfm?p=943

Britton, M., Letassy, N., Medina, M., & Er, N. (2008). A curriculum review and

mapping process supported by an electronic database system.American

Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 72(5), 1-6.

Carpenter, D., & Carpenter, M. (2009). All aboard!. Learning & leading with

technology, January, 18-23.

Curriculum and Instruction - curriculum & instruction documents. (n.d.).

Academy School District 20. Retrieved April 15, 2013, from

http://asd20.org/education/components/scrapbook/default.php?section

detailid=12492&&PHPSESSID=ca4cf6eaf449f351525db37ca465ac6d

Dolence, M. (2004). The curriculum-centered strategic planning model.

Educause Center for Applied Research Research Bulletin,2004(10), 1-11.
http://asd20.org/education/components/scrapbook/default.php?sectiondetailid=12492&&PHPSESSID=ca4cf6eaf449f351525db37ca465ac6dhttp://asd20.org/education/components/scrapbook/default.php?sectiondetailid=12492&&PHPSESSID=ca4cf6eaf449f351525db37ca465ac6dhttp://asd20.org/education/components/scrapbook/default.php?sectiondetailid=12492&&PHPSESSID=ca4cf6eaf449f351525db37ca465ac6dhttp://asd20.org/education/components/scrapbook/default.php?sectiondetailid=12492&&PHPSESSID=ca4cf6eaf449f351525db37ca465ac6dhttp://asd20.org/education/components/scrapbook/default.php?sectiondetailid=12492&&PHPSESSID=ca4cf6eaf449f351525db37ca465ac6d


17/27


Appendix Table of Contents

A. Seay 18B. MAP Testing Cycle 20C. Two-Year Review Cycle 21D. External Evaluation Process 22E. Ongoing Curriculum Alignment Process Overview 23F. Ongoing Curriculum Alignment Process Model 27


18/27


SeayAppendix A

American School of Doha Ongoing Curriculum Alignment Process


19/27



20/27


MAP Testing CycleAppendix B


21/27


Two-Year Review CycleAppendix C


22/27


External Evaluation ProcessAppendix D


23/27


Ongoing Curriculum Alignment Process OverviewAppendix E

Ongoing Curriculum Alignment Process

Background

The Ongoing Curriculum Alignment Process (OCAP) is a multi-pronged methodfor maintaining alignment between the curriculum and core beliefs of the school.

This process is not subject-specific, but dynamic, ongoing, and simultaneous for

all areas of curriculum. Although this follows a designated cycle, the process is

about encompassing all aspects of curriculum to tie back into comprehensive,

student-centered curriculum.

Two-Year Review Cycle

This cycle, a major component of the Ongoing Curriculum Alignment Process,

incorporates six tasks, each of which is informed by the External Evaluation

Processes of the PYP, MYP, and AdvancED (each of which informs the other,

particularly in terms of the basis for continual growth through whole school

improvement and department-level improvement goals). These External

Evaluation Processes are each informed by self-assessment designated by the

evaluation agency. Each of these processes takes into consideration how the

school uses assessment and learning objectives to inform goals and teaching.

Task 1

School-wide Foundational Elements

A core planning team of students, board members, parents, teachers, and schoolleadership refines the school-wide mission, beliefs and values, vision, and

student learning objectives. These agreements underpin all decisions and ensure

that additional components of the Ongoing Curriculum Alignment Process move

the school towards achieving an evolving vision.

Task 2

Departmental Foundational Elements

The departments of the school tailor departmental mission statements, belief

and values statements, vision statements, and student learning objectives that

are considerate of the particular needs of those departments while ensuring the

successful attainment and alignment of school-wide elements created in Task 1;

these departmental foundational elements fit beneath and support the school-

wide foundational elements.

Task 3

Learning Targets

Each department reviews standards, benchmarks, and grade level indicators to

ensure they build to student success of school-wide learning objectives.

Task 4

Units of Study


24/27


All units are designed using the UbD format of backwards design, with each

department using a particular model adapted to its program. Units are reviewed

to ensure the overarching aims of each unit are appropriate vertically,

horizontally, in reference to departmental learning targets, and in reference to

school-wide learning objectives. This task falls in line with department-specific

program of inquiry reviews.

Task 5

Transdisciplinary Skills

The Learner Profile, departmental-specific transdisciplinary skills, and 21st

century skills, are acknowledged in all unit plans. This process of review, which

is an extension of Task 4, examines the suitability of inclusion, horizontally and

vertically, of these skills, and ensures that teaching as laid out in the unit plans is

designed to foster appropriate development.

Task 6

Resources and PD

Teams evaluate resources currently available in each department to account for

overlap and need. These teams also evaluate areas of need for professional

development and training.

External Evaluation Processes

There are three agencies that evaluate aspects of the school. The particular

process for each evaluation agency is unique, but there are also many parallel

elements across the three processes. Each agency sends a team of evaluators

every five years to assess the effectiveness of teaching, learning, assessment, andthe use of data; the management of programs and curriculum; and the allocation

of resources and professional development. Each process follows these broad

steps (along with unique requirements), and is informed by each other, and by

the Two-Year Review Cycle.

Administrative Self-Review

Each process is guided by standards (i.e., sections on philosophy, curriculum, etc.

for PYP and MYP; sections on purpose, government, etc. for AdvancED). The

educational leadership team, programme coordinator, or school improvement

coordinator must establish a timeline for internal review well ahead of any

deadlines for the submission of documentation, and the first step is an internal

review by the administrative team. The results of this process, along with the

whole school review, inform department-level and whole school improvement

plans.

Whole School Self-Review by Committee

The educational leadership team, programme coordinator, or school

improvement coordinator create committees for whole school self-review. The

number of committees is determined by the structure of standards designated by

the evaluation agency. Each committee is headed by a chairperson who selectsother members of her or his committee. The committee must consist of at least


25/27


26/27


school improvement plan. This review, update, and creation of new goals must

consider the remaining two improvement plans as well.

Special Committee Review

The special committees created to review, update, and create new goals for the

department-level or whole school improvement plan conduct this processannually until it is once again time for administrative self-review.

NWEA Measures of Academic Progress

The MAP is a computerized, adaptive assessment the school is able to align to

the Common Core State Standards a basis for school adopted standards. Thedetailed, swift feedback is used to inform instruction that can take into

consideration each students academic level and individual strengths.

Delivery

The MAP is given three times per school year (August, February, and May),

providing educators information about growth and validating each individualsareas of strength and weakness.

Professional Development

Test results are collaboratively reviewed three times per school year, and are

always available for teacher review through an online system. The MAP

coordinator determines in advance the type of training that will be necessary to

provide before or after a test is delivered and reviewed. This evaluation of

professional development needs takes into consideration the familiarity of

faculty with the use of test data to instruct and differentiate. It also takes intoconsideration Task 6 of the Two-Year Review Cycle, and recommendations based

on External Evaluation Processes.

Data Use

MAP data is used to inform instruction, scaffolding, differentiation, learning

target evaluation, and units of study evaluation (Tasks 3 and 4 of the Two-Year

Review Cycle). MAP data is one slice of the information that is collected by

teachers and teams that is funneled back into the learning process. For more

information about assessment as an aspect of the learning process, please refer

to department-level assessment policies.


27/27


Ongoing Curriculum Alignment Process ModelAppendix F