NCA COMMISSION ON ACCREDITATION AND SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PROTOCOL

Rationale

The protocol is designed to provide a uniform structure for continuous school improvement.

Common Elements

1. An improvement cycle for a member school is five years, and within this cycle the school hosts a minimum of two peer review visits.
2. The minimum time for the two peer review visits is a total of two full days over the course of the improvement cycle.
3. The peer review visits provide technical review and assistance to the school staff.
4. The purposes of the peer visits are to provide technical review, to provide assistance in designing the school improvement plan, to collect data about the degree of implementation of the school improvement plan, and to verify results. Specifically, the peer review provides assistance in meeting the following NCA Commission on Schools requirements:
   
   
   1. Pursue improvement criteria.
   2. Develop a school profile.
   3. Select challenging student performance goals.
   4. Identify appropriate assessments.
   5. Determine effective interventions/strategies.
   6. Implement the school improvement plan.
   7. Document performance results.
      
      
5. Each state office is responsible for developing a process for validating the membership criteria for all schools.
6. Assessing capacity: Schools applying for membership will assess their capacity to undertake school improvement using the Capacity Assessment Instrument. The examination team will review the assessment and make a recommendation to the state office regarding the school's capacity to implement the performance accreditation framework.
7. Candidate and member schools design and begin implementation of the performance accreditation framework during the beginning phases of the cycle. The school/system documents in a variety of ways that its student performance goals are met. The school/system also documents that a continuous effort exists in working toward the standard of maximizing student performance and preparing students to make successful transitions.

The School:1

1. Completes the Capacity Assessment Instrument. (Completing the assessment as an initial activity applies only to schools in their first cycle of school improvement.)
2. Develops a school profile by collecting data that are relevant to improving student performance and aalyzes these data to identify strengths and needs.
3. Develops a mission statement and identifies core educational beliefs.
4. Selects goals based on the analysis of the profile. The NCA CASI state offices review and approve the goals selected by the school. NCA CASI recognizes that some goals (i.e. mandated goals) may not be based on profile data. In those cases, data should be collected relevant to those goals.
5. Develops an improvement plan with appropriate assessments, strategies/interventions, and documentation.
6. Completes the Capacity Assessment Instrument. (At this point in the protocol, this applies only to continuing member schools in their second cycle or beyond.)
7. Hosts the first peer review visit. The purpose of this visit is to provide technical assistance and to assist in the design of the improvement plan. Specifically, the team reviews and comments on the student performance goals, assessments, strategies/interventions, and documentation plans. In addition, improvement criteria are validated via the Capacity Assessment Instrument.
8. Implements the school improvement plan.
9. Documents growth on the goals throughout the course of the improvement plan.
10. At the conclusion of the improvement cycle, the school prepares a documentation report that focuses on the degree of growth for each goal.
11. Hosts the second peer review visit. The purpose of this visit is to examine and verify performance results found in the documentation report for each student performance goal and to assist the school in its continuing improvement efforts. The school's readiness to engage in improvement is again examined via the Capacity Assessment Instrument.
12. The documentation report, as verified by the peer review team, and the written report of the peer review visit are both sent to the NCA CASI state office.

1 The term "school" refers to a school, a district, or system of schools.

The Peer Review Team Chairperson

1. Peer review team chairs will be trained and certified in the NCA Commission on Schools school improvement process prior to serving a member school.
2. The state office, in consultation with the host school, assigns a peer review team chairperson during the year preceding the peer review visits. No professional employed by the district may serve as the chair for the peer review visits.
3. The peer review team chairperson serves as the improvement facilitator and is responsible for the following:
   
   
   1. Consulting with the school leadership team prior to a peer review team visit.
   2. Providing initial review of the goals selected by the school.
   3. Scheduling the peer review visits.
   4. Orienting the peer reviewers.
   5. Leading the peer review process.
   6. Delivering the exit reports to the school staff and community.
   7. Preparing the written reports of the peer review visits.

The Peer Reviewers

1. The team chair, the state office, and the principal/superintendent of the host school collaborate on the selection of peer reviewers.
2. Peer reviewers are selected based on their technical expertise and experience in the specific goal areas chosen.
3. The majority of the peer reviewers should be classroom teachers, administrators, or specialists working within schools.
4. The number of peer reviewers is based on the number of goals selected and the size of the school.

Reviewing The School Portfolio

At the conclusion of a school improvement cycle, the NCA state/intra-regional office will prepare a portfolio for each school. The contents will include:

1. A copy of the school's three-year violation history.
2. The Peer Review Chairperson's Contact Visit Report

• Profile Evaluation Summary
• Mission Evaluation Summary
• Student Performance Goal Summary
• Non-Student Performance Goal Summary

3. The First Peer Review Team Visit Report

• School Capacity Assessment Instrument (Graphed results of first administration or of the second admininstration from the previous cycle)
• For each goal, Assessments Evaluation Summary, Interventions Evaluation Summary, and Staff Development Summary

4. The Peer Review Team Documentation Visit Report

• School Documentation Report
• School Capacity Assessment Instrument (Graphed results of second administration of the current cycle)

The state/intra-regional committee is responsible for reviewing each portfolio and making accreditation recommendations. A sample of each state's portfolios and recommendations are reviewed each year via the review processes established by the Commission.

District Improvement Plans

In districts or systems where all schools are NCA members, a comprehensive improvement plan with common goals may be developed. In such cases, a coordinated team visit may be utilized. Development of the district profile, selection of goals, documentation of assessment data, and management of the process may be developed at the district level. Peer reviewers should visit each member school to discuss interventions and assessments particular to that school.

Collaboration with State Departments of Education

The NCA Commission on Accreditation and School Improvement recognizes that it is desirable to collaborate with a state department of education in the conduct of school improvement activities. If the nature of this collaboration necessitates a substantive departure from the common protocol, the state office shall submit an alternate protocol to the Board of Trustees for consideration.