X hits on this document

PDF document

A Curriculum Management Audit - page 100 / 140

370 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

100 / 140

AR 4001-R3 addresses a single aspect of the relationship between district and state assessments, by setting an implementation time line that meets or exceeds state requirements (characteristic number 9).

AR 4001-R3, AR 4001-R4, and AR 4002-R1 require school personnel to provide parents with evaluation reports on their children (characteristic number 17).

While BP 4001 provides for “periodic revision of the curriculum,” auditors found no reference to the use of appropriate assessment in such review (characteristic number 12).

Nowhere were found policy guidance as to ongoing training for various audiences on assessment, procedures for monitoring assessment design and use, ongoing evaluation of the assessment plan, facility and housing requirements, and/or budget ramifications and connections to resource allocations (characteristics numbered 15, 16, 18, 19, and 20).

In summary, auditors found the Clover Park School District’s policies and assessment planning to be inadequate in scope and quality to provide direction to district personnel in the areas of student and program assessment.

Use of Data in the Clover Park School District

Auditors reviewed various documents that reflect planning by the district in order to determine how

student reports,

and program assessment data are used in studies, school-site plans, program plans,

decision-making. These documents included curriculum guides, board presentations, and

memos. Additionally, auditors interviewed teachers, administrators, board members, members in order to learn how data are used for various forms of decision-making.

and

community

Specifically, auditors interviewed school personnel, board members, and community members about

the use of student assessment data for decision-making.

As one principal noted, “Site-based

(management) has been here long enough that we can talk more about affecting student achievement. The process is in place.” However, in general, interviewees indicated minimal and inconsistent use of assessment data for decision-making. Selected comments follow:

“Assessment data is gathered and given to the buildings…. (It is) up to the principals what they do with it.” (principal)

“Historically, information from the WASL is shared with staff by department heads. Some have done this and some have not.” (assistant principal)

“It’s hard to find the time to do what we need to with assessment data.” (assistant principal)

“Test data are never disaggregated. I can’t correlate test scores with attendance, behavior, etc.” (principal)

student

to

connected

be

could

  • “Use of assessment data is pretty inconsistent.” (administrator)

that

“For three years, (we) have given schools data performance, but isn’t directly.” (administrator)

books

  • “There is not a lot of district support for assessment. There is really not a level of expertise.” (principal)

  • “We don’t have a strong evaluation department in the district.” (administrator)

  • “(I) tried to get previous years’ scores for comparison, and I’ve never received any. I still don’t have any long-term data.” (principal)

  • “They don’t like to give us the individual school test results...but I had better get it before it’s in the paper.” (board member)

Auditors interviewed administrators, teachers, parents, community members, and members of the Board of Directors with regard to the use of student assessment data for instructional purposes. Some of these statements follow:

Clover Park School District Audit Report Page 94

Document info
Document views370
Page views371
Page last viewedSat Dec 10 01:58:23 UTC 2016
Pages140
Paragraphs8364
Words61227

Comments