SABIS International Charter School

August 11, 2017

School Quality Review

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 1

ABOUT THE COMPANY ............................................................................................................................... 2

PROJECT OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................... 5

INITIAL SCOPE OF SERVICES ........................................................................................................................ 6

PROJECT STAFFING...................................................................................................................................... 7

RELATED WORK ......................................................................................................................................... 10

PAYMENT SCHEDULE ................................................................................................................................ 11

REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................. 12

SERVICE AGREEMENT ............................................................................................................................... 13

APPENDIX A: TEAM MEMBER RÉSUMÉS

APPENDIX B: SAMPLE SCHOOL QUALITY REVIEW REPORT

Introduction The SABIS International Charter School (SICS) is a K through 12th grade charter school located in Springfield, Massachusetts.

Founded in 1995 by a group of parents and community leaders, SICS became one of the first 25 public charter schools in

Massachusetts, and now serves more than 1,500 students. SABIS International Charter School Board of Trustees is

committed to providing SICS students with access to a high-quality education that prepares them for college success,

fosters a lifelong interest in learning, and develops responsible world-class citizens.

To ensure the efficacy of its educational program in fostering those outcomes, the SABIS International Charter School Board

of Trustees seeks to formally evaluate the school’s current curriculum, implementation of the curriculum, and future trends

in learning. The Board of Trustees has requested proposals for an independent, comprehensive, objective third-party

evaluation of the school, with specific attention to the current curriculum and implementation. As an education consulting

company that has assessed more than a thousand schools since 1998—including the SABIS International Charter School in

2015—SchoolWorks is pleased to submit this proposal of services for consideration.

1

About the Company SchoolWorks, founded in 1998 and based in Beverly, Massachusetts, is an education consulting group whose mission is to

advance all aspects of student learning and well-being by building the capacity of educators and educational institutions to

assess, plan for and achieve student success.

Our vision is an educational system that interprets best practices to meet the unique needs of every community,

neighborhood and school. To accomplish this vision, we work from a set of core values. We will learn with our clients as

their capacity to educate students evolves. We will achieve our vision by continually learning from effective practices and

by reflecting on how we impact student learning, educators’ practices and client satisfaction.

In developing any proposal, SchoolWorks adheres to our core values.

• Accountability. We believe accountability for results is an essential component of every successful organization.

• Based on Evidence. We seek to understand the context and practices of schools, districts, school networks, authorizers, and communities through evidence based processes.

• Collaboration and Learning. We serve our clients best by collaborating and learning with them.

• Diversity. We practice cultural competence in the diverse communities and schools in which we work, and are strengthened by differing backgrounds, beliefs, experiences, and approaches.

• Effective Practices. We identify effective practices across the education landscape, interpret and apply them in all

aspects of our work.

The company works with:

State Departments of Education. We collaborate with departments of education to provide accountability and technical

assistance to districts and schools. Services begin with district and school reviews related to federal and state accountability

and may extend to providing sustained professional development to districts and schools in need of intervention.

School Districts and School Management Organizations. We provide a comprehensive set of school improvement services

to districts and school management organizations, including the design and implementation of school reviews, school

improvement planning processes and leadership coaching.

Charter School Authorizers. We provide school quality reviews as part of the charter review and renewal process. These

reviews may be summative reviews at the end of the charter period or formative reviews that provide recommendations

and root cause analyses to help schools meet their charter goals.

Foundations. Foundations engage us for a variety of services, including school design, grant evaluation and school reviews.

Individual Schools. We offer a range of services to individual schools, including program evaluation, charter school

application design, formative school reviews and leadership coaching.

K-12 Service Providers. We help publishers and professional development organizations by conducting research and

program evaluation. K-12 service providers benefit from our expertise in understanding how services impact schools.

SchoolWorks Accountability and Design Services

Chicago Public Schools: SchoolWorks’ partnership with the Chicago Public Schools Office of Innovation and Incubation (I&I)

began in 2006 and, since then, has provided a range of services, including charter school renewal support, school site visits,

and new charter school application reviews. Early in the relationship, I&I engaged SchoolWorks to boost their capacity

during charter school renewal and new charter application evaluation processes, which has led to regular support of these

processes by SchoolWorks. To date, SchoolWorks has facilitated more than 50 new school proposal reviews, more than 40

renewal team recommendations, and has conducted more than 30 site visits. SchoolWorks has collaborated with I&I

2

regularly to update their renewal and Request for Proposal (RFP) review tools. SchoolWorks continues to assess the quality

of charter school renewal applications, conduct renewal site visits, and develop renewal recommendations for the Office of

Innovation and Incubation.

Colorado Department of Education: In 2009, the Colorado Department of Education (CDE) established the State Review

Panel to evaluate schools and districts placed on a five-year improvement timetable. Since 2014, SchoolWorks has

supported this accountability work by partnering with CDE to develop an extensive school and district evaluation process.

This work began by creating a protocol that could be used to guide panelists through a document review and site visit

process, using the critical evaluation factors laid out in the Education Accountability Act of 2009 as the central organizing

principle. Additionally, SchoolWorks – using the evidence gathered through the document review and site visit processes –

collaborated with CDE to create a Recommendation Protocol to guide panelists in making recommendations to the state’s

Commissioner regarding potential actions for schools at the end of the five-year timetable. SchoolWorks was fully

responsible for the recruitment, hiring, and training of State Review Panelists, as well as communicating with districts and

schools to coordinate their site visits. In the 2014-2015 school year, SchoolWorks facilitated the State Review Panel site visit

and recommendation process for 36 schools and districts across the State of Colorado, culminating in formal

recommendations submitted to the Commissioner and State Board of Education for consideration.

Louisiana Department of Education: In 2013, SchoolWorks began their ongoing partnership with the Louisiana Department

of Education (LDE) to conduct third-party reviews of new charter school applications. In this first year of partnership,

SchoolWorks collaborated with LDE to refine its review process for charter school applications. The resulting multi-stage

review process includes an initial review of application materials, an interview with each applicant team, and a due

diligence review of the applicant organization. The review process concludes with a recommendation to LDE and,

eventually, the State Superintendent of Education and Louisiana Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE).

Since the inception of this partnership, SchoolWorks has helped LDE review more than 60 charter school applications and

more than 30 additional applications through a separate appeals process.

Citizens of the World Charter School. Citizens of the World Charter Schools is an emerging Charter Management

Organization (CMO) dedicated to creating a national network of charter schools that celebrate and reflect the full diversity

of their communities. In 2011, the organization sought a proven partner to help the CMO develop and submit two high-

quality charter applications for schools in New York City. SchoolWorks collaborated with leadership from Citizens of the

World Charter Schools to draft complete charter applications that met the standards and expectations of one of the

nation’s preeminent charter school authorizations – The State University of New York Charter Schools Institute. Citizens of

the World Charter Schools was awarded two charter contracts for schools in New York City.

Tennessee Charter School Center: The Tennessee Charter School Center (TCSC) was established with the primary goal of

closing the education achievement gap in Tennessee by supporting the creation of high-quality public charter schools in

Memphis and Nashville. An integral component of TCSC’s work involves helping entrepreneurs and educators launch new

charter schools by providing them with support services through the start-up year and initial years of operation.

SchoolWorks was engaged by TCSC to support several school founders in drafting complete charter applications based on

the vision of the school leaders. Through an iterative process, SchoolWorks and the school leaders produced high-quality

charter applications that were submitted to authorizers throughout Tennessee.

SchoolWorks Quality Reviews

Denver Public Schools: Since 2014, SchoolWorks has served as a partner to Denver Public schools to conduct diagnostic

reviews. The School Quality Review (SQR) process focused on qualitative data on instruction, students’ and educators’

opportunities to learn, and leadership and community. Each SQR team spends two-and-a-half days on site collecting

evidence through document review, interviews and focus groups, and classroom visits. This external review of current

3

practices has supported schools in their school improvement planning, and simultaneously supplemented the district’s

existing school level accountability data. SchoolWorks provides the district and school a rubric-based rated report

summarizing the claims and evidence. These reports have been included as a source of evidence in the district’s decision

making on individual school accountability.

SchoolWorks Instructional Supports

Lynn Public Schools: After conducting monitoring site visits to schools in 2014, Lynn district officials and SchoolWorks

identified a need to improve instructional leadership and knowledge. In addition to providing school principals with

leadership coaching services, SchoolWorks also provides the school district with instructional coaching through Learning

Walks – non-evaluative classroom observations involving teachers and school leaders. Learning Walks allow participants

with varying degrees of classroom experience to collaborate on instructional strategies and model targeted practice areas,

including small-group instruction and student discourse. School leaders have identified Learning Walks as a valuable tool in

aligning classroom instruction to school goals and addressing areas of improvement.

SchoolWorks Leadership Supports

Lynn Public Schools: SchoolWorks has a long-standing partnership with the Lynn Public School District to provide targeted

school improvement resources for designated turnaround schools. After conducting monitoring site visits to schools in

2014, Lynn district officials and SchoolWorks identified a need to improve instructional leadership and knowledge.

SchoolWorks then developed a leadership coaching plan to provide support to seven school principals. Each school leader

collaborated with SchoolWorks coaches to create an individual action plan and goals specifically tailored to the principal’s

needs. Coaching occurs through a multitude of processes, depending on the specific goals set by each principal. These

supports include shadowing and providing feedback on classroom observations, support in developing strategies to

delegate tasks, and assistance with leadership team meetings and professional learning community meetings.

SchoolWorks Lead Partner Services

Holyoke Public Schools: In the summer of 2015, the Holyoke Public Schools (HPS) was placed in receivership by the

Massachusetts Department of Education. The new Receiver for the district selected SchoolWorks from among 16 applicants

to serve as Lead Partner for the Peck School – a school with chronic underperformance and significant needs in both its

general education grades 4-8 program and its grades 4-8 therapeutic intervention program. SchoolWorks began the

partnership by completing a SchoolWorks Quality Review to identify and prioritize areas for improvement. SchoolWorks

then developed a targeted action plan focused on school climate, instructional practices, and the therapeutic intervention

program. Through re-staffing, a restructuring of the school schedule, leadership coaching, and professional development,

SchoolWorks has assisted HPS in stabilizing the Peck School, raising attendance by 3-to-5% points across the school and

cutting discipline incidents in half. In addition, SchoolWorks assisted the Peck School to develop a clear instructional focus

and to support that focus through professional development and learning walks.

4

Project Overview SchoolWorks will provide a formal evaluation of the SABIS International School, along with a comprehensive assessment of

the current curriculum, by conducting a SchoolWorks School Quality Review (SQR) of SICS, preceded by an in-depth

Curriculum Review. These services will be performed as follows.

1. Curriculum Review. Prior to the site visit, a SchoolWorks curriculum development and assessment specialist will

provide a desk review of the current SICS curriculum (specific to SICS-identified subject areas) for all grade levels

against state and national standards. Having completed this work, she will then join the SchoolWorks team at the site

visit to administer the SQR through the lens of quality implementation, evaluating both the use of the curriculum by

teachers and the support that leadership provides in its application (i.e., opportunities to plan, feedback on lesson

plans, etc.).

2. SchoolWorks School Quality Review Protocol Enhancement. Simultaneously, the SchoolWorks team will modify its

School Quality Criteria (SQC) protocol to provide an enhanced focus on the quality and implementation of the

curriculum. The protocol will be reviewed and approved by SICS leadership prior to the SQR.

3. SchoolWorks School Quality Review. The SchoolWorks team will then conduct a comprehensive formal review of SICS.

The SQR will be facilitated by a team of four SchoolWorks representatives comprised of a Team Lead, a Team Writer

and two Team Members, including the curriculum development and assessment specialist who conducted the initial

Curriculum Review. Over a period of two days, the reviewers will gather and consider evidence about school programs

and operations in relation to the key questions outlined in the protocol.

About the School Quality Review: The SQR is based on a transparent set of standards – the SchoolWorks Quality

Criteria (SQC) – that serve as the framework to assess critical aspects of a school’s culture, organization, and academic

program. SchoolWorks Quality Criteria and indicators are based on research of best educational practices, and refined

by the company’s extensive experience in assessing more than 1,000 school programs since 1998. The SQC are

organized into five domains: Student Attainment and Development, Instruction, Students’ Opportunities to Learn,

Educators’ Opportunities to Learn, and Governance and Leadership. The modified protocol utilized during the SICS

assessment will prompt a more rigorous assessment of curriculum quality and implementation, and may incorporate

fewer domains to yield targeted evidence collection in key areas.

School Quality Review Process: Prior to the site visit, the SchoolWorks Project Manager and Team Lead will work with

the school to organize the schedule and begin pre-visit document analysis. In addition to the curricula, key documents

analyzed during this initial review will include attendance records, professional development records, student

assessment results, and other materials. All SchoolWorks reviewers will independently analyze the records prior to

their arrival at the site visit. Once on-site, the evidence collection process will continue with additional document

review, classroom visits, and interviews with key school stakeholders. The team will meet daily to confirm, refute, and

modify its hypotheses about school performance and then communicate it progress to the school’s leadership. At the

end of the SQR, the team will provide an oral report of findings. Deliverables will include:

a. Prioritization Session. The following day, the SchoolWorks Team will host an on-site prioritization session. During

this action-planning process, the team and the school will work together to identify prioritized areas for

improvement. The outcome will be a prioritized action plan of next steps, including strategies, resources, and

timelines to accomplish goals. This verbal feedback will then be followed by a written report, detailing the

evidence that led the team to reach its findings.

b. Written Report: After the visit, the school will receive a full written report that formalizes the SQR results and

recommendations discussed on site. For SICS, the report will also contain an appendix that specifically documents

the findings of the curriculum review and provides annotated recommendations for improvement. The report will

be finalized approximately 3-4 weeks after the completion of the SQR.

5

The result of this process will be: 1) a comprehensive formal objective evaluation of the school; 2) an internally-developed

action-plan of immediate next steps to facilitate ongoing school improvement; and 3) a full review of the strengths and

weaknesses of the current curriculum and its implementation with authoritative recommendations for improvement.

SchoolWorks is pleased to submit this proposal to the SABIS International Charter School Board of Trustees for

consideration.

Initial Scope of Services

Tasks Deliverable(s) Fixed Fee

Curriculum Review

• Review the current SICS curriculum

against state and national standards

• Administer an on-site review of

curriculum use and implementation

• Curriculum-specific findings and

recommendations within an appendix

of the final SQR report

$8,900

SQR Protocol Enhancement

• Review and update the SchoolWorks SQR

assessment protocol based on SICS

curriculum assessment objectives

• SICS Site Visit protocol $3,900

School Quality Review

• Plan and facilitate of all aspects of the School Quality Review

• 2.5 days on site with four (4) SchoolWorks representatives

• Collect data from document review, classroom observations and focus groups

• Write and finalize SQR Report

• On-site prioritization session with school

leaders resulting in action-plan for school

improvement

• 10-12-page written report detailing findings

(including an appendix with curriculum

review findings and recommendations)

$26,300

Total $39,100

6

Project Staffing

SchoolWorks will assign a Project Manager to oversee all aspects of the project and provide quality control. The Curriculum Review will be conducted by SchoolWorks consultant specializing in curriculum development and assessment. The School Quality Review will be facilitated by a team of four (4) SchoolWorks staff and/or consultants including a Team Lead, a Team Writer and two Team Members, one of whom will be the Curriculum Development and Assessment Specialist who conducted the initial curriculum review. Personnel for key roles are identified below. Résumés are included in Appendix A.

SchoolWorks Project Manager: Kate Wheeler

Kate Wheeler is Director of Project Management at SchoolWorks. As a Project Manager, Kate has worked most closely with

Baltimore City Public Schools, helping to create and implement a School Effectiveness Review process for more than 50

schools throughout the district. Prior to SchoolWorks, she managed the implementation and daily operations of the teacher

evaluation system for DC Public Schools, IMPACT. Kate supported the completion and input of triannual assessments for

more than 6,000 employees; supervised the creation of a web-based portal in which to enter and analyze assessment data;

organized and conducted more than 100 teacher feedback sessions in planning for the evaluation system; and, guided

principals in providing support to teachers in need of assistance. While with DC Public Schools, Kate also coordinated the

District’s Teacher Incentive Fund grant, overseeing the presentation of more than $1.5 million in awards over two years.

She has participated in numerous school quality reviews and assisted in the development of case studies of highly effective

schools. She is a former elementary and middle school teacher and teacher leader, with experience in both traditional and

charter schools. Kate holds a B.A. in Psychology from the University of Richmond and an Ed.M. in Education Policy and

Management from Harvard University.

SchoolWorks Curriculum Development and Assessment Specialist: Aubrey Goodman

Aubrey Goodman is a consultant at SchoolWorks. Aubrey is the former Director of K-8 Curriculum and Assessment at

Lighthouse Academies, a national network of charter schools. In this role, Aubrey developed and oversaw the

implementation of the network’s education model, led professional development for school leaders and teachers,

SchoolWorks Project Manger

SchoolWorks Curriculum Development and

Assessment Specialist

SchoolWorks Site Visit Writer

SchoolWorks Site Visit Team Lead

SchoolWorks Site Visit Team Member

7

conducted school evaluation visits and designed curriculum and assessments. Prior to her work at Lighthouse Academies,

Aubrey taught in elementary and middle schools and worked as a curriculum developer for Kaplan K12, where she designed

middle school English Language Arts courses for large urban school districts. Aubrey holds a B.A. in American Studies from

Yale University and an Ed.M. in Education Policy and Management from Harvard University.

SchoolWorks Potential Site Visit Team Lead and/or Team Members

Upon contract award, the SchoolWorks Project Manager will identify the remaining members of the site visit team

depending upon the desired timing of the project. Team members may include:

• Dominique Astier is a consultant for SchoolWorks. She taught French and Spanish for fifteen years in Rhode Island,

New York and Massachusetts and served as a department head, student counselor and teacher mentor. For the past

eight years, she has been working as a consultant, conducting Charter School inspections and DOE reviews of

underperforming and exemplary schools in Massachusetts and New York; developing and guiding the execution of new

curricula and programs; and conducting program evaluations in various states across the nation. Dominique holds a BS

in Education and an MA in French Language and Literature from the Ohio State University.

• Kathryn Cobb. Kathryn is a consultant for SchoolWorks. She is an experienced high school English and reading teacher

and has taught all secondary grade and ability levels, from remedial reading to International Baccalaureate English.

Kathryn held multiple leadership positions in addition to her teaching assignments. As English Department Head, she

acted as a liaison between administration and teachers, supported instructional goals, and ensured the equitable

distribution of resources. In addition, Kathryn served on the Design Team – a leadership committee responsible for

making and executing strategic school decisions, such as the implementation of professional learning communities and

the facilitation of school-wide professional development. Kathryn transitioned from teacher to curriculum writer for

the Virginia Department of Education. In addition to developing, writing, and revising courses, she authored case

studies and teaching guides. Kathryn holds a B.A. in English and linguistics from Northeastern University.

• Kara Dunn, M.Ed., M.Div. is a consultant with SchoolWorks. She is also the CEO and consultant of ApogeeVision, a

consulting firm that works with many public and private organizations in the areas of administration, facilitation,

teacher and staff training, organizational and curriculum development, and program evaluation. She has been an

educator for 15 years, serving K-12 students. Among many instructional positions, she has worked in the Boston Public

Schools as a science teacher and district lead teacher. She was a teacher trainer and science coach for the Boston

Teacher Residency Program – a teacher preparation program under the auspices of the Boston Plan for Excellence

organization. She has served as a curriculum developer and instructor for the Office of Diversity and Community

Partnerships at Harvard Medical School. She is the author of several curricula, including one made for the national film

tour, Kunta Kinteh Island: Coming Home without Shackles. She holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in Educational

Psychology from Spelman College and two Masters Degrees – a Masters of Education from the University of

Massachusetts, and Masters of Divinity from Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary.

• Peggy Kemp is a consultant with SchoolWorks. She recently retired as headmaster of Boston’s Fenway High School.

During her tenure, Fenway achieved status as a Commonwealth Compass School, a Massachusetts Commendation

School, and a National Blue Ribbon School. Peggy held several school-based teaching and administrative positions in

the Boston Public Schools, and also served as city-wide program director for social studies. She has more than ten years

of experience working in higher education, including serving as associate director of a math and science center at

Northeastern University and director of school partnerships at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. She has

consulted with the school districts of Prince George’s County Maryland; Jefferson County, Kentucky; and Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania.

8

• Nick Thompson is a consultant for SchoolWorks. He has taught mathematics in public schools in Boston for over 10

years in both charter and district settings. Nick began his career teaching 6th, 7th, and 8th grade math at a high-

performing charter school, where he received a Spotlight Teacher Award by the Effective Practice Incentive Community

based on student achievement results. Most recently, he has served as the Math Specialist at a district elementary

school in Boston. In this capacity, he collaborated with teachers at all grade levels in all aspects of math instruction

from classroom culture to assessment design, data analysis, and lesson planning.

• Megan Tupa. Most recently, Megan served as Executive Director in the Chicago Public Schools (CPS) special education

department, which is responsible for providing services to over 50,000 students across the City of Chicago. Megan led

the transformation of the citywide evaluation teams, hiring, training and managing over 75 staff members to conduct

special education evaluations of over 6000 students annually. The leadership Megan brought to this work was lauded

by top District officials, the Mayor’s Office, and the Illinois State Board of Education. Megan was also responsible for

establishing policy for the provision of preschool special education services for over 5000 students and 200 teachers. In

collaboration with the district’s early childhood office, Megan was a key player in the roll out of a centralized preschool

application process and full day preschool programs - both priorities set forth by Chicago’s Mayor. Megan joined CPS in

2010, as the Director of Special Projects with the Office of Instruction. In this role, she was integral in leading many

district priorities, including the development and launch of the district’s comprehensive, performance-based teacher

evaluation system. Prior to joining CPS, Megan was the Chief Operating Officer at SchoolWorks, an education

consulting company, providing project management and organizational support to school districts across the country.

Megan has extensive experience managing diverse teams, developing and implementing strategic plans, and providing

consultation to district and school administrators as well as city officials. She has over fifteen years of experience in

special education that also includes work in research settings, Early Intervention programs and as a teacher to children

with Autism Spectrum Disorders. Megan has a BS in Child Development and Psychology from Vanderbilt University, an

M.Ed. in Early Childhood Special Education from the University of Illinois at Chicago, and a Masters in Health

Administration from Suffolk University.

9

Related Work In 1998, SchoolWorks began its work with an emphasis on assessment services. Working for charter school authorizers and

departments of education, SchoolWorks conducted charter renewal site visits and district school reviews for accountability

purposes. From these beginnings, SchoolWorks assessments have broadened and deepened to include formative school

reviews, program evaluations, and case study development. With assessment services at the core of our work, SchoolWorks

has a culture committed to using criteria based on effective practices, making statements based on evidence, and reporting

what we learn in a way that values and respects the efforts of educators. Having assessed and documented the work of

thousands of schools, we never forget that the challenge of evaluating the work pales in comparison to the challenge of

doing the work.

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

• School and District Reviews: SchoolWorks has been providing valuable support to the Massachusetts Department of

Elementary and Secondary Education’s Division for Accountability, Partnerships and Assistance since the department

was first established. SchoolWorks began this partnership with the Department by conducting more than 200

independent reviews of traditional public schools and districts. SchoolWorks increased its support to the Department in

2009 by collaborating with staff and other stakeholders to develop a site visit protocol that was specifically designed to

understand school and district improvement efforts. Using the site visit protocol, SchoolWorks conducted, and

continues to conduct, reviews of many of the Commonwealth’s largest urban districts schools, including district-level

interviews and site visits to more than 40 schools.

• School Quality Reviews: In recent years, SchoolWorks has partnered with Chelsea Public Schools to conduct focused

School Quality Reviews catered to the individual needs of each school, ranging in length from 1.5 to 2.5 days. Site

reviewers conducted document review, classroom observations, and interviews with key stakeholders, including school

leaders, teachers, and parents. At the conclusion of these SQRs, SchoolWorks analyzed findings across the schools and

presented the district with a summary report that identified evidence-based trends across the selected schools.

• Monitoring Site Visits: SchoolWorks provided annual Monitoring Site Visits for all Level 4 schools in Massachusetts

between 2010 and 2014 (approximately 40 schools per year). The resulting reports were used as critical evidence in the

identification of the Turnaround Practices.

• Turnaround Site Visits: In 2017, SchoolWorks and the Institute for Strategic Leadership and Learning (INSTLL) worked

with Massachusetts’ Statewide System of Support (SSoS) to develop a Turnaround Site Visit (TSV) process and protocol

aligned with the Turnaround Practices and attentive to district and school needs. To date SchoolWorks and INSTLL have

been conducted TSVs in 12 MA DESE Level 3 schools.

Charter Schools

• Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education: SchoolWorks has conducted dozens of renewal

site visits for the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education in accordance with the

Massachusetts Charter School Renewal Inspection Protocol. As longtime partners in renewal work, SchoolWorks

executive staff have provided input and recommendations to proposed changes to the charter school performance

criteria and accountability processes to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Office of Charter

Schools and School Redesign.

• Public Prep: In 2013, SchoolWorks began their partnership with Public Prep by conducting School Quality Reviews

among the organization’s charter schools. These school visits resulted in the development of targeted school

improvement plans focused narrowly around improving instruction and student outcomes. In 2014, Public Prep opened

10

three additional campuses and engaged SchoolWorks in the development of intensive coaching supports for the school

leaders. The goal of this coaching effort was to support the school improvement plans and build the capacity of each

team leader and their leadership teams.

SchoolWorks built on the experience gained from the School Quality Reviews to construct individualized coaching plans

for each school leader that have continued through the 2015-2016 academic year. Coaches supported school leaders

through a hybrid model of monthly in-person visits supplemented by regular virtual coaching sessions. Coaching

supports also include a feedback component in which school leaders videotape themselves in leadership roles and are

reviewed by coaches through SchoolWorks’ online platform. The continuity between school reviews and coaching with

Public Prep allows SchoolWorks to focus on specific strengths and areas of improvement for school leaders, culture,

and instruction, resulting in marked improvement in school performance.

• The KIPP Foundation: Over the past several years, SchoolWorks has provided feedback to KIPP Foundation School and

Regional Leaders to provide quality control for the network. As a component of its re-envisioned Successor Leader

Program, the KIPP Foundation has modified the existing Successor Leader School Quality Review process to assess the

current strengths and the areas for development against the school-wide priorities set at the beginning of the year. The

review process is designed to be a checkpoint to the annual plan that the school and regional leader created during the

summer. The reviews include a half-day prioritization session, facilitated by a SchoolWorks staff member, to support

the leadership teams of schools and regions in developing targeted action plans to address the highest-priority growth

areas in the implementation of their annual priorities. SchoolWorks conducted 18 Successor Leader Visits during the

Fall of 2016.

Payment Schedule

SchoolWorks Budget

SchoolWorks services will be conducted at a fixed fee of $39,100, inclusive of all fees and expenses.

Services will be billed as follows:

• SchoolWorks will bill for 20% of fixed fee upon commencement of work.

• SchoolWorks will bill for 50% of fixed fee upon completion of on-site visit.

• SchoolWorks will bill for remaining 30% of fixed fee upon the submittal of written reports.

SchoolWorks Billing and Expense Policy

Planning and Project

Management

SchoolWorks will bill for 20% of fixed fee upon commencement of work.

Completion of

On-site Work

SchoolWorks will bill for 50% of fixed fee upon completion of on-site visit.

Completion of Reporting SchoolWorks will bill for remaining 30% of fixed fee upon the submittal of written

reports.

Payment Schedule Payment of invoices due to SchoolWorks within 30 days.

11

References SchoolWorks is pleased to submit the following references: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Alison Bagg Director, Office of Charter Schools and School Redesign 781-338-3218 abagg@doe.mass.edu SUNY Charter Schools Institute Susan Miller Carello Executive Director 518-445-4250 SusieMiller.Carello@suny.edu

Cleveland Metropolitan School District Nicholas D’Amico Executive Director of School Performance, Office of Portfolio Planning, Growth and Management 216-838-0112 Nicholas.D'Amico@clevelandmetroschools.org

12

Service Agreement

Attached is a copy of SchoolWorks’ standard Terms and Conditions for the provision of the Services referred to herein,

which must be executed by SchoolWorks and SABIS International Charter School before the commencement of the

Services.

Terms & Conditions

CLIENT: SABIS International Charter School

DATE: August 30, 2017 TERM: August 30, 2017 - June 30, 2018

These terms and conditions are the agreement (the "Agreement") made as of the Date set forth above between the client

named above (the "Client") and SchoolWorks, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("SchoolWorks").

1. Term. Client shall retain SchoolWorks for the Term set forth above, unless earlier terminated pursuant to Section 8 hereof.

2. Services. Subject to timely payment hereunder, SchoolWorks shall perform the services described on Addendum A hereto (the "Services") in the manner described on such Addendum A.

3. Payment; Expenses. Client will pay SchoolWorks the amount(s) specified on Addendum B hereto in the manner and upon the terms specified such Addendum B. SchoolWorks shall be responsible for all out-of-pocket expenses incurred by it and its employees or agents in performance of the Services hereunder, including without limitation all compensation, salaries and travel expenses of its employees or independent contractors; provided, however, that SchoolWorks may seek reimbursement of such expenses from Client as specified in Addendum B.

4. Ownership. It is understood that SchoolWorks has developed and continues to develop a unique methodology for performing its educational consulting services (the Methodology”) and in the performance of the Services hereunder, SchoolWorks may update its Methodology or employ it to create reports or presentations, whether written, recorded, or oral, for delivery to Client. Although such reports or presentations may be used by the Client for its internal purposes, the parties hereto agree and acknowledge that SchoolWorks is the sole and exclusive owner of all right, title and interest in and to the Methodology, and nothing herein or in the relationship of the parties shall serve to transfer any right, title or interest in the Methodology itself to Client.

5. Independent Contractor Status. The parties hereto agree that SchoolWorks is an independent contractor, and nothing herein or in the relationship of the parties shall alter or affect such status. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the parties hereto acknowledge that at all times during the term of this Agreement: a) SchoolWorks shall have the right to perform services for others; b) SchoolWorks shall have the sole right to control and direct the means, manner and method by which the

Services will be performed; c) SchoolWorks shall have the right to perform the Services at such places, locations or times as it shall deem

appropriate; d) SchoolWorks shall furnish all equipment and materials necessary to provide the Services; e) SchoolWorks shall have the right to hire third parties, including employees, agents or subcontractors, to provide

the Services, and all such third parties shall be under the control of SchoolWorks, not the Client; and f) Client shall not require SchoolWorks or its employees, agents or subcontractors to devote full time to

performing the Services hereunder. 6. Nonsolicitation. Client agrees that it will not, during the Term and for one year thereafter, solicit any employee,

agent or subcontractor of SchoolWorks to leave the employ or engagement of SchoolWorks, or to become employees of Client or of any other person or entity.

13

7. Indemnification. The Client shall indemnify and hold harmless SchoolWorks, and its assigns, for and from all claims, actions and liabilities arising from SchoolWorks' performance of this Agreement unless such claim, action or liability is a result of SchoolWorks' gross negligence or willful misconduct.

8. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated prior to the expiration of the term hereof by either party's (the "Terminating Party") written notice to the other party (the "Breaching Party") of such termination upon the occurrence of a material breach by the Breaching Party of any provision of this Agreement; provided, that the Terminating Party gives the Breaching Party written notice of such breach and such breach, though curable, continues unremedied for a period of sixty (60) days after receipt of such written notice by the Breaching Party.

9. Enforceability, etc. This Agreement shall be interpreted so as to be effective under applicable law, but if any portion hereof is prohibited or invalid, such portion shall be ineffective only to the extent of such prohibition or invalidity, without invalidating the remainder of this Agreement. If any one or more of the provisions contained in this Agreement are for any reason held to be excessively broad as to duration, geographical scope, activity or subject, such provisions shall be construed by limiting and reducing them so as to be enforceable to the maximum extent permitted under applicable law.

10. Notices. Any notice or other communication given pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be personally delivered, sent by overnight courier or express mail, or mailed by first class certified or registered mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to the parties at the addresses set below or to such other addresses as the parties shall have designated by notice to the other party.

11. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of The Commonwealth of Massachusetts without regard to its conflicts of laws provisions. Any claims or legal actions by one party against the other shall be commenced and maintained in any federal or state court located in Massachusetts, and both parties hereby submit to the jurisdiction and venue of any such court.

12. Amendments and Waivers. No amendment or waiver of this Agreement or any provision hereof shall be binding upon the party against whom enforcement of such amendment or waiver is sought unless it is made in writing and signed by or on behalf of such party. The waiver by either party of a breach of any provision of this Agreement by the other party shall not operate as a waiver by that party of the same or any subsequent breach of any provision of this Agreement by the other party.

13. Binding Effect; Assignment. This Agreement shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors and administrators, successors and assigns. This Agreement may not be assigned in whole or in part by Client without the consent of SchoolWorks.

14. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the final and entire agreement of the parties with respect to the matters covered hereby, and replaces and supersedes all other agreements and understandings relating thereto, including without limitation any proposals.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed as a sealed instrument as of the Date first above written.

SchoolWorks, LLC

By: ________________________________

Name: Kim Wechtenhiser

Title: President

Contact information:

100 Cummings Center, Suite 236C Beverly, MA 01915 kwechtenhiser@schoolworks.org 978-921-1674

SABIS International Charter School

By: ________________________________

Name of Authorized Agent: ____________________

Title: ___________________________________

Contact information:

Address: ___________________________________

___________________________________

Email: ___________________________________

Tel: ___________________________________

ADDENDUM A

TO SERVICES AGREEMENT

SERVICES

Tasks Deliverable(s) Fixed Fee

Curriculum Review

• Review the current SICS curriculum

against state and national standards

• Administer an on-site review of

curriculum use and implementation

• Curriculum-specific findings and

recommendations within an appendix

of the final SQR report

$8,900

SQR Protocol Enhancement

• Review and update the SchoolWorks SQR

assessment protocol based on SICS

curriculum assessment objectives

• SICS Site Visit protocol $3,900

School Quality Review

• Plan and facilitate of all aspects of the School Quality Review

• 2.5 days on site with four (4) SchoolWorks representatives

• Collect data from document review, classroom observations and focus groups

• Write and finalize SQR Report

• On-site prioritization session with school

leaders resulting in action-plan for school

improvement

• 10-12-page written report detailing findings

(including an appendix with curriculum

review findings and recommendations)

$26,300

Total $39,100

ADDENDUM B

TO SERVICES AGREEMENT

PAYMENT

SchoolWorks Budget

SchoolWorks services will be conducted at a fixed fee of $39,100, inclusive of all fees and expenses.

Services will be billed as follows:

• SchoolWorks will bill for 20% of fixed fee upon commencement of work.

• SchoolWorks will bill for 50% of fixed fee upon completion of on-site visit.

• SchoolWorks will bill for remaining 30% of fixed fee upon the submittal of written reports.

SchoolWorks Billing and Expense Policy

Planning and Project

Management

SchoolWorks will bill for 20% of fixed fee upon commencement of work.

Completion of

On-site Work

SchoolWorks will bill for 50% of fixed fee upon completion of on-site visit.

Completion of Reporting SchoolWorks will bill for remaining 30% of fixed fee upon the submittal of written

reports.

Payment Schedule Payment of invoices due to SchoolWorks within 30 days.

Appendix A: TEAM MEMBER RÉSUMÉS

1 |

Kate is Director of Project Management at SchoolWorks. As a project manager, Kate has worked most closely with Baltimore City Public Schools and Lynn, MA Public Schools. In Baltimore, she helped to create and implement a School Effectiveness Review process for more than 50 schools throughout the district. In Lynn, she oversaw site visits to the district’s lowest performing schools, and then worked with the district to create and implement a leadership coaching model. Prior to SchoolWorks, she managed the implementation and daily operations of the teacher evaluation system for DC Public Schools, IMPACT. Kate supported the completion and input of triannual assessments for more than 6,000 employees; supervised the creation of a web-based portal in which to enter and analyze assessment data; organized and conducted more than 100 teacher feedback sessions in planning for the evaluation system; and, guided principals in providing support to teachers in need of assistance. While with DC Public Schools, Kate also coordinated the district’s Teacher Incentive Fund grant, overseeing the presentation of more than $1.5 million in awards over two years. She has participated in numerous school quality reviews and assisted in the development of case studies of highly effective schools. She is a former elementary and middle school teacher and teacher leader, with experience in both traditional district and charter schools.

SCHOOLWORKS EXPERIENCE

SchoolWorks, LLC Beverly, MA Director of Project Management 2012 - Present

• Collaborate with clients and SchoolWorks staff in design of projects and tools

• Oversee the staffing and scheduling of all projects

• Recruit, hire, and foster relationships with consultants

• Manage the training and development of new team members

• Serve on Leadership Team, which guides organization’s strategic decision-making

• Continue to serve as Project Manager for Baltimore City Public Schools project Project Manager 2010 - 2012

• Lynn Public Schools Project Manager o Managed site visits to the district’s lowest performing schools o Developed, implemented, and oversaw a coaching system in schools across the district

• Baltimore City Public Schools Project Manager o Coordinated the development of a school effectiveness review protocol based on existing district

frameworks and stakeholder input o Led school quality reviews over three years o Built capacity among district staff to participate in and then lead over 100 effectiveness reviews in

3 years

• Various Projects o Managed all aspects of assigned projects and facilitate delivery of services to clients as outlined in

the scope of work and budget, ensuring client satisfaction o Analyzed complex issues and develop tools, strategies and recommendations to build the

organizational capacity o Guided and manage teams of adults through site visit activities o Wrote strong, compelling, evidence-based reports

PREVIOUS PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE

District of Columbia Public Schools Washington, DC Human Capital Project Manager 2008 - 2010

Responsible for initiatives involving teacher evaluation, recruitment, selection, retention, engagement and recognition. Investing in these key areas is paramount to enhancing the capacity of the teaching force and increasing student achievement.

IMPACT Manager 2009 - 2010

• Supported the development and implementation of the district’s new assessment system, IMPACT, for 6,000+ school-based personnel

• Managed the completion and input of web-based assessments for 99.7% of all school-based personnel for the first assessment cycle

• Supervised the creation of a web-based portal in which to enter, view, and analyze all IMPACT assessments

• Disaggregated accumulated assessment data for various stakeholders

• Oversaw the hiring process for 31 Master Educator positions, for which more than 800 applications

KATE WHEELER Director of Project Management

2 |

PREVIOUS PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Cont.

were received

• Organized and conducted more than 100 teacher feedback sessions in planning for and implementing IMPACT

• Researched the evaluation systems of successful local and national urban districts and charter schools

Together Everyone Achieves More (TEAM) Coordinator 2008 - 2010

• Oversaw the presentation of more than $1.5 million in Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF) awards for seven schools, increasing test scores more than 20 percentage points in both mathematics and reading

• Participated in site visits to investigate and document effective practices of award-winning schools in conjunction with New Leaders for New Schools

• Assisted in writing and producing case studies documenting the effective practices of TEAM award-winning schools to place on a national online platform

Professional Performance Evaluation Process Coordinator 2008 - 2009

• Guided more than 125 principals through the evaluation process of all 4,000 district teachers

• Supported principals in the implementation of Intervention Plans for teachers in need of assistance

• Managed 33 Helping Teachers who provided additional support to more than 100 teachers in need of assistance

TEACHING EXPERIENCE

Lowell Community Charter Public School Lowell, MA Acceleration Teacher, Grades 2 and 5 2005 - 2007

• Guided grade level teams in analyzing and utilizing Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills

(DIBELS)and Everyday Math assessment data

• Promoted inclusion and pull-out lessons for students approaching proficiency in mathematics

and English language arts based on assessment results

• Created and coordinated an achievement-focused after-school program for fifth grade students

TEACHING EXPERIENCE (continued)

Lead Teacher, Words Their Way Spelling Program 2004 - 2005

• Coached teachers to implement new spelling/word study program for 1st through 6th grade Lead Teacher, First Grade Mathematics 2003 - 2004

• Supplemented Everyday Mathematics program to meet state standards

• Led grade-level meetings to analyze student data, plan enrichment and supplemental projects, and discussed strengths and weaknesses of program implementation

Classroom Teacher, Grade 2 2002 - 2005

• Served on charter renewal committee, participating in weekly meetings and executing assigned

responsibilities

• Created developmentally appropriate lessons in reading, writing, math, social studies, science, spelling, and character building guided by the MA Curriculum Frameworks, Everyday Math mathematics program, Success for All reading program, John Collins and WriteSource writing programs, Words Their Way word study program, and FOSS science program

• Looped with previous year’s class

Mentor Teacher 2003 - 2005

• Assisted first year teachers through weekly meetings and classroom observations

• Delivered tactical and strategic recommendations based upon best practices

EDUCATION Harvard University Graduate School of Education Cambridge, MA Ed.M., Education Policy and Management 2007

• Concentration in education innovation and urban reform

University of Richmond Richmond, VA B.S., Psychology; Minor in Elementary Education 2002

La Universidad de Salamanca Salamanca, Spain

• Summer Study Abroad Program 2001

1

Aubrey is a consultant with SchoolWorks. She is the former Director of K-8 Curriculum and Assessment at Lighthouse Academies – a

national network of charter schools. In this role, Aubrey developed and oversaw the implementation of the network’s education

model, led professional development for school leaders and teachers, conducted school evaluation visits, and designed curriculum

and assessments. Prior to her work at Lighthouse Academies, Aubrey taught in elementary and middle schools and worked as a

curriculum developer for Kaplan K12, where she designed middle school English language arts courses for large urban school districts.

Aubrey holds a B.A. in American Studies from Yale University and an Ed.M. in Education Policy and Management from Harvard

University.

SCHOOLWORKS

EXPERIENCE

SchoolWorks, LLC Beverly, MA

Consultant 2013 - Present

• New York State Department of Education: Virtual Coach

o Select and coach teachers to demonstrate the Common Core instructional shifts on video for the

EngageNY website.

o Co-plan and provide feedback on Common Core-aligned lesson plans.

• Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education: School Quality Review Team

Writer

o Conduct school site visits to review and share feedback with school leaders on instruction,

leadership and other school quality indicators.

o Write reports summarizing the findings of the school site visits.

PROFESSIONAL

EXPERIENCE

TNTP (The New Teacher Project) Brooklyn, NY

Independent Consultant February 2013- Present

• Manage development of Common Core State Standards-aligned instructional plans and assessments to

be used by hundreds of new teachers during their summer training: supervise approximately 30

curriculum and assessment writers; review and revise curriculum and assessment materials.

• Create professional development materials for school leaders: develop and revise materials for

coursework on instructional leadership and data analysis for new principals program; design online

course about high impact teacher coaching model.

• Create professional development materials about the Common Core State Standards in mathematics

and English language arts.

• Design online professional development experiences for new teachers: write interactive online courses

to develop teachers’ expertise in classroom culture and instructional planning using Blackboard’s

learning management system.

• Write assessments to measure teacher candidates’ English language arts content knowledge.

McKinsey & Company New York, NY

Independent Consultant June 2015- Present

• Design curriculum for Generation, a program of the McKinsey Social Initiative.

• Create case studies and role-plays for job training courses using the principles of Understanding by

Design.

Spark Academy Lawrence, MA

Independent Consultant August 2013- February 2014

• Served as 5th and 6th grade English language arts instructional coach; observed and provided feedback

on lessons, instructional plans, assessments and student work; led team meetings on topics directly

connected to student achievement.

AUBREY GOODMAN

Consultant, SchoolWorks

2

PROFESSIONAL

EXPERIENCE

(continued)

Lighthouse Academies Framingham, MA

Independent Consultant February - December 2013

• Created a Common Core State Standards-aligned K-12 interim assessment scope and sequence for use

by a national network of charter schools.

• Evaluated interim assessments to ensure alignment to the Common Core State Standards.

• Revised charter applications and marketing materials.

Director of K-8 Curriculum and Assessment July 2009 – February 2013

• Developed and oversaw the education model for a network of 21 charter schools.

• Planned and led professional development for principals, directors of instruction, directors of school

culture and teachers. Session sizes ranged from 10 – 70 participants, consistently received 85-100%

“good” or “excellent” ratings in all categories of satisfaction surveys.

• Conducted 50 school evaluation visits to assess the effectiveness of leadership and instruction.

• Led plans for aligning network’s curriculum and instruction to the CCSS.

• Co-planned annual network-wide conferences for 400+ attendees, as well as biannual conferences for

school leaders.

• Designed and developed network-wide writing initiative: wrote CCSS-aligned writing curriculum for

grades K-8; created a K-12 writing assessment for use with over 6,000 students; coordinated external

consultants and personally led professional development sessions to train hundreds of teachers and

leaders in the writing workshop model and content-area writing; analyzed assessment and observation

data to determine next steps for the initiative.

• Analyzed state, school, and classroom data to inform adjustments to the education model.

Michael J. Perkins School, Boston Public Schools Boston, MA

4th and 5th Grade Teacher September 2007- June 2009

• Created and implemented ELA curriculum for newly-established 4th and 5th grade class, which resulted

in a passing rate on the ELA MCAS that was 13 points above the school-wide average.

• Facilitated meetings and projects of the Instructional Leadership Team.

• Mentored teachers seeking National Board for Professional Teaching Standards certification.

Kaplan K12 Learning Services New York, NY

Middle School English Language Arts Curriculum Developer January 2006- August 2007

• Designed 6th, 7th and 8th grade English language arts courses for large urban school districts.

• Applied Understanding by Design principles to create standards-aligned curriculum maps, unit, and

daily lessons.

PROFESSIONAL

EXPERIENCE

(continued)

Talent Academy Nairobi, Kenya

Visiting Teacher September 2005– November 2005

• Conducted teaching demonstrations in English, math, science, social studies, physical education, and

visual arts classes for children between the ages of 3 and 12 years old.

Rachel Carson School, Chicago Public Schools Chicago, IL

5th Grade Teacher August 2003 – August 2005

• Taught students (94% English language learners, 98% free or reduced-price lunch) in all subject areas,

resulting in more than 90% of students meeting/exceeding state standards on the math ISAT and more

than 70% of students meeting/exceeding state standards on the ELA ISAT.

• Selected to supervise two student teachers.

• Coached the girls and boys basketball teams.

Anderson Community Academy, Chicago Public Schools Chicago, IL

Teach for America 2001 Chicago Corps September 2001 – June 2003

• Taught 7th and 8th grade reading and social studies

• Coached the girls basketball team

EDUCATION

Harvard Graduate School of Education Cambridge, MA

M.Ed., Education Policy and Management June 2007

Yale University New Haven, CT

B.A., American Studies May 2001

1 |

Dominique is a consultant with SchoolWorks. She taught French and Spanish for 15 years in Rhode Island, New York, and

Massachusetts and served as a department head, student counselor, and teacher mentor. For the past 15 years, she has been working

as a consultant, conducting Charter School inspections and DOE reviews of underperforming and exemplary schools in Massachusetts

and New York; developing and guiding the implementation of school improvement plans; conducting program evaluations in various

states across the nation; and conducting research on the impact of federal grants on school improvement. Dominique holds a BS in

Education and an MA in French Language and Literature from the Ohio State University. She is fluent in French and Spanish.

SCHOOLWORKS

EXPERIENCE

SchoolWorks, LLC Beverly, MA

Consultant 2005- Present

• School Reviewer

o Participate in Grant Evaluation Site Visits to the Family Life Academy Charter School in New York

City to gather qualitative evidence of implementation of project inputs.

o Participate in inspections of Massachusetts and New York charter schools for renewal of their

charters.

o Participate in Monitoring Site Visits of Level 4 Massachusetts schools and School Redesign Grant

recipients.

o Participate in School Quality Reviews throughout Massachusetts and for the Denver Pubic Schools

in Colorado.

o Led panel reviews of Massachusetts low-performing urban elementary, middle and high schools as

part of the Department of Education’s process in determining whether a school needs State

assistance to guide improvement efforts.

o Led site visits to Massachusetts elementary and middle schools selected by the Department of

Education as finalists for designation as Exemplar Schools.

• New York State Common Core Video Project Coach

o Identified teachers across New York State to be videotaped for the project

o Supported teachers through lesson-planning process to highlight Common Core shifts

o Prepared teachers to serve as models for their peers

• Bay State Reading Institute Program Evaluator

o Lead visits to Massachusetts schools implementing the BSRI model.

o Evaluate the extent to which BSRI has been implemented as part of a federal i3 development grant.

• Manager of ATLAS Project

o Developed and piloted an evaluation tool for Authentic Teaching and Learning for All Students

(ATLAS), which is a national school district change model.

o Worked with teachers, administrators, parents, students and ATLAS personnel to develop an

information system to monitor the progress of member districts.

PROFESSIONAL

EXPERIENCE

Brimmer and May School Chestnut Hill, MA

Department Chair, French and Spanish Teacher 1992-2000

• Headed the World Language Department, taught French and Spanish to grades 6-12, and served as

academic advisor.

• Led the World Language Committee, directing the restructuring of the language program.

• Organized and executed student exchange trips with France and Spain, as well as student travel to

Quebec.

• Held leadership positions on the Curriculum Committee and Senior Project Committee.

Hackley School Tarrytown, NY

French and Spanish Teacher 1990-1992

• Taught French and Spanish to grades 6-12 and served as academic advisor.

• Served on the Curriculum Committee and collaborated with administrators and teachers to improve the

school’s language program.

DOMINIQUE ASTIER

Consultant, SchoolWorks

2 |

PROFESSIONAL

EXPERIENCE

(continued)

The Wheeler School Providence, RI

French and Spanish Teacher 1988-1990

• Taught French and Spanish to grades 6-12 and served as academic advisor.

• Led student travel to France.

Ohio State University Columbus, OH

Teaching Assistant 1986-1988

• Taught introductory and intermediate French courses to undergraduate students.

EDUCATION Ohio State University Columbus, OH

• M.A., French Language and Literature 1988

• B.S., French and Spanish Education

1 |

Kathryn is a consultant with SchoolWorks. She is an experienced high school English and reading teacher and has taught all secondary grade and ability levels, from remedial reading to International Baccalaureate English. In addition to her teaching assignments, Kathryn held multiple leadership positions. As English Department Head, she acted as a liaison between administration and teachers, supported instructional goals, and ensured the equitable distribution of resources. In addition, Kathryn served on the Design Team – a leadership committee responsible for making and executing strategic school decisions, such as the implementation of professional learning communities and the facilitation of school-wide professional development. Kathryn transitioned from teacher to curriculum writer for the Virginia Department of Education. In addition to developing, writing, and revising courses, she authored case studies and teaching guides. Kathryn holds a B.A. in English and Linguistics from Northeastern University.

SCHOOLWORKS EXPERIENCE

SchoolWorks, LLC Beverly, MA Consultant 2013 - Present

• School Reviewer o Analyzed school documents (e.g., school improvement plans, standardized test results, teacher

evaluations, curricular documents); interviewed district and school leaders, instructional and support staff, students, and parents; and conducted teacher observations to determine schools’ areas of strength and areas for opportunity.

o Authored more than 30 reports that detailed school review findings and presented evidence to substantiate areas of strength and areas for opportunity.

• Charter School Application Writer o Synthesized client planning documents and communications with research to co-author charter

school application. o Drafted, revised, and finalized application in coordination with client and project management

feedback.

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE

CTE Resource Center, Henrico County Public Schools Richmond, VA Writer/Editor November 2011 – present Developed, implemented, and supported career and technical programs for the Office of Career and Technical Education Services in the Virginia Department of Education.

• Item of what a person did (if supplied); conducted in-service presentations to teachers about curriculum development, course offerings, support materials, and web-based resources.

• Facilitated meetings with industry experts and teachers to gather information needed to develop, write, and revise Virginia Career and Technical Education courses and materials.

• Evaluated, managed, and executed numerous writing and editing projects in terms of scope of work required, timelines, resources needed, and client criteria.

• Proposed and authored comprehensive teacher companion, Ready or Not, to supplement and align with Virginia Department of Education’s career magazine, R U Ready?, by providing engaging lesson plans, activities, assessments, and answer keys for 27 articles featured in the magazine.

• Planned, researched, and wrote business case studies for Virtual Enterprise Virginia competitions

Tampa Bay Technical High School, Hillsborough County Public Schools Tampa, FL English and Reading Instructor September 2010 – June 2012 Taught Freshman English Honors, Sophomore English Honors, Junior English Honors, Sophomore Intensive Reading, and Senior Intensive Reading.

• Selected to lead and coach all freshman English and reading teachers in analyzing achievement data, crafting curriculum, developing assessments, and implementing student interventions. Managed curriculum and classroom supplies, maintained accurate inventory logs, and ensured equitable distribution of resources.

• Planned, facilitated, and reported results of monthly meetings to align district, campus, and departmental instructional and assessment goals.

• Analyzed more than 100 students’ state testing data to write and execute individualized educational intervention plans to ensure student proficiency on state mandated tests.

• Crafted intensive reading curriculum and interventions that successfully raised state assessment scores.

KATHRYN KOERNER Consultant, SchoolWorks

2 |

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE (continued)

Buena High School, Sierra Vista Unified School District Sierra Vista, AZ English Teacher August 2008 – May 2009 Taught Advanced Placement English Language and Composition and Senior English.

• Authored semester-long research project to prepare seniors for analytical and technological skills necessary in college and workplace. Developed instructional programs to promote student proficiency in research methodologies, documentation, writing, PowerPoint, Publisher, blogging, and website publishing. Project implemented as mandatory curriculum for all language arts senior students.

• Tasked to revive failing Advanced Placement Language and Composition program. Completed goals included revising curriculum and assessments, implementing vertical alignment curriculum, boosting course and test enrollment, improving student test scores, and recruiting underclassmen for program entrance.

• Founded Advanced Placement Vertical and Horizontal Alignment Team. Authored mission statement, recruited teachers, and facilitated meetings. Worked to establish common curriculum to ensure student preparedness and content cohesiveness.

• Selected as faculty advisor of Advanced Placement Club. Organized and executed five major fundraising activities designed to offset the cost of Advanced Placement exams.

Killeen High School, Killeen Independent School District Killeen, TX English Instructor August 2003 –June 2007 Taught Freshman English, Sophomore English, Pre-AP Sophomore English, International Baccalaureate Independent Study of English, and International Baccalaureate Higher Level English.

• Selected as campus representative to write and revise tenth grade language arts performance standard district benchmark assessments for large school district. Analyzed student testing data in relation to assessed skills in order to write future programs of instruction.

• Authored international, foreign language, and language arts curriculum for large school district. All units written included a detailed unit overview, clear teacher-edition instructions for unit lessons, vocabulary and study guide supplements, and assessments.

• Served as middle school and community liaison for International Baccalaureate Programme. Worked with middle school director to refine admittance policies, informational brochures, and curriculum alignment. Presented program details to community stakeholders, parents, and prospective program candidates. Fielded verbal and written program inquiries.

• Recruited member of the campus Design Team, consisting of 10 teachers. Organized and executed five-day in-service for more than 200 teachers, revised and presented Campus Improvement Plan, and created detailed manuals for four subject area standardized state tests (TAKS).

• Requested to serve on AVID site team. Participated in creation and implementation of mission and vision statements. Conducted classroom observations and post-observation conferences to assist teachers in incorporating AVID strategies in instruction. Managed records required by AVID to ensure compliance.

• Appointed as English Department Point-of-Contact. Planned and facilitated professional learning community meetings to create curriculum, share instructional strategies, and promote reflective dialogues about teaching practices and performance. Managed detailed records of meetings to ensure district compliance. Acted as liaison between administration and department, disseminated information, and advocated for supplies and resources.

• Mentored new English teacher. Guided through district, campus, and departmental policies and procedures. Ensured that all needed curriculum resources and classroom supplies were received. Provided support with curriculum, instruction, and classroom management.

• Elected as faculty editor of fall and spring volumes of student-generated literary magazine. Directed and motivated efforts of 15 volunteer students in overlapping process of soliciting, sorting, selecting, and editing submissions. Coordinated with commercial arts department to embed magazine publication into curriculum. Organized campus and community distribution.

EDUCATION Northeastern University Boston, MA

• Bachelor of Arts, English and Linguistics 2003

• Magna Cum Laude (3.6 GPA)

• Northeastern University Writing Lab Mentor

• Northeastern University Honors Program

• National Society of Collegiate Scholars

1 |

Kara is a consultant with SchoolWorks. As school quality reviewer, she has been a frequent team lead or team writer for school quality reviews and charter renewal visits in California, Colorado, Massachusetts, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee. She is also the CEO and consultant of ApogeeVision – a consulting firm that works with many public and private organizations in the areas of administration, facilitation, teacher and staff training, organizational and curriculum development, and program evaluation. She has been an educator for more than 15 years, serving K-12 students. Among many instructional positions, she has worked in Boston Public Schools as a teacher, district lead teacher, teacher trainer, instructional coach for math/science educators, and a school-based administrator. She graduated from Spelman College with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Educational Psychology. She has earned two Masters degrees – a Masters of Education from the University of Massachusetts, and Masters of Divinity from Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. She has served as an adjunct professor at Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary (Boston Campus). She has served as a curriculum developer and instructor for the Office of Diversity and Community Partnerships at Harvard Medical School. She is the author of several curricula, including one made for the national film tour, Kunta Kinteh Island: Coming Home without Shackles. SCHOOLWORKS EXPERIENCE

SchoolWorks, LLC Beverly, MA Consultant 2011- present

• Denver Public School: School Quality Reviewer o Provided turnaround schools with formative feedback based on site visit team’s findings as team lead

and writer o Provided supervision of site visits, content editing of reports and facilitated action planning sessions

with school administration as team lead

• Philadelphia Charter School Office: Charter School Renewal Reviewer o Provided supervision and facilitation of site visits, content editing of reports as team lead o Generated finding reports to the Commissioner and Charter School office regarding schools’ progress

and achievements as part of their renewal cycle as team writer

• Citizens the World Charter Schools: School Quality Reviewer o Participated as a team members and writer, collecting evidence from focus groups, classroom

observations, document reviews in Los Angeles and New York network school o Provided network schools with formative feedback based on site visit team’s findings as team and

writer

• Colorado Department of Education: State Review Panel Reviewer/Writer o Participated as a team member and writer, collecting evidence from focus groups, classroom

observations, document reviews o Generated findings and recommendations reports to the Commissioner and State Board of Education

regarding potential actions for schools reaching year 5 of the accountability clock. • Bay State Reading Institute (BSRI): State Review Panel Reviewer/Writer

o Evaluated BSRI program implementation as part of the federal i3 development grant to conduct a study that examines the relationship between student achievement, BSRI and turnaround interventions as team led and writer.

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE

MA Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Medford, MA School & District Quality Reviewer 2010-2014 • Collected evidence from focus groups, classroom observations, document reviews • As team lead, provided Level 4 Schools formative feedback for Year Zero of MA Redesign Grant • Generated a report of strengths and needs improvement areas related to the MA Board of Education’s 11

Essential Conditions for School Effectiveness as a team writer E. Ross Studios Valencia, CA Curriculum Developer 2013 • Created middle school and high school curriculum units (common core-aligned) to accompany the national

movie tour, Kunta Kinteh: Coming Home without Shackles, which included urban districts including New Orleans, Atlanta, and Boston.

BCT Partners, LLC.,(U.S. Department of Education) 2011-2012 Technical Assistance Liaison • Provided technical assistance (guidance on data collection, financial planning, community relations, and

strategic planning) for a Promise Neighborhood Grant-funded agency • Provided a needs-assessment report for the U.S. Department of Education, assessing the strengths and

KARA NICOLE DUNN Consultant, SchoolWorks

2 |

areas of improvement for the planning agency by conducting focus groups, site observations, document review, and interviews.

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE (continued)

Harvard Medical School, Office of Diversity and Community Partnerships Boston, MA Curriculum Developer/ Project Manager 2004-2010 • Advised the curriculum development team on effective pedagogy • Co-writer of four medical case studies (expected publish date, fall 2011) for high-school students • Coordinated programming for Mentoring for Science-10th grade, medical case-based curriculum

Kendall Hunt Publishing, Educational Division Teacher Trainer 2004 – Present

• Trainer for biology curriculum, BSCS Biology: A Human Approach Curriculum Smith Leadership Academy, Public Charter Middle School Dorchester, MA

Head of Science Dept./ Administration Team Member 2008-2010 • Implemented the mission of SLA in the science department • Maintained the science budget and inventory • Planned and implemented various initiatives as Science Fair, Career Day, etc. • Coached and trained the science department on Differentiated Instruction, Effective Classroom Practice,

Effective Inquiry Practice, etc. • Coordinated and implemented professional development school-wide with the Administration Team to

improve teacher performance and student achievement • Analyzed MCAS Data and created STEM improvement action plan

Boston Plan for Excellence, Boston Teacher Residency Program Boston, MA Science Induction Coach 2007-2010 • Mentored beginning K-12 science teachers (1-4yrs. of experience) by examining their practice through

observations, analyzing student work, and reflection processes • Presented workshops to Boston Public Schools on Classroom Climate, Differentiated Instruction, Culturally

Relevant Teaching • Advised BPS schools on how to support new teachers within their first three years

American Association for the Advancement of Science, Center for Science and Engineering Advancement Washington, DC. Consultant 2005-2006

• Contracted for educational advisement and program evaluation Boston Public Schools, Hyde Park High School Boston, MA

Science Coach 2004 • Trained biology teachers on BSCS Biology: A Human Approach Curriculum • Advised the HPHS science department in the areas of classroom management, literacy integration and

teacher practice. TEACHING EXPERIENCE

Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, Center for Urban Ministerial Education Hamilton, MA Adjunct Professor 2010- Present

• Instructor of the courses: Baptist Polity and Hebrew Head Start Hebrew Teaching Fellow 2010- Present • Led the Review Session for Hebrew 1 and 2 for the Masters of Divinity Program • Assisted the Professor with teaching the students and other needed administrative tasks Boston University, Upward Bound, Math and Science Program Boston, MA Instructor 2007 • Developed course curricula for physics courses • Promoted student achievement by facilitating critical thinking, inquisitiveness, creative problem solving,

positive study skills and habits • Prepared weekly student progress reports, assessments for course objectives, and a final evaluation of

student study skills and habits with recommendations for the upcoming year EDUCATION Spelman College Atlanta, GA

B.A., Psychology (Education); minor in Chemistry 1999 University of Massachusetts Boston, MA

M.Ed., Urban Studies and Science Education 2002 Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary Boston, MA

M.Div., Urban Pastoral and Youth Studies 2007

1 |

Peggy is a consultant with SchoolWorks. She recently retired as headmaster of Boston’s Fenway High School. During her tenure,

Fenway achieved status as a Commonwealth Compass School, a Massachusetts Commendation School, and a National Blue Ribbon

School. Peggy held several school-based teaching and administrative positions in the Boston Public Schools, and also served as city-

wide program director for social studies. She has more than ten years of experience working in higher education, including serving

as associate director of a math and science center at Northeastern University and director of school partnerships at the Harvard

Graduate School of Education. She has consulted with the school districts of Prince George’s County Maryland; Jefferson County,

Kentucky; and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

PROFESSIONAL

EXPERIENCE

Boston Public Schools Boston, MA

Headmaster-Fenway High School 2003-2016

Provided leadership and direction for curricular and instructional programs at a nationally-recognized

innovative high school. Collaborated with a wide range of community partners to design and implement

faculty and student programming. Provided oversight of design and renovation of facility that was

completed in September 2015.

• 2012: Recognized by U.S. Department of Education as a National Blue Ribbon School.

• 2012: Designated a Commendation School by Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

• 2012: Outstanding Service Award by Coalition of Schools Educating Boys of Color.

• 2007: Recognized by Massachusetts Department of Education as a Commonwealth

Compass School.

• 2005: Student body recognized with Reebok Student Activist Award.

Harvard University Graduate School of Education Cambridge, MA

Director – Office of School Partnerships 1996-2003

Served as key administrator to develop effective alliances and collaborations with public schools and school

systems. Partnered with university executive leadership and faculty members, school administrators,

teachers, and community leaders to design and implement effective strategies linking school systems’

priorities and needs to Harvard’s teaching, research, professional development, and service.

• Directed Leadership Development Initiative – a capacity-building professional development

collaboration between Harvard Graduate School of Education and Boston Public Schools.

• Coordinated Greater Boston Superintendents’ Roundtable – a professional development network used

by 18 school superintendents.

• Continually monitored progress of related initiatives, authored status reports, planned and attended

strategy meetings, and identified and developed new financial resources.

• Took one-year leave (2001–2002) to serve as Interim Headmaster.

Boston Public Schools Boston, MA

Interim Headmaster-John D O’Bryant School of Mathematics & Science 2001-2002

• Provided leadership and direction to instructional programs and activities for grades 7–12 college

preparatory school with 1,250 students.

• Worked with 100 teachers and administrators – plus parents, community agencies, and higher

education partners – to design and implement staff and student programming.

• Managed campus safety and security, facilities maintenance, financial operations, and records

administration.

• Headed budget development, coordinated and managed partnerships with higher education and

business leaders, and administered collective bargaining agreements.

PEGGY S. KEMP

Consultant, SchoolWorks

2 |

PROFESSIONAL

EXPERIENCE

(continued)

Jobs for the Future Boston, MA

Program Director/Consultant- Benchmark Communities Initiative 1996-1997

Served as site lead for national school reform program designed to bring school-to-career efforts to scale in

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and Louisville, Kentucky. Helped communities carry out system-wide educational

reforms by setting milestones, developing ongoing operational improvements, and applying performance

indicators and assessment tools to track program headway.

• Managed technical assistance delivery to targeted communities; maintained frequent contact with

senior-level school, business, and community leaders.

• Wrote analytical reports that applied knowledge learned throughout project.

Northeastern University Boston, MA

Associate Director 1993-1996

Collaborated with 16 Boston Public School principals and headmasters to strengthen instructional delivery and curriculum offerings in mathematics and sciences.

• Designed professional development opportunities for teachers.

• Implemented and monitored academic support and enrichment programs for students.

• Developed collaborations with museums, industries, and academia.

Harvard University Graduate School of Education Cambridge, MA

Associate in Education-Project Zero 1992-1993

Served on design team for ATLAS Communities – an innovative school reform project and collaborative

partnership between Harvard Project Zero, The Coalition of Essential Schools of Brown University, The

School Development Program at Yale University, and The Educational Development Corporation.

• Acted as site liaison to school system in Prince George’s County, MD.

• Provided technical expertise in school management, parental and community involvement, teacher

training, and curriculum design.

Boston Public Schools Boston, MA

City-Wide Program Director- Social Studies 1990-1991

Coordinated grades K–12 social studies curriculum for 115 schools. Provided academic support to teachers

and administrators. Offered direction, advice, and leadership.

• Partnered with business, academic, governmental, and community groups and leaders to create and

implement academic enrichment programs for teachers and students.

Boston Latin School Boston, MA

Department Head/Chairperson 1991-1992; 1983-1990

Supervised 14-teacher department. Developed and implemented class schedules, special programs, and

faculty meetings. Worked with wide range of education and business leaders to develop progressive,

rewarding programs and activities.

• Introduced variety of new course selections.

• Increased student enrollment in history electives.

• Organized and managed school-wide simulations, speakers’ programs, and community service

internships to enhance students’ academic interests and accomplishments.

EDUCATION Harvard Law School Cambridge, MA

• Juris Doctor 1980

Berea College Berea, KY

• Bachelor of Arts in History/Political Science 1969

1 |

Nick is a consultant with SchoolWorks. He has taught mathematics in public schools in Boston for more than 10 years in both charter and district settings. Nick began his career teaching 6th, 7th, and 8th grade mathematics at a high-performing charter school, where – based on student achievement results – he received a Spotlight Teacher Award by the Effective Practice Incentive Community. He serves as the Math Specialist at a district elementary school in Boston. In this capacity, he collaborates with teachers at all grade levels in all aspects of mathematics instruction – from classroom culture to assessment design, data analysis, and lesson planning.

SCHOOLWORKS EXPERIENCE

SchoolWorks, LLC Beverly, MA Consultant 2012 - Present

• Louisiana Department of Education: Charter Applicant Interviewer & Writer

o Prepare standards-based team interview questions designed to gather specific information from applicant groups in final phases of application appeals

o Participate in charter applicant interviews o Compose draft recommendation reports, aligning evidence from applicants with client standards to

determine whether the application fulfills all state expectations

• Cleveland Municipal School District: School Quality Review Team Writer

o Research schools to be visited, reviewing performance data and school documents in preparation for each visit

o Conduct focus group interviews and classroom observations, gathering evidence aligned to the SchoolWorks School Quality Review (SQR) criteria and indicators

o Collaborate with team members and district representatives to develop findings regarding each school’s performance based on the evidence collected during each visit

o Compose SQR report; synthesizing multiple sources of evidence on all aspects of school programming with draft findings into clear, narrative format

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE

William M. Trotter Elementary School Boston, MA Math Specialist Sept 2012 – present

Curriculum Design, Instruction, and Assessment

• Teach and/or co-teach 3rd, 4th, and 5th grade math classes daily.

• Developed 4th and 5th grade math curricula that meet the expectations of the Common Core State Standards while differentiating class materials to both support and challenge a high-need student population.

• Assess and adapt school-provided curriculum materials and assessments – from re-sequencing topics to ensure best-fit instruction in the classroom to revising assessments in order to provide teachers with useful data on skills and concepts critical to student progress.

Teacher Coaching & Support

• Provide instructional support and guidance in mathematics to all teachers (grades 1-5): observing, providing feedback, offering guidance in unit planning, assisting with the use of technology in classrooms, and teaching lessons to introduce / demonstrate specific practices.

• Designed and delivered a series of staff professional development seminars aimed at improving school-wide math instruction – focusing on using multi-tiered data analysis in the classroom and classifying/creating rich higher order thinking questions.

Boston Preparatory Charter Public School Boston, MA Middle School Math Teacher (6th, 7th , 8th Grade) September 2004-2012

Curriculum Design, Instruction, and Assessment

• Taught and developed self-generated curricula for 6th, 7th, and 8th grade Math classes in alignment with Massachusetts State Curriculum Frameworks.

• Awarded a Spotlight Teacher Award in 2009, by the Effective Practice Incentive Community (EPIC) of New Leaders for New Schools, based on significant student achievement results.

NICHOLAS THOMPSON Consultant, SchoolWorks

2 |

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE (continued)

• Designed and administered rigorous, standards-based assessments on a regular basis. Gathered and analyzed valid assessment data and planned daily instruction in response to results.

• Differentiated curriculum materials on a daily basis to meet the needs of all students.

Building of School Culture

• Engaged students in mission-aligned activities outside traditional school hours: chaperoning full-day and overnight field trips to colleges and educational institutions around New England.

• Designed and directed Boston Prep Guitar Club in response to need for programming in instrumental music: Recruited local musicians as volunteer instructors; managed partnerships with supporting institutions (New England Conservatory, Boston University), coordinated student and volunteer schedules, planned performances, and purchased equipment.

Partnering with Students and Families

• Served as advisor to groups of seven to ten students, communicating weekly with students and families about academic progress and other issues related to student life.

• Welcomed incoming students and families during annual home visits: reiterating the school’s mission, practices, and expectations to new community members, proactively answering questions and concerns.

Shady Hill School Cambridge, MA Math Department Apprentice Teacher (Shady Hill School) September 2003-June 2004

• Co-taught 6th grade mathematics & 8th grade algebra. Researched, developed, and taught units on absolute value & the laws of exponents.

• Created lesson plans built around mathematical concepts & their real-world applications.

• Managed daily responsibilities: created & corrected homework, updated gradebooks, compiled individual observations & assessments of students, provided one-on-one tutoring

First Grade Apprentice Teacher (John M. Tobin Elementary School)

• Co-taught 1st grade class daily, guiding students in all activities: reading, writing, and phonics instruction, as well as science and mathematics investigations.

• Developed curriculum, including a three week unit aligned with MA curriculum frameworks

Citizens Schools Boston, MA Teaching Fellow January 2001-July 2003

• Co-taught 3rd grade (summer school) and 6th & 7th grade math classes. Collaborated with students, families, teachers, & administrators at three Boston public schools.

• Directly responsible, each semester, for a team of ten 6th- 8th graders during all afterschool activities.

• Built relationships with community members & utilized local resources to plan trips & events.

Law Offices of Howard Friedman Boston, MA Legal Assistant September 2000-August 2001

• Managed client base for large civil-rights class action lawsuit challenging systematic strip searches at a local jail.

• Participated in client interviews, depositions, site examinations, and mediations.

EDUCATION Lesley University/Shady Hill School Collaborative Program Cambridge, MA

• Master of Education 2004

Oberlin College Oberlin, OH

• Bachelor of Arts, Sociology, GPA 3.4 2000

1 |

Megan is a consultant with SchoolWorks. Most recently, she served as Executive Director in the Chicago Public Schools (CPS) special education department, which is responsible for providing services to more than 50,000 students across the City of Chicago. Megan led the transformation of the citywide evaluation teams, hiring, training and managing more than 75 staff members to conduct special education evaluations of more than 6,000 students annually. The leadership Megan brought to this work was lauded by top District officials, the Mayor’s Office, and the Illinois State Board of Education. Megan was also responsible for establishing policy for the provision of preschool special education services for more than 5,000 students and 200 teachers. In collaboration with the District’s early childhood office, Megan was a key player in the roll-out of a centralized preschool application process and full-day preschool programs - both priorities set forth by Chicago’s Mayor. Megan joined CPS in 2010 as the Director of Special Projects with the Office of Instruction. In this role, she was integral in leading many district priorities, including the development and launch of the districts comprehensive, performance-based teacher evaluation system. Prior to joining CPS, Megan was the Chief Operating Officer at SchoolWorks, providing project management and organizational support to school districts across the country. Megan has extensive experience managing diverse teams, developing and implementing strategic plans, and providing consultation to district and school administrators, as well as city officials. Megan holds a BS in Child Development and Psychology from Vanderbilt University, an M.Ed. in Early Childhood Special Education from the University of Illinois at Chicago, and a Masters in Health Administration from Suffolk University.

SCHOOLWORKS EXPERIENCE

SchoolWorks, LLC Beverly, MA Consultant 2015 - present

• Cleveland Metropolitan School District o Conduct summative criterion-based school reviews o Produce evidence-based written reports

Chief Operating Officer 2008 - 2010

• Developed and oversaw all project operations through the life-cycle, including set-up, budget, protocol development, staffing, training, ongoing monitoring and support.

• Provided company leadership for business development and implementation of policies. Oversight of 40 consultants supporting company projects nationwide.

Product Manager for School Quality Reviews 2005 - 2008

• Created high quality systemic protocols and related tools based on education research related to school/district reviews, evaluation and accountability system development.

• Developed and ran staff and consultant trainings. Ensured consistent and high quality use of products.

• Chicago Public Schools Office of New Schools 2004 - 2005 o Developed a renewal site visit process for schools authorized by the Chicago Board of Education,

including multi-campus charter schools o Led site visits and facilitate team to consensus findings o Provided oral and written summative and formative feedback to the District and school leaders

based on team conclusions

• The Broad Foundation o Managed reviews of Broad prize finalist districts o Led school visits and interviews with district administrators and stakeholders o Provided oral feedback to the district and an evidence-based written report to the

Broad Foundation

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE

Chicago Public Schools, Office of Diverse Learner Supports & Services Chicago, IL Executive Director 2013 - 2015

• Oversight of the district’s early childhood special education program supports and services, proportionate share program and charter school special education supports.

• Established citywide assessment teams and overhauled procedures for evaluation of preschool and private school students entering the district, resulting in the closure of 4 major noncompliance findings.

• Management/supervision of more than 80 staff. Member of the executive leadership team.

MEGAN TUPA Consultant, SchoolWorks

2 |

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE (continued)

Chicago Public Schools, Office of Instruction Chicago, IL Director of Special Projects 2011 - 2013

• Provided project leadership to support priority work across the Office of Instruction.

• Oversight and management of strategic plan development and stakeholder collaboration for rollout of a centralized preschool application and enrollment process.

• Led the development and initial implementation of the district’s teacher evaluation system.

• Collaboration with Chicago Teachers Union to provide training and communications to support implementation of CPS’ teacher evaluation system.

Chicago Public Schools, Office of Performance Chicago, IL Deputy, Specialized Services 2010 - 2011

• Provided leadership, project management support and resource development for key district initiatives such as Response to Intervention.

• Acted as a consultant and strategic partner to the Office of Special Education and Supports.

• Analyzed data, produced reports and presentations and facilitated cross-departmental collaboration to assist with central office decision-making.

EK Shriver Center/UMass Medical School Waltham, MA Research Associate 2002 – 2005

• Designed curriculum and taught on-line courses in Behavioral Intervention in Autism and other areas of developmental disabilities.

Boston Medical Center Boston, MA Family and Education Advocate 2003 - 2005

• Acted as a liaison between Pediatric Assessment Clinic (PAC), families and public schools to determine appropriate placements for children with autism via ongoing communications, home and school visits.

Massachusetts Department of Education Malden, MA Panelist 2003

• Conducted school evaluation and diagnostic reviews.

• Collected data and reported Massachusetts Commissioner of Education to assist under-performing schools improve to meet statewide standards.

New England Center for Children Southborough, MA Teacher / Case Manager 1999 - 2001

• Implemented and developed behavioral and academic curricula, teaching strategies and annual IEPs to instruct children with autism.

• Recorded, analyzed and reported student progress data. Conducted teacher trainings.

University of Illinois Chicago, IL Research Specialist in Behavioral Sciences 1997 - 1999

• Project coordination and organization, including data collection and management, recruitment, and screening.

• Participated in weekly home and early intervention program visits throughout Chicago.

• Constructed family-centered education recommendations.

EDUCATION Suffolk University Boston, MA

• Master of Health Administration 2002 - 2003

University of Illinois Chicago, IL

• Master of Education, Special Education, Early Childhood 1998 - 1999

Vanderbilt University Nashville, TN

• Bachelor of Science, Child Development, Psychology; Magna Cum Laude 1993 - 1997

Appendix B: SAMPLE SCHOOL QUALITY REVIEW REPORT

SchoolWorks School Quality Review Report

Academie ABC

March 27-30, 2017

100 Cummings Center, Suite 236C

Beverly, MA 01915 (978) 921-1674 www.schoolworks.org

Table of Contents

About the School Quality Review Process ...................................................................................... 1

Domains and Key Questions ........................................................................................................... 2

Domain 1: Instruction .................................................................................................................. 3

Domain 2: Students’ Opportunities to Learn .............................................................................. 7

Domain 3: Educators’ Opportunities to Learn ............................................................................ 9

Domain 4: Leadership and Governance .................................................................................... 11

Prioritization Process................................................................................................................. 14

Appendix A: Site Visit Team Members ......................................................................................... 15

Appendix B: Summary of Classroom Observation Data ............................................................... 16

Academie ABC March 27-30, 2017

© 2017 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 1

About the School Quality Review Process

The SchoolWorks School Quality Review (SQR) is a process that educators can use to understand and

explain how well schools are working to educate students. The SQR places a team of experienced

educators from SchoolWorks in a school to collect and analyze data about school performance. The SQR

lasts for 3.5 days. The SQR is based on a transparent, research-based set of standards – the SchoolWorks

Quality Criteria (SQC) – that serve as the framework to understand the effectiveness of school practices.

The SQC are used to promote understanding and dialogue between the school and the site visit team

through both verbal and written feedback.

The report documents the team’s findings (strengths and areas for improvement) for each of the four

domains identified within the SQR protocol: Instruction, Students’ Opportunities to Learn, Educators’

Opportunities to Learn, and Governance and Leadership. Findings provide a response to each Key Question

in the SQR protocol, and are categorized as either strengths or areas for improvement.

Academie ABC March 27-30, 2017

© 2017 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 2

Domains and Key Questions

The following key questions guide the School Quality Review team’s work in the school. All evidence is

collected in response to these key questions and their respective standards.

Domain 1: Instruction

1. Do classroom interactions and organization ensure a classroom climate conducive to learning?

2. Is classroom instruction intentional, engaging, and challenging for all students?

3. Do teachers regularly assess students’ progress toward mastery of key skills and concepts, and utilize

assessment data to make adjustments to instruction and to provide feedback to students during the

lesson?

Domain 2: Students’ Opportunities to Learn

4. Does the school identify and support special education students, English language learners, and

students who are struggling or at risk?

5. Does the school’s culture reflect a safe learning environment that holds high academic expectations?

Domain 3: Educators’ Opportunities to Learn

6. Does the school design professional development and collaborative supports to sustain a focus on

instructional improvement?

7. Does the school’s culture indicate high levels of collective responsibility, trust, and efficacy?

Domain 4: Leadership and Governance

8. Do school leaders guide and participate with instructional staff in the central processes of improving

teaching and learning?

9. Do school leaders executive effectively orchestrate the school’s operations?

10. Does the Board provide competent stewardship and oversight of the school?

Academie ABC March 27-30, 2017

© 2017 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 3

Domain 1: Instruction

Strengths

Some classroom interactions and organization ensure a classroom climate conducive to learning.

Behavioral Expectations

Ineffective Partially Effective Effective

1 2 3 4

3% 24% 29% 44%

• Behavioral expectations are clear and understood by most students. In 44% of lessons, the site visit

team observed the effective implementation of behavioral expectations (n=34). In these classrooms,

teachers provided clear directions, and students were compliant and followed expectations. Students

were seen raising their hands to ask and answer questions, listening to the speaker, and following

directions. For example, in one lesson, the teacher counted down to zero to quiet the class; in another

class, there were no classroom interruptions. The site visit team observed the partially effective

implementation of behavioral expectations in 53% of classrooms. In these classrooms, teachers

generally set clear expectations (e.g., raise your hand to speak, limit unnecessary movement around

the class, no talking), but low-level student misbehavior often required teachers to stop lessons to

redirect behavior. After halting instruction, some teachers provided quick, effective redirections;

other teachers were ineffective in redirecting consistent misbehavior by some students. For example,

in one classroom, the teacher stopped instruction to turn a student’s desk so that s/he would not

continue to play with the things inside his desk; however, the student continued to display off-task

behavior. In other classrooms observed, teachers ignored some students’ misbehavior, allowing them

to opt-out of lessons or lay their heads on their desks.

Structured Learning Environment

Ineffective Partially Effective Effective

1 2 3 4

6% 38% 44% 12%

• The learning environment is not always highly structured, and learning time is not consistently

maximized through effective planning and guidance. The site visit team observed partially effective

structured learning environments in 82% of classrooms. In most classrooms, teachers were prepared

and materials were readily available; however, the site visit team rarely observed agendas posted or

communicated to students. For example, a teacher wrote the topic or theme of the lesson on the

board but did not list the description of class activities. In some classrooms, teachers used structures

and routines to minimize classroom transition times. However, other teachers failed to maximize

learning time during transitions. In one classroom, for example, in the middle of a lesson, the teacher

spent 10 minutes of instructional time looking for materials to hand out to the students. In another

class, the teacher addressed random questions about seating arrangements for 5 minutes before

beginning the academic discussion. Further, in other classrooms, teachers provided choices for when

tasks were completed, but choices often did not provide an extension of learning objectives and did

not maximize learning time. For instance, in one class, a teacher designated a bin for extra worksheets

on which students could work when they were done with the assignment, but the worksheets were

not connected to the lesson’s objective. Also, the site visit team observed students engaging in off-

task behavior when they finished the assignment early. For example, in one class, the teacher assigned

a math problem to complete. Most students completed the problem in under 10 minutes. Instead of

Academie ABC March 27-30, 2017

© 2017 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 4

continuing in their learning, students began to walk around the room, wash their hands, and interact

with one another.

Areas for Improvement

Classroom instruction is not yet intentional, engaging, and challenging for all students.

Instructional Strategies

Ineffective Partially Effective Effective

1 2 3 4

38% 38% 15% 9%

• A variety of instructional strategies and materials do not fully support students’ diverse needs.

School leaders reported that teachers are encouraged to practice a higher quality of student

engagement using strategies such as group work and partner talk. However, the site visit team

observed that most lessons included multi-sensory strategies but were brief and moderately effective

at meeting the needs of diverse learners. More specifically, the site visit team observed partially

effective instructional strategies in 53% of classrooms. In these classrooms, the lessons included multi-

sensory modalities but only for a brief part of the lesson. For example, in one observed classroom, the

teacher showed a video that modeled the phases of the moon; however, students were allowed only

a brief part of the lesson to manipulate phases to reflect a particular position of sun, moon, and earth.

In another observed lesson, the teacher displayed a map for students to complete with a partner, but

most students completed the activity independently and did not collaborate with their peers. Further,

while teachers reported that they are encouraged to incorporate differentiation and rigor in the

classroom and that they use different instructional strategies such as direct instruction, guided

practice, and small group, the site visit team observed that instruction was heavily focused on listening

and writing. In 38% of the classrooms, the site visit team observed ineffective use of a variety of

instructional strategies. Students were given limited opportunities to engage with visuals, kinesthetic

activities, or manipulatives. For example, in one observed classroom, the teacher delivered most of

the lesson through lecture with breaks in order for students to independently fill in the blanks on a

worksheet. In another observed classroom, the teacher lectured the entire duration of the

observation without any interaction with students.

Higher-order Thinking

Ineffective Partially Effective Effective

1 2 3 4

32% 44% 21% 3%

• Instruction does not require all students to use and develop higher-order thinking skills. In 65% of

lessons observed, the site visit team noted the partially effective promotion of higher-order thinking

skills. In these classrooms, some questions required students to answer challenging questions related

to the lesson content, but the opportunity for this was infrequent or only half of the students were

engaged in higher-order thinking. For example, in one classroom, a teacher posed a series of

challenging questions to the entire class; however, only three students participated in the discussion.

The site visit team also noted that even though students were asked open-ended questions, they were

not asked to expand on their thinking or exposed to questions that allowed them to explain their

thoughts. For example, in one classroom, the teacher asked students, “Have you ever thought a spider

would be good luck?” Students answered yes or no but the teacher did not ask for an explanation. In

another observed classroom, students were asked to discuss a book but were not required to have

Academie ABC March 27-30, 2017

© 2017 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 5

the book out or refer to it. In addition, in these lessons, teachers provided only some students with

opportunities to engage in academic conversations or to process lesson content. For example, in one

observed lesson, a teacher allowed two students to debate whether negotiations are possible in war;

however, the other students were not given an opportunity to participate. The site visit team

observed the ineffective promotion of higher-order thinking skills in 32% of lessons. In these

classrooms, students were asked low-level questions that required students to summarize or recall

previous knowledge. Examples of questions included, “Who did they go to?” And “What does it say?”

Teachers reported that they are encouraged to provide rigorous tasks; however, the site visit team

did not observe challenging tasks such as application activities and, instead, observed summary or

recall. In most classrooms, students were engaged in low metacognition activities such as filling in

blank worksheets and copying down information presented on the board.

Teachers do not regularly assess students’ progress toward mastery of key skills and concepts and provide feedback to students during the lesson.

Assessment Strategies

Ineffective Partially Effective Effective

1 2 3 4

32% 29% 32% 6%

• In-class assessment strategies reveal some students’ thinking about learning goals. The site visit

team observed the partially effective use of in-class assessment strategies to reveal students’ thinking

about learning in 61% of visited classrooms. In some of these classrooms, the site visit team noted

that teachers used tools to assess for mastery – for example, visual checks for understanding such as

thumbs up/down and choral response. However, the ratio of students participating in these informal

assessments were inconsistent. For example, in one class, during whole group instruction, a teacher

used thumbs up/down; but approximately half the class did not participate. Additionally, teachers

often asked questions to assess student learning. However, most questions were directed to students

individually or to only a few students who volunteered. For instance, in one observed lesson, the

teacher asked questions of the whole class but only the students seated in the front of the room

answered. The other students just listened. Further, the site visit team observed that most teachers

used assessment strategies that gave a general sense of students’ understanding. For example, in one

observed lesson, the teacher asked students to hold up white boards with their answers, but the

teacher only glanced at a few boards and did not address the incorrect answers that other students

displayed. In another observed classroom, the teacher asked students to raise their hands if their

answers were correct. Finally, in 32% of observed classrooms, the site visit team noted the ineffective

use of in-class assessment strategies. Even though teachers reported that they create in-class

assessment for lessons, the site team observed superficial checks for understanding such as circulating

around the room and reiterating the directions rather than the content of the lesson. For example, in

one classroom, a teacher circulated around the room and listened to a group of four students to hear

their answers and reiterated the directions of the objective but did not assess if students understood

the question precisely. The site visit team also observed teachers circulating around the room with a

focus on student behavior and directions, rather than lesson content.

Academie ABC March 27-30, 2017

© 2017 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 6

Feedback

Ineffective Partially Effective Effective

1 2 3 4

50% 26% 24% 0%

• Timely, frequent, specific feedback is rarely provided throughout the learning process. The site visit

team observed the partially effective provision of feedback in 50% of lessons observed. In some

classrooms, feedback was provided to some, but not all, students. For example, one teacher supplied

content-specific feedback to a few students who were struggling to work on equivalent fractions word

problems, but did not provide feedback to all students. Additionally, the site visit team noted that

while teachers provided all students with feedback, it was based on one student’s misunderstanding

rather than a whole class trend. For example, in one observed lesson, the teacher provided feedback

to the whole class because one of the students was confused about the difference between the metric

system and the U.S. system. In other classrooms, teachers provided feedback but it was inconsistently

provided during the lesson. For example, in one such a classroom, a teacher only provided feedback

to students who were able to identify parts of personification and gave general examples but did not

effectively respond to misunderstandings when students did not understand how it related to a story.

In 50% of classrooms observed, teachers provided ineffective feedback to students. In most of these

classrooms, teachers did not provide content-specific feedback related to the lesson, but general

responses such as, “Tres bien” (Very good) and “Bien fait” (Good job). In addition, in several of these

classes, feedback did not provide any useful guidance. For example, in one class, a teacher asked a

question to check students’ understanding. When one student responded, the teacher nodded but

did not provide additional feedback to guide student work. Further, in some of these classrooms,

feedback was not evident.

Academie ABC March 27-30, 2017

© 2017 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 7

Domain 2: Students’ Opportunities to Learn

Strengths

The school’s culture reflects a safe learning environment that supports students’ learning.

• The school provides a safe environment to support students’ learning. The site visit team noted a

clean and orderly building and observed bulletin boards and school hallways displaying student work.

The site visit team also observed teachers, leaders, and staff supervising shared public spaces and

regularly checking in with students. Further, leaders, teachers, and parents all expressed that the

school is a safe environment for all students. The site visit team observed positive relationships

between students in classrooms and in hallways. For instance, students spoke kindly with each other

and shared common interests. Upon entering the school building each morning, students are greeted

with smiles by teachers and school leaders. Students noted that there is at least one adult in the

building whom they trust and reported that they have friends and positive relationships with other

peers. For example, they explained the social worker holds a monthly class meeting with each class

to provide students an opportunity to talk and discuss issues they may have. Teachers reported that

students feel safe because they linger after school and want to stay with their teachers. Students

explained that the school is a nice place and feel that their teachers know them because they taught

their older siblings.

• The school has taken steps to engage families in support of students’ learning. Leaders, teachers,

students, and parents reported that the school hosts multiple community-building events for parents

and families – for example, parent orientation night, an ice cream social, parent-principal coffee, and

playground mixers after school. Leaders explained that playground mixers were established at the

beginning of the year for both teachers and parents to play outside to help new families connect to

the school. Students and parents stated that parents are invited to all assemblies, special project

nights, and field trips. The site visit team observed STEM night, where the school was full of parents

and students participating in activities centered on STEM. Leaders and teachers also described a

workshop series called Open book – an after-school program sponsored by Title I funds for struggling

readers. Leaders explained that parents are encouraged to attend with their children to learn reading

strategies that they can practice at home. For example, teachers showed parents how to assist

students with identifying and sounding out the middle sounds of words. In addition, leaders, teachers,

and parents reported (and a review of this year’s newsletters confirmed) that every Monday, parents

receive weekly memoranda that include curriculum updates, upcoming events, and weekly

reminders. Parents described the school quest to involve parents in school-life by offering many

volunteer opportunities – leading after-school programs or tutoring students during the school day.

Areas for Improvement

Although the school has structures to identify and support students with diverse needs, some processes

are not implemented with fidelity.

• The school has defined a process for identifying struggling and at-risk students; however, it is not

implemented with fidelity. Leaders and teachers reported a defined process for identifying students

who are struggling or at risk. Teachers reported that they identify students who are struggling and

implement their own strategies before referring for additional interventions. However, teachers

explained that once they feel more assistance is needed, they complete a referral form and submit to

the care team. Leaders indicated that the care team is led by the special education teacher and

Academie ABC March 27-30, 2017

© 2017 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 8

includes the speech specialist, nurse, and counselor. Teachers stated that once students are referred,

parents are notified and given the opportunity to deny services. School leaders and teachers stated

that once the care team receives the referral, they convene, analyze referrals, and craft intervention

plans. Teachers explained that the care team discusses what strategies are needed for the struggling

student and provides next steps for teachers. After a month of employing the strategies, the team

reconvenes and reviews if the interventions were successful with the teacher. School leaders reported

that even though there is a process for identifying struggling students, there is not a process for

progress monitoring or effective follow up for these students. Teachers explained that once students

are identified, they are either placed in Title I or continue with invention services that the teacher

provides. However, if students do not qualify to participate in Title I, there is not a source to monitor

their progress. Teachers reported that students can continue to struggle even after being referred

because there are not additional services for struggling students.

• The school provides appropriate supports for special education and English language learner (ELL)

students. School leaders reported that the school is staffed to support special education and English

language learners (ELL) students. Specifically, school leaders indicated that the school employs four

special education teachers, either part-time or full-time, plus a special education consultant. Teachers

reported that the special education teachers provide support to students by providing

accommodations and modifications in the classroom through pushing in with students. Leaders

explained that special education teachers also support students in other ways, such as pulling out

small groups, completing evaluations for special education students, and providing in-service to staff

on modification strategies and ways to manage individualized education plans (IEPs). Regarding ELL

students, school leaders noted that the school employs one teacher who is dedicated to support ELL

students. Teachers explained that the first hour of the day is reserved for planning with teachers for

support with ELL students; the other part of the day is dedicated to supporting ELL students by pulling

out to work one-on-one or pushing in to support inside classrooms. School leaders explained that ELL

students are identified by a questionnaire that is given during enrollment that asks parents whether

their child speaks English. If they do not, administration flags that student for testing and possibly to

receive ELL supports. Teachers reported that students usually test out of the program by third grade.

Academie ABC March 27-30, 2017

© 2017 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 9

Domain 3: Educators’ Opportunities to Learn

Strengths

While the school has designed professional development to address school priorities, it does not yet

result in a sustained focus on instructional improvement.

• Professional development (PD) is designed to address school priorities. School leaders reported that

PD topics are aligned with the school strategic plan, organizational goals, and school curriculum.

Professional development plans indicated that teachers received monthly training based on school

goals, students’ achievement, teacher observation, and feedback. For example, school leaders

explained that a top instructional priority for the year is to improve science instruction across all

grades. School leaders and teachers shared that they have received PD on Next Generation science

curriculum in an effort to further this initiative. Teachers reported that school leaders also provided

training on other school priority areas, which are diversity and closing the achievement gap. According

to the PD plan, in order to meet parts of the school’s strategic plan, technology must be enhanced in

the classroom. Therefore, teachers reported that they received PD on using new Smartboards as a

technology instructional resource in the classroom. Teachers reported that following every PD

session, teachers fill out an online survey (review of PD survey results confirmed) to provide

immediate feedback to school leaders to help PD focus on educators’ learning needs. School leaders

and teachers also reported that leaders are very open to supporting differentiated PD based on the

needs of teachers. For example, teachers reported that they have submitted opportunities to attend

educational conferences and workshops; school leaders have approved and supported their requests.

• While professional development is regularly scheduled, it is not consistently active, intensive, and

sustained. School leaders and teachers reported (and the PD plan confirmed) that school-wide PD is

scheduled to occur six times a year. Both stakeholder groups described these meetings as a mixture

of staff division meetings and PD sessions. Leaders explained that while PD sessions are held with both

school staff combined, division meetings are for individual school levels. Leaders explained that at

division meetings, teachers receive training on individual school-wide issues. Review of the PD

agendas revealed that teachers received training on IEPs, safe schools training, and immersion

teaching strategies. Leaders and teachers also reported that teachers have a weekly collaboration

grade-level meeting and, occasionally, administration attends the meetings. Leaders described these

meetings as opportunities to engage teachers in active learning by providing time for the grade-level

teams to design assessments, discuss instruction, and observe one another. While the PD plan showed

that there is a schedule for regularly scheduled collaboration meetings to discuss data and

assessments, teachers reported that these meetings are not consistently intensive or sustained.

Further, teachers explained that these meetings are not used to discuss best practices or instruction,

but mostly for administration announcements and directives. For example, teachers stated that two

meetings were about the site visit and raising money for the high school, not about instructional needs

as the PD plan shows. Teachers reported that only approximately five percent of the grade level

meeting time is focused on student achievement.

Academie ABC March 27-30, 2017

© 2017 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 10

Areas for Improvement

The school’s culture has some levels of collective responsibility, trust, and efficacy.

• Some educators’ mindsets and beliefs reflect shared commitments to students’ learning. Leaders,

teachers, and staff expressed a shared vision to bring together a diverse community of students and

develop global critical thinkers through immersion in the French language. Teachers reported that

they want students to achieve. However, leaders and teachers stated that they struggle with cultural

understanding of the American education system. For instance, teachers described that in their

foreign countries, their teaching responsibilities end with instruction and not with data analysis or

building relationships. School leaders and teachers indicated that some educators do not yet share a

common commitment to all students. For instance, when asked how they demonstrate commitment

to students, some teachers stated that they differentiate in their classrooms or volunteer to lead an

after-school program; however, other teachers indicated that they do not plan to stay at Academie

ABC for more than two years. Parents reported that they felt that some teachers were not committed

to ensure that all students succeed. For instance, when a parent asked for additional assistance to

help his/her child improve academically, the teacher stated that s/he could not do anything at this

point. Finally, a few teachers reported that they engage in data accountability conversations with their

grade-level teams. However, the site visit team observed that teachers only referred to what they do

individually for students and not how they collaborate as a team to improve school goals.

• The school does not fully reflect a safe, trustworthy, and growth-oriented professional climate.

While teachers indicated that they have open, caring, and supportive relationships with their teams

and colleagues with whom they work closely, they reported that the staff, as a whole, is disconnected.

Teachers explained that some grade levels worked very well together but that, due to trust concerns,

other teams did not. More specifically, teachers consistently stated that they are close to their grade-

level teams and that they are like family; however, they rarely have the opportunity to spend time

with other grade-level teachers. Teachers explained that they want to collaborate with other teachers

around their instructional practice and content area. However, teachers noted that there is not a

teachers’ lounge or area for them to collaborate with one another. Teachers indicated that even

though colleagues are caring and open to sharing their practice, they feel that administration is not.

Teachers reported that administration is not always honest and candid when it comes to making

decisions. Teachers reported that they feel that school leaders listen to their concerns and ask for

their opinions but indicated they often go with their own resolutions. However, school leaders stated

that relationships between teachers and administration is changing. For instance, leaders explained

that in the past, there was a lot of confrontation between teachers and administration, but they are

now moving to collaboration. Alternatively, teachers stated that they feel that staff morale is low and

teachers do not feel connected to administration. According to the five-essential survey, there is a

weak teacher-to-principal trust level, where only 49% of teachers trust the word of their principal.

Teachers stated that most of their questions are not answered or the information given is not

accurate. Teachers stated that they do not feel confident that school leaders will take their ideas and

opinions seriously.

Academie ABC March 27-30, 2017

© 2017 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 11

Domain 4: Leadership and Governance

Strengths

School leaders have developed structures to manage and coordinate the school’s operations, but these

structures are not yet consistently effective.

• School leaders have established structures for communication and decision making across the

organization; however, these structures are not consistently effective. School Leaders described that

there is a communication structure that is used to communicate and assist in decision making across

the school. Leaders stated that administration meets once a week to discuss new school-wide

concerns. This information is shared with the building leadership team that includes one grade-level

teacher, counselor, principal, assistant principal, and school nurse. This teams meets twice a month

and addresses school-wide issues such as classroom concerns and school-wide changes. Once a

decision is made, information is disseminated to grade-level team leaders who meet once a month,

then share information with teachers during weekly grade-level meetings. According to meeting

agendas, decision making is often addressed during building-level meetings. For example, in BLT

agendas, discussion and decision making was made around school uniforms. Teacher explained that

even though these structures are in place, communication can sometimes be ineffective. For example,

teachers stated that if they are not a content area teacher, they do not receive all the information

from the BLT meeting because they do not belong to a team. Teachers also stated that the school

improvement team met four times but that there were no agendas shared from all of the meetings.

Finally, teachers explained that the lack of providing minutes and agendas before division meetings

show that there is a lack of clear transparency in communication.

• School leaders implement structures to recruit teachers who fit the instructional model, but lack

effective structures to retain teachers and staff. School leaders explained that their goal is to hire

high-quality French teachers from all over the world. Leaders stated that even though they receive an

abundance of applications, it is difficult to find the right fit and to understand the different diplomas,

teaching programs, and certifications from around the world. Leaders explained that candidates

undergo an intense and rigorous interview process. For example, school leaders reported that they

use a screening document to determine whom to interview. Once screened, leaders request that the

candidate send videos of their teaching and other related documents. Based on the strength of the

lesson presented, leaders stated that candidates are offered an interview with a panel that includes

administration and grade-level representation. However, teachers and leaders reported that retaining

teachers is an ongoing struggle. Leaders feel some teachers are not vested in the school culture;

therefore, they do not return to the school. Teachers explained that it is difficult to learn the school

culture in America, which, leaders explained, makes it difficult to retain teachers. Leaders admitted

that besides the mentoring support that is offered to new teachers, there are no structured supports

for retaining teachers. Teachers reported that they do not have instructional coaches to assist with

instructional concerns or a dean to help with behavior issues. Teachers also reported that they are

highly stressed and tired, which leads to them lacking home/life balance. Nonetheless, Board

members explained that there are several things that they put in place to retain teachers. For

example, the Board reported they established a pay scale increase to be competitive with other

teachers in the area, subsidize healthcare, placed two teacher representatives to be at Board

meetings, and instituted a structured grievance process for teachers. However, according to the five-

essential survey, more than half of the teachers are interested in working at other schools.

Academie ABC March 27-30, 2017

© 2017 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 12

The Board provides oversight of the school.

• The Board provides adequate oversight over the effectiveness of the academic program. Board

members explained that their academic goal is to improve the instructional quality of the school.

Board members expressed that they oversee important aspects of the academic program to ensure

that it is effective. For example, the Board explained that they are making sure that the International

Baccalaureate (IB) program is finalized, science is a focus this year, and that the achievement gap is

closed and scores are raised for students who receive free or reduced-price lunch. Board members

stated that in an effort to support these incentives, they have voted to extend the school day to allow

for additional instructional supports. They have also voted to supply additional funds for tutoring

services. Board members explained that their current school mission is not fully aligned with focusing

students for college. However, they noted that they are working on changing the current mission to

better align with college readiness. In order to continue to provide adequate academic supports,

school leaders and Board members reported (and a review of Board reports reflected) that the Board

discusses school-wide data reports at meetings that include high-level academics of students. Board

members reported that the achievement gap was a concern and at the forefront of their discussions.

However, the Board stressed that they give full autonomy to the school leaders to make academic

decisions and that they monitor the structures of the academic performance through the evaluation

of the head of schools. The board explained that in order to monitor leadership efforts to address

their concern regarding the performance gap, they plan to use Measures of Academic Progress (MAP)

formative assessment scores as part of this evaluation.

• The Board provides substantial financial oversight. Board members expressed confidence in their

financial oversight of the school. Board members explained that there is a finance committee that

meets monthly to review monthly financial statements and make decisions about the school’s

monthly budget. The finance committee includes Board members, as well as a member who has

expertise in accounting. Board members noted that through the finance committee, there is a robust

monitoring process for expenditures. For example, there is a mandatory approval of any expenditure

over five-hundred dollars. Board members reported (and a financial report confirmed) that they have

received nearly perfect audits every year. The Board explained that funds are limited due to the

budget cuts that have effected charter schools. Board members reported that most of the school’s

funds are applied toward salaries and facilities; therefore, discretionary income is limited. However,

Board members stated that they plan to continue to support the school goals and enhance their

academic program. For instance, Board members noted that there was a high need for additional

academic assistance for students who were failing; therefore, they approved funds for after-school

activities. Finally, review of the 2016-2017 budget presentation confirmed that the school has a

current surplus and is financially stable. Board members stated that the school is in a healthy financial

position.

Areas for Improvement

School leaders have taken some steps to guide and participate with instructional staff in the central

processes of improving teaching and learning.

• School leaders are working to ensure that the school has a coherent, comprehensive, and aligned

curriculum. A review of curricular materials indicated that curriculum is aligned to Common Core and

includes essential content and skills across grade levels. School leaders reported that the Head of

Schools determine curriculum requirements and ensure that instructional materials are aligned with

curriculum standards. For example, teachers reported that administration constructs a team of

Academie ABC March 27-30, 2017

© 2017 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 13

teachers to balance the French curriculum with the Missouri standards to ensure that students are

receiving a complete grade-level curriculum. School leaders explained that they support this work by

making sure that there are curriculum textbooks aligned with State standards. School leaders also

reported that they are working to make sure that the IB program at the school is done effectively. For

instance, leaders reported that they are working to make sure that teachers receive active training

and support as they map out plans to integrate the IB program in their classrooms. Teachers reported

that each grade-level team creates pacing guides to map across the year. However, teachers stated

that they are not aware what the other grade levels are teaching and there is no connection across

grade levels. Leaders reported that they plan to work with teachers to vertically align across grade

levels and support planning.

• School leaders do not yet ensure that teachers deliver high-quality instruction. School leaders

reported that administration completes biweekly walkthroughs and monthly observations. Leaders

explained that each administrator is assigned a set of teachers to provide instructional support. School

leaders and teachers stated that leaders meet with their assigned teachers individually twice a month.

Teachers indicated that they engage in a monthly coaching cycle during which they are observed and

receive feedback. School leaders explained that they use an evaluator tool for formal evaluations and

an observation form when doing daily walkthroughs. The walkthrough form includes four areas to

assess – learning targets, student engagement, French language communication, and physical

environment/safety. Review of this form showed that the feedback did not provide details on how to

improve instructional practice. Also, review of the evaluator’s observation tool revealed observation

scores and ratings, but the forms did not provide constructive, growth-oriented feedback on

instruction. For example, on a teacher evaluation tool, the observer commented that the teacher was

hardworking and developed good relationship with their students. However, the feedback did not

address the teacher’s rating of effective and how it relates to delivering quality instruction. On

another teacher observation form, the observer gave a general comment stating that the students

knew what to do during the lesson. Teachers consistently described the feedback they have received

as general and ineffective. However, leaders explained that they provide a follow-up observation to

ensure all feedback was implemented and that instructional practice was improved.

Academie ABC March 27-30, 2017

© 2017 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 14

Prioritization Process

The team met with the Academie ABC School’s leadership team to review its findings, discuss the school’s areas of strengths and areas for improvement, prioritize areas for improvement, and discuss ways to address the identified areas for improvement.

School leaders and the site visit team agreed that there are significant strengths present in the school.

Areas of strength the team discussed included Student Learning Supports, Students Learning Culture, and

Organizational Structures and Leadership. The site visit team also noted the following areas for growth:

Purposeful, Focused Instruction; Instructional Leadership; and Educators’ Learning Culture.

The group identified as Educators’ Learning Culture the area for growth to prioritize.

The team then developed the following goal and action steps related to that area for growth:

Goal: The school fully reflects a safe, trustworthy, and growth-oriented professional climate.

Actions Date Champions

SQR committee will share findings with teaching staff during

an upcoming staff session in the following order:

• Staff will highlight positive growth

• SQR committee will share all data to inform staff of the

current state of the school

5/1/17 Head of School

SQR committee will develop survey that asks specific

questions in terms of Educators’ Learning Culture

5/31/17 Principal

SQR committee will give survey and conduct interviews or

focus groups across the organization:

5/31/17 Principal and

Teacher

Staff would review, analyze the data during division meeting

(tentatively), and create action plans to establish Academie

ABC norms and shared vision

• The SQR committee need to consider protocol, team

norms, common language, set of procedures

• Also, need to consider how to encourage staff input in

support of the process

6/30/17 Principal

Academie ABC March 27-30, 2017

© 2017 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 15

Appendix A: Site Visit Team Members

The school quality review site visit to the Academie ABC was conducted on March 27-30, 2017 by a team

of educators from SchoolWorks, LLC.

Kara Dunn Team Leader SchoolWorks, LLC

Ashanti Howard Team Writer SchoolWorks, LLC

Lourdes Laguna Team Member SchoolWorks, LLC

Dominique Astier Team Member SchoolWorks, LLC

Academie ABC March 27-30, 2017

© 2017 SchoolWorks, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 16

Appendix B: Summary of Classroom Observation Data

During the site visit, the team conducted 34 observations, representing a range of grade levels and

subject areas. The following table presents the compiled data from those observations. Note: Due to

rounding, the percentages for a particular indicator may not appear to total to 100%.

Indicator Distribution of Scores (%)

Ineffective Partially Effective Effective

1 2 3 4

Co

mm

on

Co

re

Alig

nm

en

t

1a. Common Core Literacy Alignment (for all classes other than math) Alignment to content standards

Alignment to instructional shifts N = _25_

17% 35% 12% 9%

1b. Common Core Math Alignment (for math classes only) Alignment to content standards Alignment to instructional shifts

Alignment to standards for mathematical practice N = _9_

12% 6% 6% 3%

Cla

ssro

om

Clim

ate

2. Behavioral Expectations Student behavior Clear expectations Consistent rewards and/or consequences Anticipation and redirection of misbehavior

3% 24% 29% 44%

3. Structured Learning Environment Teacher preparation Clear agenda Learning time maximized

6% 38% 44% 12%

4. Supportive Learning Environment Caring relationships Teacher responsiveness to students’ needs 3% 44% 24% 29%

Pu

rpo

sefu

l Te

ach

ing

5. Focused Instruction Learning objectives High expectations Effective communication of academic content

17% 59% 24% 0%

6. Instructional Strategies Multi-sensory modalities and materials Varied groupings Student choice and leadership

38% 38% 15% 9%

7. Cognitive Engagement Active student participation Perseverance 9% 44% 35% 12%

8. Higher-order Thinking Challenging tasks Application to new problems and situations Student questions Metacognition

32% 44% 21% 3%

In-C

lass

Ass

ess

me

nt

&

Ad

just

me

nt

9. Assessment Strategies Use of formative assessments

32% 29% 32% 6%

10. Adjustments to Instruction Adjustment of instructional Strategies Adjustment of content Adjustment of organization of students

91% 3% 3% 3%

11. Feedback Feedback to students Student use of feedback

50% 26% 24% 0%