A-Z IndexPrinter Friendly Image
Search
 

 

SIP header
School Improvement

Common Characteristics of High Performing Schools

What Makes a Successful School ?

  1. Clear and Shared Focus
  2. High Standards and Expectations
  3. Effective School Leadership
  4. High Levels of Collaboration and Communication
  5. Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment Aligned with Standards
  6. Frequent Monitoring of Teaching and Learning
  7. Focused Professional Development
  8. Supportive Learning Environment
  9. High Levels of Community and Parent Involvement

High Standards and Expectations

Teachers and staff believe that all students can learn and meet high standards. While recognizing that some students must overcome significant barriers, these obstacles are not seen as insurmountable. Students are offered an ambitious and rigorous course of study.

INDICATORS:

  • Instruction is focused on high expectations that implements powerful teaching and learning strategies including action inquiry, in-depth learning, and performance assessments.
  • Instruction is focused on high expectations that implements powerful teaching and learning strategies including action inquiry, in-depth learning, and performance assessments.
  • Staff is consistent and purposeful in cross-grade-level conversations that result in an alignment of the curriculum within and among the content areas.
  • Staff focuses on commonalities that cut across grades and subjects.
  • All students participate in and can master academically rigorous courses.
  • There is a clear link between student assessment and instructional activities.
  • Teachers focus on competence, not coverage.
  • Students are aware of expectations, produce quality work, and present to real audiences (Gates).
  • Expectations connect to the real world, and students are role models and peer educators (Partnership for Learning).
  • Staff and students articulate their belief in their capacity for success.
  • Instruction is personalized and encompasses a broad, concerted, and systematic emphasis on motivation as well as knowledge and skills.
  • All participants can articulate the common purpose.
  • The use of time, materials, and professional development activities are aligned with common focus.
  • Learning goals are developed and prioritized according to district or building guidelines.
  • There is a commitment to long-range, continuous improvement.
  • The common focus is directly related to assignment of staff time and resource allocation.
  • All staff can articulate how the school is improving student learning.
  • Staff study test results and establish a plan to attack areas of weakness.
  • Professional development reflects the National Staff Development Council Standards.
  • There is a sustained emphasis on learning.

RESOURCES:

  • Research - U.S. Department of Education Cross-Site Indexing Project
  • Leadership and Organizational Vitality
  • effectiveschools.com
  • Add It Up: Using Research to Improve Education for Low-Income and Minority Students.
  • Barth, R. S. (1990). Improving Schools from within: Teachers, parents, and principals can make the difference. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. See chapter 11, Visions of Good Schools.
  • Conzemius, A. and O'Neill, J. (2001). Building Shared Responsibility for Student Learning. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. See chapter 2, Focus.
  • Cunningham, W. G. and Gresso, D. W. (1993). Cultural Leadership: The Culture of Excellence in Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. See chapter 4, Vision, Not Criticism, Supports Excellence.
  • DuFour, R. and Eaker, R. (1998). Professional Learning Communities at Work. Best Practices for Enhancing Student Achievement. Bloomington, Id.: National Educational Service and Alexandria, VA:ASCD. See chapters 4-5 on Mission and Vision/ Values and Goals.
  • Glickman, C. D. (1993). Renewing America's Schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. See chapter 2, The Covenant: Establishing Common Principles of Teaching and Learning.
  • Holcomb, E. L. (2001). Asking the Right Questions. Techniques for Collaboration and School Change. (2nd ed.) Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
  • Louis, K. S. and Miles, M. B. (1990). Improving the Urban High School. What Works and Why. New York: Teachers College Press. See chapter 9, Vision Building in School Reform.
  • Sagor, R. (1996). Local Control and Accountability. How to Get It, Keep It and Improve School Performance. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. See chapter 3, The Three Building Blocks of Accountability: Vision Setting, Action Research, and Performance Assessment.
  • Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline. The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday Currency. See Part III, The Core Disciplines: Building the Learning Organization.
  • Senge, P., Cambron-McCabe, N., Lucas, T., Smith, B., Dutton, J., and Kleiner, A. (2000). Schools That Learn: A Fifth Discipline Fieldbook for Educators, Parents, and Everyone Who Cares about Education. New York: Doubleday Currency. See Part IX, School Vision.
  • Schlechty. P. C. (2001). Shaking Up the School House. How to Support and Sustain Educational Innovation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. See chapters 2 and 8.
  • Schmoker, M. (1999). Results: The Key to Continuous School Improvement (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. See chapter 2, Goals, at http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/1999schmoker/1999schmokertoc.html

Old Capitol Building, PO Box 47200, 600 Washington St. S.E., Olympia, WA  98504-7200  (360) 725-6000  TTY (360) 664-3631