Please go to www.joinpd.com and press the button “Join a Session” that is located at the top of the website. Join our session using the following code:
Staff Self-Assessment
September 22, 2021
As each team presents their summary, please be mindful of any additional insights or evidence that should be considered by the Cognia Review Team.
You will have an opportunity to share your thoughts after each presentation.
Standard 2.2 | |||
The learning culture promotes creativity, innovation and collaborative problem-solving. |
Key Evidence | ||||
EN | PBL Plans | |||
STEAM Week | ||||
IM | PBL Team Meetings | |||
PBL Project Sharing (Team meetings and STEAM Week) | ||||
RE | Teacher constructed project rubrics | |||
PBL Reflection Form/ Rubric | ||||
SU | Evolution of COJOWA Mission and Vision to prioritize creativity, innovation, and problem solving | |||
PBL videos to show improvement in quality over time | ||||
EM | All staff trained in PBL through UTeach | |||
PBL embedded in school’s strategic plan |
Standard 2.2 | The learning culture promotes creativity, innovation and collaborative problem-solving. |
Rubric Rating: | 2.9 |
Rating Reflection | |||
Teachers and students are committed to the development of creativity, innovation, and problem-solving. PBL is being implemented school-wide. The institution should Seek areas that currently serve as models for mastery for this standard. Formal processes are required to monitor and analyze data to demonstrate results and growth of student skills. |
Do you have any additional insights or evidence that you think should be considered by the Cognia Engagement Review Team for this standard?�
Standard 2.2 | The learning culture promotes creativity, innovation and collaborative problem-solving. |
Standard 2.4 | |||
The institution has a formal structure to ensure learners develop positive relationships with and have adults/peers who support their educational experiences. |
Standard 2.4 | The institution has a formal structure to ensure learners develop positive relationships with and have adults/peers who support their educational experiences. |
Key Evidence | ||||
EN 4 |
| |||
IM 3.5 |
| |||
RE 2.5 |
| |||
SU 2 |
| |||
EM 3 |
| |||
Rubric Rating: | 3 |
Rating Explanation | |||
Glow: Commitment as an organization to develop and strengthen positive relationships and social-emotional skills in our school and community. Programs and structures implemented to ensure success. Grow: Expanding our data collection to include teachers and staff to determine the effectiveness of the programs within the school. Involve teachers in the analysis of the effectiveness of the program. |
Do you have any additional insights or evidence that you think should be considered by the Cognia Engagement Review Team for this standard?�
Standard 2.4 | The institution has a formal structure to ensure learners develop positive relationships with and have adults/peers who support their educational experiences. |
Standard 2.6 | |||
The institution implements a process to ensure the curriculum is aligned to standards and best practices. |
Evidence | ||||
EN 3.5 | UbD's show the alignment between the standards, the unit planned by the teacher and the assessments | |||
Syllabus | ||||
IM 3 | Year at a glance Curriculum matrix | |||
Annual review with standards curriculum | ||||
RE 3 | Report card | |||
Data Wall | ||||
SU 4 | ES / MS / HS Matrix (syllabi, unit planning, power standards) | |||
Follow-up from Counseling /Learning Center/ Academic coaching | ||||
EM 3 | Annual Review of Power Standards / Reflection Conversations | |||
Professional Development by Leading Teachers (Teacher as a leading model) |
Standar 2.6 | The institution implements a process to ensure the curriculum is aligned to standards and best practices. |
Rubric Rating | 3.3 |
Rating Reflection | |||
Growth:
Glow:
|
Do you have any additional insights or evidence that you think should be considered by the Cognia Engagement Review Team for this standard?�
Standard 2.6 | The institution implements a process to ensure the curriculum is aligned to standards and best practices. |
Standard 2.8 | |||
The institution provides programs and services for learners’ educational futures and career planning. |
Key Evidence | ||||
EN | Xello | |||
Career focus on pasantia/internship & career project (12th grade) | ||||
IM | Academic Counselor: Guidance in course selection/registration | |||
Xello | ||||
RE | % Students who are admitted to the Univ. of their choice | |||
Xello- Interest Surveys, Career Research | ||||
SU | % Students who are admitted to the Univ. of their choice | |||
Xello - Interest Surveys, Career Research | ||||
EM | PBL | |||
Standards Based Grading |
Standard 2.8 | The institution provides programs and services for learners’ educational futures and career planning. |
Rubric Rating: | 2.9 |
Rating Reflection: | |||
Strength- Engagement and our Counselor Department Growth- we saw a lot of places for growth for some of these. Specifically for sustainability. We could log scores for AP, SAT scores. Track applicant numbers for how many students apply to accelerated classes, NJHS, NHS, AP classes etc.
|
Do you have any additional insights or evidence that you think should be considered by the Cognia Engagement Review Team for this standard?�
Standard 2.8 | The institution provides programs and services for learners’ educational futures and career planning. |
Standard 2.11 | |||
Educators gather, analyze, and use formative and summative data that lead to demonstrable improvement of student learning. |
Key Evidence | ||||
Engagement | Google Classroom | |||
Station rotations- Conferences with teacher | ||||
Implementation | Reading groups, small groups, centers | |||
UBDs | ||||
Results | RTI Process- Meetings teachers do per grade level or area | |||
Saber 11 | ||||
Sustainability | Vida Universitaria | |||
Data Wall | ||||
Embeddedness | Small group instruction | |||
| Yearly meetings between grade levels to talk about levels and student data |
Standard 2.11 | Educators gather, analyze, and use formative and summative data that lead to demonstrable improvement of student learning. |
Rubric Rating: | 2.2 |
Rating Reflexion | |||
GLOW: There is a lot of data and information on the processes and from all areas. Teachers are consistent in gathering information. Good longitudinal results. GROW: More time is needed to analyze the data and to take action to continue improvement in students. It is necessary to standardize the information and optimize it (formats are repetitive and not communicated in a timely manner)This way improvements are carried out and the progress of the students is evident). |
Do you have any additional insights or evidence that you think should be considered by the Cognia Engagement Review Team for this standard?�
Standard 2.11 | Educators gather, analyze, and use formative and summative data that lead to demonstrable improvement of student learning. |
Standard 2.12 | |||
The institution implements a process to continuously assess its programs and organizational conditions to improve student learning. |
Evidencias | ||||
E | Participation of all groups in the development of our 5-year strategic plan plan. | |||
Annual surveys for staff, students, and parents to measure progress toward meeting the goals of our strategic plan. | ||||
I | Surveys to evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of 7Mindsets. | |||
Use of PBL rubric to measure implementation of the PBL program. | ||||
R | The transition from PHIDIAS to ALMA. | |||
Use of data through the RTI (Response to Intervention) program to analyze student growth in Learning Center/Academic Coaching and to exit students from this program. | ||||
S | Analysis of test results (MAP, SAT, ACT, SABER). | |||
Raz Kids, Formal Assessment of Students' Reading Level (F&P or DRA). | ||||
Em | Choosing Alma as a student information platform based on feedback from teachers, students and parents. | |||
Digital Learning class in MS and Technology (Digital Citizenship) in ES (Google for Education, Google Classroom, Google Drive, etc.) as part of the new strategic plan. |
Standard 2.12 | The institution implements a process to continuously assess its programs and organizational conditions to improve student learning. |
Rubric Rating: | 2.6 |
Rating Reflection | |||
Glow: Participation - We collect a lot of information and everyone participates. Grow: Results - We need to share, analyze and use the data in order to make better decisions as an institution. |
Do you have any additional insights or evidence that you think should be considered by the Cognia Engagement Review Team for this standard?�
Standard 2.12 | The institution implements a process to continuously assess its programs and organizational conditions to improve student learning. |