The New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC) is the oldest of the six regional accrediting agencies in the United States. Since its inception in 1885, the Association has awarded membership and accreditation to those educational institutions in the six-state New England region who seek voluntary affiliation.
The governing body of the Association is its Board of Trustees which supervises the work of five Commissions: the Commission on Institutions of Higher Education (CIHE), the Commission on Independent Schools (CIS), the Commission on Public Secondary Schools (CPSS), the Commission on Technical and Career Institutions (CTCI), and the Commission on Public Elementary Schools (CPES).
As the responsible body for matters of the evaluation and accreditation of public secondary school member institutions, the CPSS requires visiting committees to assess the degree to which the evaluated schools meet the qualitative Standards for Accreditation of the Commission. Those Standards are:
Teaching and Learning Standards
Mission and Expectations for Student Learning
Curriculum
Instruction
Assessment of Student LearningSupport of Teaching and Learning Standards
Leadership and Organization
School Resources for Learning
Community Resources for Learning
The accreditation program for public schools involves a threefold process: the self-study conducted by the local professional staff, the on-site evaluation conducted by the Commission’s visiting committee, and the follow-up program carried out by the school to implement the findings of its own self-study and the valid recommendations of the visiting committee and those identified by the Commission in the Follow-Up process. Continued accreditation requires that the school be reevaluated at least once every ten years and that it show continued progress addressing identified needs.
Preparation for the Evaluation Visit – the School Self-Assessment
A steering committee of the professional staff was appointed to supervise the myriad details inherent in the self-assessment. At Georges Valley High School, a committee of seven members with the principal serving in an ex officio capacity supervised all aspects of the self-study. The steering committee assigned all teachers and administrators in the school to appropriate subcommittees to determine the quality of all programs, activities, and facilities available for young people. In addition to faculty members, the self-study committee included a student, a parent, and a member of the board of directors for MSAD #50
The self-study of Georges Valley High School extended over a period of eighteen school months from December 2002 to June 2004.
Public schools evaluated by the Commission on Public Secondary Schools must complete appropriate materials to assess their adherence to the Standards for Accreditation and the quality of their educational offerings in light of the school’s mission, learning expectations, and unique student population. In addition to using the Self-Study Guides developed by the Commission, Georges Valley High School also used the questionnaires developed by the Center for Research and Education at the University of Maine to reflect the concepts contained in the Standards for Accreditation. These materials provided discussion items for a comprehensive assessment of the school by the professional staff during the self-study.
It is important that the reader understand that every subcommittee appointed
by the steering committee was required to present its report to the entire professional
staff for approval. No single report developed in the self-study became part
of the official self-study documents until it had been approved by the entire
professional staff.
The Process Used by the Visiting Committee
A visiting committee of fourteen evaluators was assigned by the Commission on Public Secondary Schools to evaluate the Georges Valley High School. The committee members spent four days in MSAD #50, reviewed the self-study documents which had been prepared for their examination, and met with administrators, teachers, other school and system personnel, students, and parents, shadowed students, visited classes, and interviewed teachers to determine the degree to which the school meets the Commission's Standards for Accreditation.
The visiting team built its professional judgment on evidence collected from the following sources:
Each conclusion on the report was
agreed to by team consensus. Sources of evidence for each conclusion drawn by
the visiting committee appear in parenthesis in the Standards sections of the
report. The seven Standards for Accreditation reports include commendations
and recommendations that in its judgment will be helpful to the school as it
works to improve teaching and learning and to better meet Commission Standards.
This report of the findings of the visiting committee will be forwarded to the
Commission on Public Secondary Schools which will make a decision on the accreditation
of Georges Valley High School.
Although the conclusions of the visiting committee on the school’s adherence to the Commission’s Standards for Accreditation appears in various sections of this report, the committee wishes to highlight some findings in the paragraphs that follow, these findings are not intended to be a summary of the report.
The missions and expectations for student learning document for Georges Valley High School was crafted with input from faculty members, administrators, students, and parents, thus ensuring that the values and beliefs of the school community were heard and addressed. Once completed, the document was accepted and approved by the faculty and board of directors for MSAD #50. Work has begun to ensure that the mission and expectations for student learning becomes enculturated within the school community. It is posted in all rooms, painted on the wall across from the school entrance, and used as the format for the Expectation Portfolio put in place for the Class of 2008 and beyond. This is not to say, however, that the document is universally accepted by staff members or students or that it is used as the touchstone for decision-making regarding teaching and learning. This is clearly not the case, and there are several other areas of concern that must also be noted. First, no district-wide vision or set of guiding principles exist to which the school’s document could be aligned; second, no mechanism is in place to review or revise the document; and third, while assessment tools are in place to measure student achievement of the school’s expectations for student learning, student work is not being consistently collected, and no real data exists to demonstrate student fulfillment of the learning expectations. Faculty members and administrators are fully aware of these shortfalls and understand they must be confronted in a timely fashion.
Curriculum guides are available for all disciplines. Most guides are aligned to the school’s expectations for student learning, and some guides are also aligned to the standards of the Maine Learning Results, but this is not done in a standardized and consistent manner. Further, not all guides make reference to or recommendation about instructional approaches or assessment practices. Curricular coordination within individual disciplines is taking place, but there is very little inter-departmental coordination and articulation. Further, there is neither a coordinated and articulated curriculum K-12 nor a district-wide curriculum review cycle. Use of student assessment data to inform curricular review and revision is non-existent, save for a few individual teachers. While students are provided a variety of course offerings and have opportunities to access learning activities that extent beyond the school walls, there are few opportunities for students to make “real life” connections between content areas as little or no inter-disciplinary learning opportunities are provided. The curriculum is delivered to students in four different levels in language arts and science, and three levels in social studies, and two levels in math. Review of student work indicates the need to emphasize depth over breadth in all levels and to examine the issues of academic rigor and equity of academic programming for all students. Space constraints in such areas as the library coupled with the fact that some teachers must “roam” from room-to-room impacts curricular delivery time. There is insufficient time allowed for curricular review and revision. Further, no plan is in place that would provide teachers the skills needed to ensure that curricular review and revision is based on best practices.
While a number of teachers at Georges Valley High School are employing a wide variety of instructional strategies such as group work, computer-based projects, hands-on skill building, and inquiry-based learning, many others use traditional teacher-centered methods. Further, use of student assessment data to inform instruction is non-existent. Some teachers do provide students with opportunities to practice self-assessment, but this practice is inconsistent and extremely limited. Staff development regarding best instructional practices is left to the discretion of individual teachers. Teachers are neither provided formal professional development activities to improve instructional practices nor the time to reflect on student work as a guide for instructional improvement. The teacher evaluation process does address instruction but in a very limited fashion as regards skills. Teachers are committed to providing individual assistance to students in need of help or re-teaching topics. However, time once provided for this has been greatly diminished over the past year as a result of the impact of the Maine Learning Results and No Child Left Behind initiatives and the need to find time to adequately address these mandates. The Maine Laptop Initiative has been fully supported by the district, and all Grade 9 students will soon have a laptop for use. The district is to be commended for its commitment to this project and for its plan to have a laptop in the hands of all students and teachers over the next several years. Having these will certainly impact instructional practices as well as staff development needs.
Assessment procedures and practices are in place at Georges Valley High School. A number of teachers are using a wide variety of assessment tools to measure student progress in individual classes. All teachers understand the concept, use, and importance of rubrics and employ them as a common practice. Some teachers also use student assessment data to inform curriculum and instruction. However, such practice is not universal as no formal plan is in place school-wide to collect, analyze, and employ student assessment data to review and revise curriculum and instructional practices. The expectations portfolio is set up to document student achievement of the school’s expectations for student learning. Students in the Class of 2008 and beyond will be measured against these expectations using rubrics currently in place. However, there is no process in place to either measure in all core content areas student achievement of the standards of the Maine Learning Results or to compile this data for institutional use. The district’s local assessment system is being completed and may well contain plans to collect student assessment and to report to students, parents, teachers, and community the status of student achievement of both the school’s expectations for student learning and the standards of the Maine Learning Results.
A school leadership team has recently been formed by the principal to oversee school improvement efforts. This team consists of six faculty members and the principal. Each faculty member on the team represents a sub-group of other faculty members in an attempt to ensure up and down communication related to decision-making. However, as no formal decision-making process has been defined, published, and employed, there is confusion as to who is making decisions. Further, the principal is not accorded the full autonomy she needs in order to be seen by the faculty as the school’s true educational leader. The leadership style of the superintendent as compared to the principal clouds, in the minds of most faculty members, the understanding of who is truly making the decisions about teaching and learning at Georges Valley High School. The principal and staff make great efforts to involve parents in the educational process. A number of parents serve on the principal’s parent advisory council, and many more are involved on school sub-committees. All teachers at Georges Valley High School serve on committees aimed at school improvement. The 4x2 block schedule does permit more student access to courses. However, spatial issues do impede full student choice of those classes offered. The school offers courses in four levels: standard, comprehensive, accelerated, and advanced placement. Such grouping collides with the school’s mission statement that states as one of its tenets “To strive to empower each student to realize his/her highest learning potential”. Such grouping also raises questions as to the equality and rigor of the academic program for all students.
The advisory program is making great efforts to personalize the educational program for all students. Special education and health services are in place to provide assistance to students in need. Guidance services are in place but in need of restructuring in order that all students have equitable access to academic and career planning as well as having their emotional and social needs addressed. Job descriptions need to be established for guidance personnel that address specific job tasks and responsibilities. Media services and technology are in place to support the learning process, but library/media center space is small and, as a result, student access is limited.
Building maintenance is in place
to ensure that, at present, Georges Valley High School is a clean and healthy
place for both students and staff. Spatial problems plague the building. Not
only do teachers have to share space or move from space-to-space between classes,
thus impacting instructional time and curricular delivery, but lack of space
also brings about the need to store materials and equipment off-site at individual
homes. Some equipment stored on-site is in areas open to students causing hazardous
situations. The building is also not in full compliance with the Americans with
Disabilities Act, limiting student access to some programs. A Five-Year Capital
Improvement Plan for the district exists, but is currently “on hold”
because of budgetary problems and merger talks. The community is extremely supportive
of Georges Valley High School and provides fiscal and personnel resources for
such programs as Trekker and the Junior Journey.
It is to be noted that the faculty and support staff of Georges Valley High
School do recognize the strengths and concerns highlighted in the above paragraphs.
The self-study was well done, and, generally, presented an adequate appraisal
of the status of the high school in relationship to the standards. It is also
to be noted that, in some cases, school personnel are already moving forward
to address some of the issues noted in the self-study and in the principal’s
school improvement plan. Administrators and faculty and support staff members
generally understand that the improvement of teaching and learning must be the
focus for all they do. Most also understand that curriculum, instruction, and
assessment are systemic in nature and must, therefore, be used in a formal school-wide
and coordinated effort if the school’s mission is to be met and the expectations
for student learning are to be achieved.
Georges Valley High School has many
successes to celebrate and many strengths of which to be proud. Of equal importance
are those areas of concern identified either through the self-study and/or by
the visiting team. Addressing these concerns will not be an effortless task,
but, once done, will provide a more rigorous, equitable, and personalized place
of learning for all students and allow further cause for celebration. Hopefully,
school and community members will find this document to be a valued tool as
they move forward together in the best interest of students.