12
SCHOOL PEER REVIEW A reflective tool for effective school improvement within the SAESC community

SCHOOL PEER REVIEW A reflective tool for effective school improvement within the SAESC community

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: SCHOOL PEER REVIEW A reflective tool for effective school improvement within the SAESC community

SCHOOL PEER REVIEW

A reflective tool for effective school improvement within the SAESC community

Page 2: SCHOOL PEER REVIEW A reflective tool for effective school improvement within the SAESC community

Where did we start?

March to November 2011 – Discussion amongst SAESC members on how to continue to evolve best practice and improve on outcomes

Jan/Feb 2012 – Presentation by EdVillage on model, followed by discussion and agreement on process with SAESC members

June 2012 – SPR training in NYC with EdVillage (8 members, report by EdVillage + report by SAESC)

Page 3: SCHOOL PEER REVIEW A reflective tool for effective school improvement within the SAESC community

What have we done so far?

August 2012 – Implementation plan for SAESC

September 2012 – Lebone II as the first pilot site, followed by LEAP 4 and Inanda

October 2012 – COSAT and Vuleka November 2012 – LEAP 1

Page 4: SCHOOL PEER REVIEW A reflective tool for effective school improvement within the SAESC community

A quick snap-shot – vital statistics 8 people trained in NYC 6 schools participated in Phase I as review

sites – pilot testing of instrument and model Further 13 members from SAESC schools

participated as reviewers and trained in model 11 schools volunteered members as peer

reviewers (including host schools) Over 200 formal classroom observations and

92 meeting blocks were held in these six reviews (parents, students, teachers)

Page 5: SCHOOL PEER REVIEW A reflective tool for effective school improvement within the SAESC community

What did we build along the way?

A lesson plan for the pre-review training session (CoC, OCD)

A template for scheduling of classroom visits – with key activities/meetings that need to be included

A template for recording evidence by domain A process model for debriefing, checking in and

calibrating evidence/observations with team leads A process model for peer support (team lead,

coach, paired observations, paired check-ins)

Page 6: SCHOOL PEER REVIEW A reflective tool for effective school improvement within the SAESC community

Precise praise (all)

Open, honest reflection constructively given to schools (peer review as an objective reflection of classroom practice)

Real connections and tremendous trust built between team members during the review – a solid foundation for effective teams

In 4 of 6 reviews, provided host school with team bios (in 3 out of 6 reviews introduced team to whole school, in 1/6 reviews introduced to staff specifically)

Page 7: SCHOOL PEER REVIEW A reflective tool for effective school improvement within the SAESC community

Precise praise (all) – CONT.

4/6 reports already submitted to school heads – only one outside of the 30-day turnaround

Check-ins and debriefs were available electronically on the day for review by team leads

Calibration exercise by video followed by in-class calibration was extremely valuable, and more so, when supported by a paired observation

Each team lead supported by a “thought partner” deepened the process, acting as a reflective mirror

Page 8: SCHOOL PEER REVIEW A reflective tool for effective school improvement within the SAESC community

Areas for improvement (all)

Inadequate briefing of schools in respect to meeting purpose/requirements for key stakeholders – common expectations

Better delivery mechanism/style for close-out verbal reporting (preparing the receiving school, adequate time for preparation, scripted narratives)

Solid preparation of host school staff by host school head (work through of instrument, expectations for classroom observations e.g. no feedback)

Page 9: SCHOOL PEER REVIEW A reflective tool for effective school improvement within the SAESC community

Areas for improvement (all) - CONT Using the detail of the evidence for the

written report to the school Starting the prep process earlier – at

least 30 days prior to each review (build a timeline as part of the toolkit)

Possible revision of some of the criteria – some heavily worded, some difficult to evidence, some could be further expanded

Page 10: SCHOOL PEER REVIEW A reflective tool for effective school improvement within the SAESC community

Big rocks (all)

Preparing host schools adequately for the “invasion” – paperwork & documentation needed in advance (for on-site review), meetings to be set up etc

Being comfortable with being vulnerable (host school and team) – safety, trust, confidentiality, professionalism, humility, commitment to the process

Getting the right people in the room (host school) – for dissemination, to take ownership of action, and build a stronger school team

Page 11: SCHOOL PEER REVIEW A reflective tool for effective school improvement within the SAESC community

What do we need to do differently?

Toolkit to be developed – key resources, templates, checklists for host schools and review teams

Review nature of written report – more detail, more evidence, more constructive recommendations on big rocks or other

Train more members in the art of difficult conversations and in the art of “giving the gift”

Page 12: SCHOOL PEER REVIEW A reflective tool for effective school improvement within the SAESC community

Here’s to walking forwards together in the next phase ...

Thank you.

Click icon to add picture