QFIC, Not Just Another Educational Acronym

QFIC, no it does not stand for the Quebec Forest Industry Council, I know that is what you all were thinking!  QFIC, or Quality, Fidelity, Intensity, Consistency is a mindset that we teach when working with districts on their leadership development and evaluation systems.  

Many of you are thinking, “why do we need another acronym to confuse us, and the people that we try to inspire, as we lead our buildings and districts.”  QFIC is a mindset that we have to develop and reinforce within our organization, and it starts with the leaders of that organization. This summer I have had some great opportunities to work with districts on developing the QFIC mindset as they reflect on the implementation of their “new” evaluation systems.  These districts are trying to ensure that they are getting the highest level of effectiveness with the evaluation systems they implemented this past year.  We have worked with them on improving the quality of the evaluation process, fidelity to the intended purposes of the evaluation system, intensity that they exhibit as they use the evaluation process, and consistency as they calibrate common levels of expectations within the system while doing the evaluation process.

The questions your administrative team needs to consider as you work to instill a QFIC mindset around evaluation include:

Are we asking the “right” questions when conducting the pre-evaluation and post observation conferences?  These questions are a critical piece of the evaluation process, and when done well bring quality, insights and reflection to the process that will drive improvement of instruction and leadership.  The evaluator should be developing questions prior to the conferences that force the evaluee to reflect on their professional practices, and make the link between their actions and results.  

Do all the users of your evaluation system “look for” and “see” the same things happening when conducting observations?  “Norming” your evaluation system is a practice that should be done at a minimum on an annual basis to ensure consistency of expectations and reduce variability across your system.

Do the professional goals established link back to the areas of need for the evaluee and support the overarching district goals?  As evaluator and evaluee sit down to craft their professional goals they should be focusing on areas that will translate to improved results in the classroom or across the school.  These goals should include measurable outcomes that if met assist the school with reaching their improvement goals.  The goals developed should also incorporate the language found within the evaluation instrument. References can then be made back to the instrument by the evaluee and evaluator so they can easily monitor growth towards the established goal.

Do the artifacts collected validate and support the level of practice by the professional?  As artifacts are collected, the evaluator and evaluee need to consider artifacts that best represent their professional abilities.  When it comes to artifacts, more is less! A system defining and deciding on quality artifacts will help the evaluee understand the expectations related to quality instructional and leadership practices.  Systems should be considering model artifacts that can be shared with evaluees so they can see and understand what quality professional practice looks like in their role.

These are a few of the questions that administrative teams should be considering as they strive to establish QFIC related to their evaluation system. Answers to the questions will continue to be important as evaluation expands over the next school year to include student growth measures. Fidelity and consistency will be very important as systems begin to analyze the data from their evaluation system to provide ongoing professional development and make personnel decisions.  QFIC is really all about culture. Systems that are working effectively and efficiently thrive on a culture of high expectations, peer support and a desire to continuously improve, in other words QFIC.

KASB leadership services staff has worked with some districts recently on these topics as they have made it through year one of implementing their new evaluation system, and are wanting to improve how evaluation is conducted in their system.  Give us a call and we would be glad to work with your team.

How do we get aligned?

                  In the recent months KASB Leadership Services has been working with service centers throughout the state to align supports and provide a systemic approach to developing leadership at all levels.

A systems approach to leadership is defined by a clear vision that is communicated and viable throughout all levels of the system.  This means that all levels of the system have established and are implementing goals that move them towards the board’s vision, and are utilizing common leadership vocabulary and processes to maximize resources and supports throughout the district.

As districts continue to strive to improve student performance, alignment around a systems approach to leadership becomes even more critical.  The supports that are in development will provide ongoing professional development for building-level leaders, district-level leaders, and board members to build their capacity around the leadership practices that research has shown make a difference. McREL International refers to this as the “What Matters Most” framework.

                  Supports provided are divided into two levels: Foundational Learning and Continuous Learning.  Those supports found within the Foundational Level are designed to provide leaders with the necessary tools and strategies to build on as they develop their capacity as a leader.  The Continuous Learning supports take educational leaders through deeper learning experiences that will result in them becoming more effective at their given role in the district.

                  The building level leader's Foundational Learning focuses on practical tools and strategies to deal with the rigors of the building leader role.  These include establishing a vision and uniting stakeholders around that vision; performing supervision and evaluation to improve student achievement; and developing communication channels to insure two-way communication is occurring.  This Foundational Learning will provide any principal new or experienced with a great foundation for building leadership.  
                  The Continuous Learning focus is the McREL Balanced Leadership Framework where building leaders will delve into the “art and science” of leadership.  They will also engage in reflection around their current practices and be provided techniques that will move them from a solid building leader to an exceptional building leader.  There are also opportunities within the Continuous Learning supports for building leaders to further develop their instructional leadership skills.

                  Superintendents, district leaders, and board members will have opportunities to build their capacity related to current initiatives and challenges that school districts are facing across the state.   These opportunities include topic-specific professional development for superintendents and district office leaders.  
                  School Board members can engage in activities designed around current issues in Kansas education and the district-level leadership practices that have shown over time to make a difference in student achievement.  At the foundation for superintendents, district leaders, and board members is the strategic planning process and annual monitoring of goals established within the district.
                  Through the Continuous Learning activities, superintendents, district leaders, and board members will be able to design, implement and monitor a strategic plan that moves their district to the next level of performance.  

Contact us if you have additional questions or would like more information.
1-800-432-2471
bjordan@kasb.org

                

                 

                  

Impacting Student Achievement

The mission of KASB can be described in simple terms, be a voice for public education, impact student outcomes and serve our members.  Our members are the elected educational leaders in each district in Kansas.  They represent the needs of nearly every child in the state.  With the goal of student success at the top of every school board’s agenda, boards are looking for ways to continually improve.  While school boards look for answers they often hear about the how difficult it is to” impact student learning.”  The leadership services department at KASB can’t think of a statement further from the truth.  Current educational research outlines some of the necessary steps to ensure improvement in student achievement, hiring highly qualified teachers, and providing ongoing professional development are some of the most frequently referenced practices.  But there is an often overlooked practice ignored, one of which is the most powerful means for improving instruction, the use of formative evaluation with high quality feedback (coaching).

As the entire nation has looked to provide a way to help students succeed we often find ourselves inspecting individual trees rather than surveying and monitoring the entire forest.  That has caused us to overlook the obvious model, help teachers improve their craft.  Take the two most famous “Bills” in the state of Kansas, Snyder and Self, they have established cultures that value formative evaluation with feedback.  When you consider the success of the their programs, and reflect on what is heard and seen from the stakeholders around those programs, you often hear phrases like, “we are just trying to get better each day,” or “we have a system that works, we each need to do our part to improve that system.”  Think of the power in the those phrases and the understanding by the players that they have to continually  improve individually to help the system improve collectively.  There is ample data provided related to their performance that allows them to monitor and reflect on the improvement process, as well as define goals and expectations.  We would argue that teachers and leaders have the same types of data available when their systems are engaged in formative evaluation.  The formative evaluation process produces many opportunities for individuals to analyze data as it applies to instruction and performance.  This ultimately results in an opportunity to impact student learning and overall student achievement.  Formative feedback helps teachers and leaders understand their personal obligation to continually improve to help students achieve.

The role of district leaders is to have high quality instruction with low variability within the system.  To accomplish the true goal of improved student achievement, leaders must develop the capacity of teachers and leaders to identify and monitor instructional improvements.  This capacity is developed through the use of the formative evaluation process, which in turn provides data to guide decisions about professional development and district wide programing.  We feel it should be a collaborative effort directed at improving our system.  The public education system will only be as good collectively as we are individually.  Shifting our models of evaluation through the use of coaching and quality feedback to improve leadership and instruction is at the core to combating complacency and the status quo.

If you are ready to take on the challenge,  let us help you and your district with the battle for continuous improvement.

How to stop the dance...

It is the time of the year when school leaders are analyzing their current personnel, and trying to address their personnel needs for the upcoming year.  Too often at this time of the year, in our profession, when get into an unproductive process known as the “Dance of the Lemons.”  This is the phrase often used when teachers are shuffled to different assignments to minimize their impact on students.  The dance often leads to a process that is detrimental to the culture of an organization.  It is also costly in terms of time spent,  lack of effectiveness and student achievement.  No one really claims the phrase, “Dance of the Lemons,” but recent thought closely links these practices to a “culture of can’t” being present within the educational system.  A “culture of can’t” prevails when leaders falsely believe they are limited in their ability to act on the improvement of instruction, as described by Frederick Hess of American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.  Hank Levin, a professor in the Teachers College at Columbia University, further explains that a “culture of can’t” develops when, school boards and district leaders use laws and regulations, “as a scapegoat to justify maintaining existing practices.”

So how do we change the “culture of can’t,” and stop the “Dance of the Lemons?”  

School leaders must establish non-negotiable expectations focused on instruction.  These expectations should be developed using open communication which allows input from all stakeholders.  The expectations must be supported by professional development related to the development of quality instruction in each classroom.  This may sound like a daunting task, but the reality is it can be accomplished within a district when all stakeholders agree to engage in formative evaluation of staff with an intense focus on the improvement of instruction. Formative evaluation brings teachers and administrators together to analyze data about instructional practices within the schools.  As formative evaluation occurs, consistent patterns  begin to develop that give educational leaders insight into the supports required to improve instruction and impact achievement.  Formative evaluation leads to improved instruction in each classroom and throughout the system.  As expectations become clear and an improved understanding of the components of quality instruction are defined, it then becomes possible to design differentiated supports for the varying needs of teachers.  The formative evaluation process provides a working framework for improving instruction.  In the end, taking these steps to combat the “culture of can’t,” will  lessens the chance of having to engage in the unfortunate “Dance of the Lemons.”

So where does an instructional leader find such a formative evaluation system?

In Kansas we are fortunate that we have options when it comes to formative evaluation models.  The Kansas State Department of Education has spent time building the Kansas Educator Evaluation Protocol (KEEP) system.  Another option that several districts across the state are moving towards is the McREL Teacher Evaluation System.  KASB has partnered with McREL to provide access to the McREL Evaluation system which provides the framework for improving instruction by tying everything back to the research supporting quality instruction and quality schools.  Improving student achievement should be the goal of every school district in Kansas.  A quality evaluation system properly implemented will enhance instructional skills and provide an opportunity for teachers to have a greater impact on student success.

The Push is on...Which evaluation system will we select?

As Dr. Moeckel indicated in an earlier post it is going to be another busy week around the state for leadership services.  Far and away the most pressing thing that I am supporting districts with right now is, "Which direction do we go with our evaluation system?"  In the past two months, I have been involved with at least 20 different sessions discussing evaluation.  In total we have discussed quality evaluation with over 500 educational leaders from around the state.  These educational leaders range from teachers and principals all the way up to KSDE personnel and board members.  The key take away from each of these sessions is that evaluation has one sole purpose, Improve the Quality of Instruction, which in turn will impact your levels of student achievement.  As we have shared with groups, quality evaluation should look like what we do with students within the MTSS/RtI process.  Establish expected outcomes, screen/evaluate where people are on their progress towards those expected outcomes, and then support the process of getting them to achieving ever higher levels of performance.  In a sense, quality evaluation is, "formative evaluation," using the data  from the evaluation process to drive improvements in the classroom and throughout the system.  So as the March 1 date draws ever closer, remember these principles as you select the evaluation system for your district.  KASB is committed to supporting you and your district through the process.  I have also linked FAQ regarding evaluation, these were compiled by KSDE.

KEEP FAQ

Dr. Jordan answering questions at yesterdays KASB's Evaluation Planning Session.

Quality Evaluation Systems, Critical for Continuous Improvement

Districts across Kansas are experiencing a dramatic shift in how they monitor and guide improvements.  In the past two months We have worked with over 500 educators ranging from teachers to school board members that are making critical decisions about how they will evaluate their teachers and principals.  Evaluation of teachers and building leaders is an essential component to improving instruction and leadership with your district.  KSDE has communicated that March 1 is the date by which districts need to indicate what they are going to do to evaluate their teachers and building leaders.  We believe that districts need to thoroughly vet their evaluation system options to find the system that fits their needs. The following are some critical questions that districts must considered as the look at their options:

• Is your personnel evaluation system formative in nature, does it promote and foster improvement in instruction and leadership? 
• Does your approach to evaluation align with your district's values, vision, and goals?
• Does your system clarify observable behaviors and/or practices that articulate differences between high and low performance?
• Are the evaluated behaviors strongly correlated with high levels of student learning and achievement?
• Is there a research base behind your evaluation system and process?
• Does your system articulate a continuum of professional growth, and provide a structure for teacher and leader reflection and collaboration?
• Do your current processes, policies, and practices align with the purposes of the evaluation system you are considering? 

Districts must engage representatives from all the stakeholder groups during the process of selecting an instrument, this provides insight into how the evaluation system fits with the current culture of your system.

Read more about questions to consider when selecting an evaluation system:

Evaluation System Questions