Instructional Consultation Teams (ICT) is a proactive model of service delivery that provides academic and behavioral support to all students who are struggling in the general education classroom. It is a systematic, problem-solving process for all teachers and staff to help them reflect on and develop instruction for all students. A teacher and a well-trained staff member who serves as an instructional consultant work shoulder to- shoulder to design and deliver instruction.
Instructional Consultation Teams
District and School Building Tool-Kit for Self-Assessment
This "tool-kit" is designed for use by building and district administrators, in consultation with WISD, as a self-assessment tool. Its purpose is to guide districts and schools in charting their course toward the implementation of the common high expectations identified by the Washtenaw Superintendents' Association Conference on Teaching and Learning.
Rationale: The "Big Ideas" shaping the work of the Conference on Teaching and Learning across our county are powerful and important, but not easy to implement. District and building leaders may wonder "Where do I begin?" One place to begin is to ask, "What are the strengths in our schools that we'll want to build on? What are our needs?" It is important to use more than MEAP data to answer those questions.
Fortunately, we know a great deal about what is required to make schools successful at helping all students meet our common high expectations for them. Engaging individual teachers or a whole staff in assessing local strengths and needs can provide valuable information and insights to guide priority-setting, development of school improvement goals and strategies, and plans for professional development.
Self-Assessment Tools
This "kit" contains several tools that can be used for self-assessment in the following key areas integral to the full implementation of "the Big Ideas:"
As you put these tools to use in your school, you will find that many of the Education YES! indicators are being addressed. For a "crosswalk" that identifies which tools are aligned with which Education YES! indicators, please see the appendix.
Some Suggested Uses for These Tools:
Broad Survey Approach: Any one of these rubrics can be distributed to individual staff members who are asked to circle, color, or mark the point on the rubric that best reflects their point of view. Responses will probably be most honest if rubrics are completed anonymously. A timeframe for completing and returning the rubric will be helpful. Results are then collected and tallied for study by the entire faculty, or by sub-groups such as School Improvement Teams.
Advantage(s) of this method: It is good for gathering data fairly quickly. Individuals have the opportunity to engage in genuine self-assessment.
Disadvantage(s) of this method: Not all faculty members may participate. There is no formal opportunity for professional conversation about the items that may lead to new insights, deeper understanding, and shared understanding.
Tool(s) Best Suited for This Use: Effective Practices that Support Student Achievement at High Levels for All Students Survey, Personalized Learning Rubric
Small Group, Collaborative Assessment Process: An entire faculty, divided into small groups, or a sub-group of the faculty (e.g., the School Improvement Team), can engage in the self-assessment process together. The process may begin by having each individual complete the rubric from his/her own perspective. Within the small groups, individuals share their responses, and offer explanations for their choices. If the goal is to come to consensus about "where we are as a building or district," an effort should be made to reach agreement on the single point on the rubric for each item that best reflects the common thinking of the group. At the end of small group time, results of the small group assessments can be shared, compared, and compiled as a whole group. Points of difference can be explored through conversation, or "flagged" for later study.
Advantage(s) of this method: There is a greater likelihood that all faculty members will participate. This method provides rich opportunity for professional conversation about important ideas contained in the rubrics that may lead to new insights, deeper understanding, shared beliefs, and an enhanced culture of collegiality.
Disadvantage(s) of this method: It may not be ideal for gathering data fairly quickly. It does require time, and skill at (large and) small group facilitation, and a norm of respect and trust among faculty.
Tool(s) Best Suited for This Use: Leadership Capacity Rubric, Professional Community-Building Rubric, Program Coherence Rubric, Personalized Learning Rubric.