study visit group report - cedefop€¦ · certificate (usually completed in secondary vocational...

Study visit group report

Group No 170

Title of the visit School self-evaluation: setting up a new system and support for schools

Topic Quality assurance mechanisms in schools and training institutions

City, country Prague, Czech Republic

Type of visit Mixed

Dates of visit 14TH – 18TH May 2012

Group reporters Miriam Horgan and Claire Breen

I FINDINGS

This section summarises the findings of the group while visiting host institutions, discussing issues with the hosts and within the group. You will be reflecting on what you learnt every day. But to put them together and give an overall picture, you need to devote a special session to prepare the final report on the last day of the visit. In this section, it is important that you describe not only things you learnt about the host country but also what you learnt about the countries represented by group members. 1. One of the objectives of the study visits programme is to exchange

examples of good practice among hosts and participants. Cedefop will select well-described projects/programmes/initiatives and disseminate

2

them to former participants and a wider public, including potential partners for future projects. Therefore it is important that you identify and describe all aspects that, in your view, make these projects/programmes/initiatives successful and worth exploring.

A Short Synopsis of internal and external evaluation in Czech Republic

Context Currently the Czech Republic, which came into existence in 1993, has 11,281 schools and almost two million pupils. A very centralized education system existed prior 1989. Many changes have occurred in the educational system since then, the most recent of which are as follows:

• A white paper was produced (2001) and this formed the basis for the Education Act and Educational Staff Act (2004).

• Decentralisation of schools occurred (2001-2003). The provision of public schools was moved from the Central Ministry of Education to regional authorities and municipalities.

• Schools were then provided by private personnel or religious organisations; Gymnaziums, general upper secondary school for pupils from 11 to 18 age old, were reintroduced.

Czech schools are independent legal entities and thus have a very high degree of autonomy. Head teachers have complete responsibility for the quality and effectiveness of the education provision in their schools. Other responsibilities include teacher appointment and dismissal, and the financial management of the school. A simple framework of the Czech education system is illustrated in figure 1:

Basic School Basic School Basic School Basic School –––– primary levelprimary levelprimary levelprimary level

BasicBasicBasicBasic School School School School –––– lowerlowerlowerlower----secondary levelsecondary levelsecondary levelsecondary level8888----years courseyears courseyears courseyears course

6666----years courseyears courseyears courseyears course

Secondary educationSecondary educationSecondary educationSecondary education withwithwithwith

SchoolSchoolSchoolSchool----leaving examleaving examleaving examleaving exam

general fields other fieldsgeneral fields other fieldsgeneral fields other fieldsgeneral fields other fields

Tertiary ProfessionalTertiary ProfessionalTertiary ProfessionalTertiary Professional

SchoolSchoolSchoolSchool

Secondary educationSecondary educationSecondary educationSecondary education

with apprenticeshipwith apprenticeshipwith apprenticeshipwith apprenticeship

certificatecertificatecertificatecertificate

SecondarySecondarySecondarySecondary

educationeducationeducationeducation

Dance

Dance

Dance

Dance Conservatoires

Conservatoires

Conservatoires

Conservatoires

Conservatoires

Conservatoires

Conservatoires

Conservatoires

4444----years courseyears courseyears courseyears course

Bachelor's Bachelor's Bachelor's Bachelor's

programmesprogrammesprogrammesprogrammes

MasterMasterMasterMaster´s s s s


Higher EducationHigher EducationHigher EducationHigher Education

InstitutionInstitutionInstitutionInstitution

Kindergarten Kindergarten Kindergarten Kindergarten –––– prepreprepre----primary levelprimary levelprimary levelprimary level

Doctoral Doctoral Doctoral Doctoral


3-6

age

6-15

15-19

19+

Figure 1

3

Education is provided in pre-primary, basic (primary and lower secondary), upper secondary and tertiary educational institutions. Schooling is compulsory for all pupils/students from six years to fifteen years of age and this is provided in the basic school. Students with special educational needs are in the main integrated into mainstream schools. However, this integrated approach does not preclude the setting up of special classes with educational programmes that are adapted to the needs of the pupils/students as necessary. In addition there are a number of special schools for students whose educational needs cannot otherwise be met in the mainstream setting. Upper secondary education is provided through a highly differentiated system and includes vocational training. The aim of upper secondary education is to further develop knowledge, skills and values attained within basic education, in either broader general education or vocational education connected with general education. Upper secondary schools are classified into three categories: (i) secondary general school (gymnasium), (ii) secondary technical school and (iii) secondary vocational school. The following levels of education can be acquired at secondary school:

• Secondary education • Secondary education leading to an apprenticeship

certificate (usually completed in secondary vocational schools)

• Secondary education completed by a school leaving examination (completed in secondary technical schools or gymnasium)

Curricular reform resulted in a significant change in the National Czech Educational Programme. In 2004 the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports approved a basic document, the Framework Educational Programme for Basic Education (FEP BE). The framework educational programme outlines different educational areas and fields of education for all sectors up to upper secondary education. The framework also specifies the minimum number of hours required for each area at each stage. Building on this framework, schools are required to develop their own detailed school-based educational programmes; these must be based on the FEP BE. The phased implementation of this FEP BE, which was updated in 2009, began on 1 September 2005. In the 2011/12 school year, the school-based educational programmes will be implemented in all years of basic school and in lower stages of multi-year gymnázia. Czech Inspectorate The evaluation of schools and school facilities is carried out by the Czech School Inspectorate. External evaluations are carried out in

4

pre-primary, basic (primary and lower secondary), upper secondary and tertiary educational institutions. The functions of the Czech School Inspectorate include the following:

• Obtaining and analysing information on the education of students and on the activities of schools and school facilities listed in the Register of Educational Facilities

• Monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of the educational system

• Determining and assessing to what extent the school educational programme is met and whether it is in compliance with the framework educational programme of the Ministry of Education

• Performing state checks to determine whether legal regulations relating to the provision of education and school services are met

• Performing a public-legal audit focused on the use of funds allocated from the state budget

• Publication of Inspectorate reports. External evaluations are based on criteria which are published in advance. Associates, who are usually head-teachers or deputy head-teachers and who have expertise that is not available in the Inspectorate, work with an inspector or auditor as external evaluators. This happens when external evaluation occurs in some technical schools. Support for School Self-Evaluation – Road to Quality Improvement

From January 2005, schools have been required to conduct a self-evaluation every three years. This internal evaluation is always focused on:

� the school's goals; � analysis of the way in which the school fulfills its goals; � the strengths of the school’s education, and the areas in which

it is necessary to improve the quality of education, including proposals for appropriate measures to be taken;

� the effectiveness of the chosen measures.

A project to support schools in conducting self-evaluation was set up in 2009 (Self-evaluation: setting up system and supporting school in self-evaluation – Road to Quality Improvement). All schools were invited to participate in this project. Although the take-up was small (8%), those who participated were very active. This project ran for three years from April 2009 until April 2012 and was supported by European Social Fund (ESF) and the Czech state budget for the Operational Education Programme for Competitiveness. The project was run in co-operation with the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports and the National Institute for Education, Education Counseling Centre and Centre for Continuing Education for Teachers and the

5

National Institute for Further Education. Educational specialists from universitites and schools were also consulted.

Participation in the project provided the following benefits for schools:

• schools were enabled to develop an understanding that self-evaluation is a fundamental activity for improving the quality of education in schools

• an organized system of valid evaluation tools was developed for schools

• examples of effective practice were shared • a consultation system supporting self-evaluation was put in

place • further training was organized for stakeholders

Schools participating in the project shared their experience of self-evaluation in workshops and through exchange visits. Through these activities, schools had the opportunity to undertake peer review and support each other through the process of school self-evaluation. A supporting network of trained advisors was also set up. The success of the project was evaluated on completion. Data was collected and analysed. Thirty evaluation tools, based on a range of evaluation methods, for use by schools, were devised and these continue to be uploaded onto the website. Examples of good practice and the monolingual dictionary, both published on the project website, will help schools to implement a process of school self-evaluation. Significantly, a self-evaluation framework was developed. The framework consists of five areas of quality:

• facilities and resources for education • the content and process of education • learning outcomes of pupils/students • support of pupils/students and co-operation with stakeholders • leadership and school management, the quality of human

resources work.

Currently, there are no links between school self-evaluation and external evaluation processes.

Describe each of the good practices you learnt about during the visit (both from the hosts and from one another) indicating the following:

6

title of the project/programme

/initiative

country name of the institution that implements it (if possible, provide a

website)

contact person (if possible) who presented the

programme to the group

whom the project/ programme/ initiative

addresses

what features of the project/programme/initiative make it an

example of good practice

DENI – Together towards

Improvement Performance Indicators

Northern Ireland

Tor Bank School (special school)

Claire Breen (Vice Principal)

All Schools

An Internal Self Evaluation (SE) using nationally agreed performance indicators. Self Evaluation as a tool for external inspection, bench marking and monitoring purposes. SE as part of Government School Improvement Programme to raise standards, SE used to support independence and accountability.

School Self Evaluation

Ireland Inspectorate, Department of

Education and Skills

Miriam Horgan, Senior Inspector

All primary and post-primary schools

School Self-Evaluation (SSE) is part of a coordinated approach that will help schools to improve standards in teaching and learning. The National Literacy and Numeracy Strategy requires all schools to engage in self-evaluation and to put in place a three-year school improvement plan which includes specific targets for the promotion and improvement of literacy and numeracy”. Guidelines have been developed to support schools in SSE and schools will be assisted in implementing the SSE process by the Inspectorate, the PDST (support service) and through the Department’s website. SSE is building on the process of school development planning that has been undertaken by schools since 1999. Current models of external evaluation have involved analysing the extent to which schools have undertaken self-evaluation practices to date.

In Italy schools are not compelled (but only

7


/initiative


website)




addresses



Italy Direzione Didattica Mirandola (MO)

Scuola Media Statale “Verga-Don Milani” Barrafranca (EN)

Paola Cavicchioli (Headteacher) Roberto Ferrera (Headteacher)

advised) to start Self Evaluation activities. There is an external system of assessment only for students, provided by INVALSI (National Evaluation System) and results are given back to school to be used for quality improvement.

Malta Quality Assurance Department DQSE

Kenneth Camilleri (Assistant Director Education)

National Policy External Evaluation is a means to support and promote Internal Evaluation. External Evaluation is evidence based and triangulation of data is used to enhance validation. Self Evaluation as a tool to include and involve all stakeholders. Self Evaluation is linked to School Development Plan.

France Lycee Polyvalent Carnot Bertin

Stephane Germain Proviseur adjoint

Technical and vocational high school

The annual assessment of a stage connected to obtaining a label as a voluntary approach is a good tool for the members of the team to have a better vision of the stakes in the school. The evaluation stimulates an approach of change and quality. The annual assessment of stage reports on implemented actions over the period and allows the school to define the axes of priority actions for the next period.

France College Paul prudhon in

cluny

Sadia Detrez headteacher

Secondary school Internal self evaluation in secondary schools and its links with (1) the financial law 2005 (LOLF): (2) the academic project

8


/initiative


website)




addresses



and the letter of mission (contract between the head teacher/principal and the academic authority)

Finland Pateniemen koulu Meri Aatsinki-Hamalainen, (Deputy head)

In Finland external evaluation doesn’t exist. Internal evaluation is an important tool for planning and developing schools’ work. Schools are planning and developing new tools for self evaluation.

Turkey Mehmet Akif Ersoy University

Educational faculty

Zeynep Karatas, Asist. Prof. Dr.

In Turkey internal and external evaluation are different practices. Schools are planning and developing their own self evaluation methods.

Portugal Escola Profissional Centro Juvenil de

Campanha

Paulo Leao Diretor Pedagogico

Technical and vocational school

In Portugal external evaluation doesn’t exist. Internal evaluation includes and involves all stakeholders. Self Evaluation is in process of School.

Greece Primary School of Isthmia Korinthias

Vaia Manoli, Head Teacher

Primary and Secondary schools

In Greece all schools have to participate in a self evaluation project from September 2012. It is more an internal evaluation in order to highlight strengths and weaknesses and to improve the educational work.

Spain Fuente Fresnedo Secondary School

Marisa Brugera Headteacher

All schools Evaluation is an essential element to innovate. Evaluation processes must reach all dimensions of education. School self-evaluation plans give schools the necessary tools to be conscious of weaknesses and strengths. The whole school community has to participate and design improvement plans to get better results and

9


/initiative


website)




addresses



organisation. France Circonscription de

Rouen Sud Academy of Rouen

Christine Malot Primary school Inspector

Pre elememtary and elementary schools

In France, there is a form of school self evaluation (three-year project) and external evaluation (inspections) Types of evaluations - self evaluation of schools, individual inspections and school evaluation. School project (three–year term) and the analysis of results. Self evaluation occurs between primary schools and secondary schools: this results in validation of common standards.

Romania School No. 1 “Sf. Voievozi”

Iuliana Soare Principal

Primary and lower secondary schools

The self evaluation programme in place in schools is a component of a yearly school improvement plan. It focuses on areas that are also evaluated externally. It identifies weaknesses and sets up a list of measures to take in order to turn these weaknesses into strengths. In perspective, the self-evaluation will be a compulsory aspect for schools accreditation.

Germany – Rhineland-Palatinate

AQS – School inspectorate of Rhineland-Palatinate

Clemens Kaesler School inspector VET

All state schools The AQS is currently setting up a system, which is supposed to link the external evaluation of schools with the internal evaluation. This will be done by not only providing the instruments of the external evaluation for internal use, but also to give training to schools in peer review and classroom walkthrough by principals. At

10


/initiative


website)




addresses



this moment, it is just a project and has not been put into reality so far. At present schools evaluate themselves in very different ways and do this on their own without any external support.

11

2. The study visits programme aims to promote and support policy development and cooperation in lifelong learning. That is why it is important to know what you learnt about such policies and their implementation during your visit. You are invited to describe your findings concerning the following:

2.1 APPROACHES TAKEN BY PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES (BOTH HOST AND

PARTICIPANTS’) REGARDING THE THEME OF THE VISIT. ARE THERE ANY SIMILAR APPROACHES/MEASURES IN PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES? WHAT ASPECTS ARE

SIMILAR AND WHY? WHAT ASPECTS ARE DIFFERENT AND WHY?

After discussion, a comparison was made with respective countries and the following similarities were found:-

NO EXTERNAL EVALUATION

NATIONAL EXTERNAL EVALUATION SYSTEM

REGIONAL EXTERNAL EVALUATION

• Finland • Italy • Greece

• Malta • France • Italy (only for

students) • Germany • Romania • Spain • Turkey • Ireland

• N. Ireland • France(academic) • Germany • Romania • Spain

INTERNAL SCHOOL EVALUATION

INTERNAL LESSON OBSERVATION

EXTERNAL LESSON OBSERVATION

• Finland(optional) • N.Ireland • Malta • Italy

(recommended) • Turkey • Portugal • France • Germany • Romania • Greece • Spain • Ireland

(mandatory from September 2012)

• N.Ireland • Malta • Turkey • Portugal • Germany, dep. On

Land • Romania • Ireland

(mentoring)

• N. Ireland • Malta • Turkey • France • Germany,

depending on Land • Romania • Ireland

The main similarities between the countries using evaluation is as follows: IN THE MAJORITY OF COUNTRIES:-

• External evaluation is used to validate internal evaluation. • In many countries trained inspectors and in a minority of instances

advisors, are used to externally verify internal evaluation processes. • The internal evaluation system is designed to measure key areas of a

school’s work.

12

• The internal evaluation process is linked to the school development plans and school improvement.

• There is a focus on using internal evaluation for highlighting success and identifying areas for improvement.

• A wide range of instruments for school self-evaluation are used. In some instances these are generated by individual schools. In other cases these are centrally devised and adapted by individual schools.

• In some countries a grading system is used for internal and external evaluation.

• The internal evaluation process values the opinion of a wide range of stakeholders such as, staff, parents, students, therapists and employers.

• A robust evaluation cycle is clearly defined within the model of internal evaluation.

The main differences highlighted by each country are as follows:

• Finland, Greece and Italy have no external evaluation system. In secondary school in France there is no external evaluation.

• External and internal evaluation is currently compulsory in Romania, Turkey and Germany.

• There is an increased focus in school self-evaluation in Ireland, Greece and Malta. From September 2012, internal self evaluation will become mandatory Greece. All schools in Ireland will be required to engage in robust school self-evaluation and to use aggregated literacy and numeracy assessment data at school level to inform their school self-evaluation, reflective practices and their school improvement plans.

• By the end of 2013 all schools in Romania and Ireland must complete a school self-evaluation report.

• It is compulsory for all schools in Romania, France (secondary schools) and Turkey to have an internal evaluation committee.

• Romania has a complex system for internal and external evaluation following national standards approved by law.

• In many countries, a framework is used in all schools to assist in the internal evaluation process.

• Currently, for internal self evaluation there is a grading system for judging performance against performance indicators in Romania and Northern Ireland. Schools will begin to evaluate themselves in this manner in Greece from September 2012.

• For internal evaluation of teacher performance in Romania, criteria have been devised at national level and the results of the internal evaluation of each teacher forms part of their portfolio.

• Currently in Northern Ireland and Spain the completed internal evaluation report are used for external inspections purposes.

• Reports from external inspections are published in Ireland, Northern Ireland, Czech Republic and Romania. The executive summary of inspection reports is published in Malta.

• There is training for school leaders and/or staff in self-evaluation in Northern Ireland, Malta, Germany, Finland, Romania and Greece. From September 2012 Ireland will also provide training for all schools.

13

• In Northern Ireland and Germany associate inspectors who are generally principals or deputy principals form part of external evaluation teams. In Czech Republic associate inspectors with expertise that is not present in the Inspectorate form part of evaluation teams as required. These associates are usually principals.

• In Italy and France(secondary) schools student performance is externally assessed. Schools may use this as an indicator of its own school effectiveness. There is no central support for this school self evaluation.

• In addition to the evaluators (inspectors), school supervisors exist in Germany. These supervisors do not have an evaluative role.

• Lesson observation is a key component of evaluating teaching and learning in schools in most countries.

• In France external evaluation is teacher evaluation and in Romania the teacher evaluation is done through the internal evaluation process.

• In Turkey, Finland and Germany, parents have the option to observe lessons.

2.2 CHALLENGES FACED BY PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES (INCLUDING HOST) IN THEIR

EFFORTS TO IMPLEMENT POLICIES RELATED TO THE THEME OF THE VISIT. WHAT

ARE THE CHALLENGES? ARE THEY COMMON CHALLENGES? IF SO, WHY? IF NOT, WHY NOT?

• It is difficult to develop an internal evaluation process that is not seen by staff to be imposed upon them from the top. Staff need to ‘buy into the process’ and this is a challenge that all school leaders face.

• In some countries, teaching unions continue to be an on-going challenge in relation to self evaluation. At present in Northern Ireland and Italy teaching unions are recommending that teachers do not take part in external evaluations.

• In countries where external evaluation exists, it is important to ensure that the internal evaluation processes used in schools and the resulting school improvement plans are recognised and validated by externally approved sources.

• Training staff in the use of internal evaluation procedures to ensure consistency of delivery right across the school is a key challenge for school leaders.

• Ensuring that staff recognise the importance of using self evaluation for monitoring and development purposes is a key factor for successful school self evaluation.

• Obtaining the commitment of all staff to engage in a self evaluation process that will subsequently feed into school improvement (school development planning) is important.

• A challenge for all school leaders is providing time for staff to carry out self evaluation within the constraints of the timetables that already exists within schools.

• Due to the current economic climate all schools face the challenge of empowering staff to use internal evaluation without funding.

• Ensuring that a robust review and evaluation cycle is maintained is key to success.

14

• It is a challenge to collect only relevant data and to select the right evaluation method and tools.

• It is also a challenge is to ensure that any data collected through the process of self evaluation is properly analysed and used accordingly.

• It is a challenge for school leadership to ensure that support is available for all staff who are under any undue stress during evaluation processes.

• It is a challenge is to ensure that the outcomes from internal and external measures are used to increase standards within a school and are not used to compare performance between schools.

• Reducing the excessive bureaucracy of additional paperwork is a challenge to school leaders.

• Networking is also a challenge in relation to internal evaluation.

2.3 NAME AND DESCRIBE EFFECTIVE AND INNOVATIVE SOLUTIONS YOU HAVE

IDENTIFIED THAT PARTICIPATING COUNTRIES (BOTH HOST AND PARTICIPANTS) APPLY TO ADDRESS THE CHALLENGES MENTIONED IN QUESTION 2.2. PLEASE MENTION SPECIFIC COUNTRY EXAMPLES.

• In some countries evaluation instruments are centrally developed for use by schools.

• In Romania and France at the present time, support is provided for external and internal evaluation. In Ireland, Greece and Malta, the inspectorate/other professional bodies have begun to provide support to schools for self evaluation/school improvement.

• With so much good practice in so many countries it would be wonderful to share resources by setting up an on-line forum where good practice can not only be shared but debated.

• In most countries schools are clustered to enable them to ‘tap into’ a wider range of expertise.

• It is imperative to ensure all staff is equipped with the skills to select the correct evaluation methods and use them effectively. It is also important that all staff (beginning with principals/head teachers) is trained in using a variety of evaluation instruments.

• Some countries have co-ordinators in schools to ensure that the internal evaluation process is undertaken in a consistent manner and to ensure that the data collected from internal evaluation feeds into the school development plan/school improvement plan. We believe this to be best practice and this approach should be used in all countries.

• Some countries have set up support systems to provide assistance for school leaders in implementing school self-evaluation processes (for example email/telephone helpline, seminars). This is a particularly important strategy in instances where self evaluation is a new initiative.

• It is best practice for all countries to consult with stakeholders such as parents, pupils/students and therapists when embarking on a self evaluation of school practices which would result in the implementation of a school improvement programme based on the findings from internal evaluation.

15

2.4 ASSESSMENT OF THE TRANSFERABILITY OF POLICIES AND PRACTICES. COULD ANY

EXAMPLES OF GOOD PRACTICE PRESENTED IN THIS REPORT BE APPLIED AND

TRANSFERRED TO OTHER COUNTRIES? IF SO, WHY? IF NOT, WHY NOT? Below we have devised a chart to clarify the best practice model for evaluation in schools:-

3. Creating networks of experts, building partnerships for future projects is another important objective of the study visit programme. Please state whether and which ideas for future cooperation have evolved during meetings and discussions.

1. We have swapped PowerPoint presentations and will each feedback to our

own school/organisation the self-evaluation process from each country highlighting the similarities and differences. Areas of best practice will be discussed and may be implemented.

2. Through the study visit project we have established a European network forum to look at self evaluation. We will continue to communicate electronically to exchange ideas in relation to self evaluation and external evaluation across all those countries involved in the study.

3. We will share our findings from the project with other stakeholders who may have an interest in the project and can become involved in the discussion process.

16

4. We watch with interest the implementation of the Greek, Irish and Maltese systems of self-evaluation which will be implemented in the near future.

17

TO SUM UPTO SUM UPTO SUM UPTO SUM UP

THANK YOUTHANK YOUTHANK YOUTHANK YOU!!!!

4. What is the most interesting/useful information that the group believes should be communicated to others? To whom, do you think, this information will be of most interest?

In conclusion the following points were felt to be of significant importance:-

• The link between external and internal evaluation needs to be clarified in countries where both processes are implemented and it is important that both processes would complement each other.

• All evaluations should lead to school improvement. • Conclusions should be drawn based on the evidence gathered and

judgements should subsequently be made using key criteria as benchmarks.

• Success of school evaluation depends on support and training provided. • Internal school evaluation is most successful when all stakeholders are

actively involved. • Those countries with the highest standards of living and best assessment

results have not necessarily got a more effective infrastructure than other countries to support school improvement.

The above information will be of interest to the following bodies:-

• Teachers • Ministries/Department of Education • Inspectorates • Principals/Headteachers • Researchers • Local Authorities • Teacher educators

Please submit the report to Cedefop ([email protected]) within one month of the visit.

study visit group report - cedefop€¦ · certificate (usually completed in secondary vocational...

Documents