teachers’ ability to collaborate to improve teaching and learning. K–12 curriculum documents in ELA/English, math, and science are incomplete and not fully aligned to the 2011 Massachusetts Frameworks and the 2016 Massachusetts Science and Technology/Engineering Framework. Furthermore, there is uneven implementation of the district’s Framework of High-Quality Teaching and Learning across schools of the same level and across different school levels. In observed classrooms, the quality of teaching varied widely within and across schools, with stronger teaching taking place K–8. Most notably, team members observed variations in expectations for student work and in students’ opportunities to develop and use higher-order thinking skills. Other challenges included an inconsistent use of differentiated instruction to address students’ learning needs and of appropriate resources for learning. And while district leaders strategically use data for decision-making, classroom teachers do not consistently demonstrate expertise in routinely analyzing and using data to make decisions about instruction, differentiation, and curriculum. The implementation of the district’s educator evaluation system has been inconsistent and uneven. The district has not made progress in using multiple measures of evidence to inform educators’ evaluations. The district has not completed its initiative to develop and implement a more cohesive multi-tiered system of supports to meet the needs of all students. Finally, many school buildings are old, outdated, and overcrowded. Planning and resources have been inadequate to keep up with needed renovations, repairs, and upgrades to the schools. Recommendations To address the challenges highlighted above, the review team has made a number of key recommendations: School committee members should act with restraint with regard to the number and complexity of motions requesting information from school and district leaders. The district should ensure that at all schools and school levels teachers have adequate, frequent common planning time for collaboration. Teachers and leaders should finish aligning all ELA/English, math, and science curriculum documents to current state standards. The district should further articulate the Framework for High-Quality Teaching and Learning with the goal of prioritizing key instructional practices, communicating these key strategies to the full educational community, and supporting teachers in their implementation. The district should provide systematic, ongoing professional learning opportunities to educators’ ability to analyze and use data for improvement, and to promote critical thinking and promote high levels of student engagement, differentiate instruction, and use appropriate resources to meet students’ diverse learning needs. The district should implement its educator evaluation system.
teachers’ ability to collaborate to improve teaching and learning. K–12 curriculum documents in ELA/English, math, and science are incomplete and not fully aligned to the 2011 Massachusetts Frameworks and the 2016 Massachusetts Science and Technology/Engineering Framework. Furthermore, there is uneven implementation of the district’s Framework of High-Quality Teaching and Learning across schools of the same level and across different school levels. In observed classrooms, the quality of teaching varied widely within and across schools, with stronger teaching taking place K–8. Most notably, team members observed variations in expectations for student work and in students’ opportunities to develop and use higher-order thinking skills. Other challenges included an inconsistent use of differentiated instruction to address students’ learning needs and of appropriate resources for learning. And while district leaders strategically use data for decision-making, classroom teachers do not consistently demonstrate expertise in routinely analyzing and using data to make decisions about instruction, differentiation, and curriculum. The implementation of the district’s educator evaluation system has been inconsistent and uneven. The district has not made progress in using multiple measures of evidence to inform educators’ evaluations. The district has not completed its initiative to develop and implement a more cohesive multi-tiered system of supports to meet the needs of all students. Finally, many school buildings are old, outdated, and overcrowded. Planning and resources have been inadequate to keep up with needed renovations, repairs, and upgrades to the schools. Recommendations To address the challenges highlighted above, the review team has made a number of key recommendations: School committee members should act with restraint with regard to the number and complexity of motions requesting information from school and district leaders. The district should ensure that at all schools and school levels teachers have adequate, frequent common planning time for collaboration. Teachers and leaders should finish aligning all ELA/English, math, and science curriculum documents to current state standards. The district should further articulate the Framework for High-Quality Teaching and Learning with the goal of prioritizing key instructional practices, communicating these key strategies to the full educational community, and supporting teachers in their implementation. The district should provide systematic, ongoing professional learning opportunities to educators’ ability to analyze and use data for improvement, and to promote critical thinking and promote high levels of student engagement, differentiate instruction, and use appropriate resources to meet students’ diverse learning needs. The district should implement its educator evaluation system.
worcester-comprehensive-district-review-report-june-2017.docx