EXAMPLE ASSESSMENT WORKSHEETS AND CHECKLISTS

12-9-16

 

SCHOOL DISTRICT READINESS TO IMPROVE CHECKLIST

 

A school district is ready to improve, such as successfully implementing the Purple Education Plan,  when the following conditions are met.

 

_______  The district is relatively stable and not in turmoil

_______  The school board and superintendent are trusted by most involved with making the improvement

_______  Performance measures are established and in use

_______  The need for improvement is accepted by most involved with making it

_______  Resources for making improvement will be made available as needed

_______  At least 30% improvement is expected--which makes the improvement project worthwhile

_______  The person in charge of the improvement project has been named

_______  The processes or conditions to be improved are identified

_______  The superintendent understands a process is a set of logically related tasks performed to achieve a defined outcome and that processes should do most of the work.  

_______  The superintendent understands process improvement is a set of actions or steps taken to achieve an improved outcome, with fewer tasks, waste, elapsed time or resources—than that required or consumed by an existing process.

 

Note:  A computerized instruction process doing most of the work, such as industrialized training processes, is estimated to reduce school instruction costs by at least 40%--with a better result.  Private schools will lead the way, profitably. 

 

 

 

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET EXAMPLES & INSTRUCTIONS

12-7-16

Assessment Worksheets are used to assess the suitability of the subject to meet its expectations.   The following page contains an example superintendent Assessment Worksheet to demonstrate use of these instructions, which are provided as steps.

1.    Use a spreadsheet to prepare the Assessment Worksheet

2.    Copy the format from the example Worksheets below or prepare one to suit the desired assessment subject

a.    Note, if a different worksheet is prepared, it is best to have the .3 condition be an unacceptable condition.  A .3 is considered a show stopper for that reason. 

3.    Once the Worksheet is constructed, start the assessment at Category A1.

a.    If the assessment is to be done by a team, the team leader should give each team member a sheet to fill out individually

4.    Perform evaluations in any manner to determine the number that best fits the condition listed for each candidate.

a.    For the superintendent assessment example below, the numbers were determined to be .9 for Jones, .75 for Adams and .3 for Smith.  The numbers can be changed as necessary to improve accuracy or fitness.

5.    Continue through the remaining categories in the same manner.

6.    Sum the numbers for each candidate and enter then in the TOTAL cells.

7.    Divide each total by the number of categories, in this case 5, to get the average for each candidate

8.    The candidate having the highest number is the best choice, provided it has no .3 values.

9.    If a team is doing the assessment, gather the team and discuss any differences in the values.  Try to get them resolved.  If that is impossible, average the two disputed numbers to reach a compromise and mark it in the appropriate column. 

10. Once the numbers for each agreed to, for the various sheets, add the corresponding totals and divide them by the number of team members to obtain the average. 

11. The candidate with the highest number is the best.

12. End of assessment.

Additional example Worksheets are provide following the superintendent Worksheet.

Note:  Use of these Assessment Work Sheets show others, including evaluators, you did your homework and know what you are doing!    Please tailor the Worksheets to better fit your needs, with that in mind!!
 

SUPERINTENDENT CANDIDATE ASSESSEMENT

 

EXAMPLE OF FILLED OUT SUPERINTENDENT CANDIDATE ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET READY FOR SIGNATURES

 Any category having a score of .3 or less is grounds for rejection, if not raised by additional information or corrective action. 

Category

SUPERINTENDENT CANDIDATE ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET:  BASED ON  PERFORMANCE AT DISTRICT OR SCHOOL LAST SERVED

Candidate's Name 

A1

LEADERSHIP SKILLS

Jones

Adams

Smith

0.9

Led A School or District That Accomplished At Least 7% Avg. Gain In  Math, Science  & Reading Student Achievement Per Year 

0.92

 

 

0.7

Led A School or District That Accomplished At Least 5% Avg. Gain In  Math, Science & Reading Student Achievement Per Year 

 

0.76

 

0.5

Led A School or District That Accomplished At Least 3% Avg. Gain In  Math, Science & Reading Student Achievement Per Year 

 

 

 

0.3

Led A School or District That Accomplished At Least 1% Avg. Gain In  Math, Science  & Reading Student Achievement Per Year

 

 

0.3

0.1

Led A School or District That Accomplished Less Than 1% Avg. Annual Gain In  Math, Science  & Reading Student Achievement

 

 

 

A2

FINANCIAL

 

 

 

0.9

Total General Fund  District Cost Per Student Is Less Than $14,000 Per Year 

 

 

0.91

0.7

Total General Fund  District Cost Per Student Is Less Than $14,500 Per Year 

 

0.73

 

0.5

Total General Fund  District Cost Per Student Is Less Than $15,000 Per Year 

0.5

 

 

0.3

Total General Fund  District Cost Per Student Is Less Than $15,500 Per Year 

 

 

 

0.1

Total General Fund  District Cost Per Student Is More Than $16,000 Per Year 

 

 

 

A3

INTEGRITY

 

 

 

0.9

Held a Top Secret or Higher Security Clearance in the Military--or Equivalent

0.91

 

 

0.7

Emphasized Ethical Behavior & Punished More than 2 violators. 

 

 

0.76

0.5

Emphasized Ethical Behavior & Punished 1 violator. 

 

 

 

0.3

Had a School Policy Against Cheating & for Punishment of Cheating 

 

0.3

 

0.1

Had No School Policy Against Cheating or for Punishment of Cheating 

 

 

 

A4

TEACHING MEMORIZATION VS. CONCEPTS

 

 

 

0.9

Has fully demonstrated and practiced understanding of memorization vs. concepts

 

 

 

0.7

Has 75%  demonstrated and practiced understanding of memorization vs. concepts

 

0.60

 

0.5

Has 50% demonstrated and practiced understanding of memorization vs. concepts

0.50

 

 

0.3

Has 30% demonstrated and practiced understanding of memorization vs. concepts

 

 

0.30

0.1

Has 15%  demonstrated and practiced understanding of memorization vs. concepts

 

 

 

A5

RISK

 

 

 

0.9

No Risk That Dist.  Student Achievement & Financials Would Improve By at Least 7%

 

 

 

0.7

10% Risk That Dist. Student Achievement & Financials Would Improve By at Least 7%

 

0.73

0.76

0.5

20% Risk That Dist. Student Achievement & Financials Would improve By at Least 7%

0.6

 

 

0.3

30% Risk That Dist. Student Achievement & Financials Would Improve By at Least 7%

 

 

 

0.1

40% or More Risk Student Achievement & Financials Would Improve By At Least 7%

 

 

 

TOTAL

3.4

3.12

3.03

AVERAGE = (TOTAL)/5 =  

0.68

0.62

0.61

SIGNED BY BOARD MEMBERS: ______________________________________ DATE:__________

__________________________________________________________________  DATE:__________

___________________________________________________________________  DATE:__________

 

 

PROTECT SCHOOLBOARD ASSESSMENT

 

Category

 ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET TO PROTECT SCHOOL BOARDS FROM EDUCATORS' FLAWED SCHOOL FIXES.  12-21-16. 

SCHOOL FIX

A1

IMPROVEMENT EXPECTATIONS

NAME

0.9

Clearly Defined and Quantified With Numbers & Milestones

 

0.7

Somewhat Clearly Defined and Quantified With Numbers & Milestones

 

0.5

Barely  Defined and Quantified With Numbers & Milestones

 

0.3

Not Defined and Quantified With Numbers & Milestones

 

0.1

Devoid of Results Expectation  Numbers & Milestones

 

A2

COSTS

 

0.9

Clearly Defined for the Duration of Fix Implementation

 

0.7

Somewhat Clearly Defined for the Duration of Fix Implementation

 

0.5

Barely Defined for the Duration of Fix Implementation

 

0.3

Not Defined for the Duration of Fix Implementation

 

0.1

Devoid of Costs for the Duration of Fix Implementation

 

A3

RECOVERY PLAN FOR STUDENTS IF FIX FAILS TO MEET EXPECTATIONS

 

0.9

Clearly Defined for the Duration of Fix Implementation

 

0.7

Somewhat Clearly Defined for the Duration of Fix Implementation

 

0.5

Barely Defined for the Duration of Fix Implementation

 

0.3

Not Defined for the Duration of Fix Implementation

 

0.1

Devoid of Recovery Plan for the Duration of Fix Implementation

 

A4

REJECTION OF BLAMING DEFECTIVE STUDENTS FOR SCHOOL FAILURES

 

0.9

Total Rejection of Blaming Defective Students for School Failures

 

0.7

At Least 95% Rejection of Blaming Defective Students for School Failures

 

0.5

At Least 90% Rejection of Blaming Defective Students for School Failures

 

0.3

At Least 85% Rejection of Blaming Defective Students for School Failures

 

0.1

Less Than  85% Rejection of Blaming Defective Students for School Failures

 

A5

RISKS

 

0.9

Clearly Defined & Manageable for the Duration of Fix Implementation

 

0.7

Somewhat Clearly Defined & Manageable for the Duration of Fix Implementation

 

0.5

Barely Defined & Manageable for the Duration of Fix Implementation

 

0.3

Not Defined & Manageable for the Duration of Fix Implementation

 

0.1

Devoid of Mention of Risks for the Duration of Fix Implementation

 

TOTAL

 

AVERAGE = (TOTAL)/5 = 

 

SIGNED BY ASSESSMENT TEAM LEADER: _____________________________________  DATE:__________

 

 

CURRICULUM ASSESSMENT

 

EXAMPLE OF FILLED OUT CURRICULUM CANDIDATE ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET READY FOR SIGNATURES

 Any category having a score of .3 or less is grounds for rejection, if not raised by additional information or corrective action. 

Category

CURRICULUM CANDIDATE ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET:  BASED ON  PERFORMANCE AT DISTRICT OR SCHOOL LAST USED

Candidate

A1

APPLICABILITY

A

B

C

0.9

Meets the needs of at least 95% of the students

 

 

 

0.7

Meets the needs of at least 80% of the students

 

 

 

0.5

Meets the needs of at least  70% of the students

 

 

 

0.3

Meets the needs of at least  60% of the students

 

 

 

0.1

Meets the needs of less than 60% of the students

 

 

 

A2

RELIABILITY

 

 

 

0.9

Has been widely used and proven to be effective beyond any significant doubt

 

 

 

0.7

Has none of the significant flaws of the existing curriculum

 

 

 

0.5

Has none of the major flaws of the existing curriculum

 

 

 

0.3

Has some of the major flaws of the existing curriculum

 

 

 

0.1

Has several of the major flaws of the existing curriculum

 

 

 

A3

TEACHABILITY

 

 

 

0.9

Can be effectively taught by existing staff with less than 25 hours of training

 

 

 

0.7

Can be effectively taught by existing staff with less than 40 hours of training

 

 

 

0.5

Can be effectively taught by new staff who are familiar with the curriculum

 

 

 

0.3

It is unlikely existing staff can be trained to teach the curriculum effectively

 

 

 

0.1

Existing staff are unable to teach the curriculum effectively

 

 

 

A4

EFFECTIVENESS

 

 

 

0.9

Will meet all measurable objectives

 

 

 

0.7

Will meet all major, measurable objectives

 

 

 

0.5

Will meet all significant, measurable objectives

 

 

 

0.3

Will not meet major, measurable objectives

 

 

 

0.1

Will not meet significant, measurable objectives 

 

 

 

A5

RISK

 

 

 

0.9

No Risk That Dist.  Student Achievement Would Improve By at Least 7%

 

 

 

0.7

10% Risk That Dist. Student Achievement  Would Improve By at Least 7%

 

 

 

0.5

20% Risk That Dist. Student Achievement Would improve By at Least 7%

 

 

 

0.3

30% Risk That Dist. Student Achievement Would Improve By at Least 7%

 

 

 

0.1

40% or More Risk Student Achievement Would Improve By At Least 7%

 

 

 

TOTAL

 

 

 

AVERAGE = (TOTAL)/5 =  

 

 

 

SIGNED BY TEAM MEMBERS: ______________________________________ DATE:__________

__________________________________________________________________  DATE:__________

___________________________________________________________________  DATE:__________

 

 

SCHEDULING ASSESSMENT

 

 

ASSESSMENT CANDIDATES:  EXISTING SCHEDULING & AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH

 

 

 

 

 

 

A1

EXPECTED STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT GAIN--WITHIN 3 YEARS

EXISTING SCHEDULING ASSESSMENT

ALTERNATIVE APPROACH ASSESSMENT

0.9

40%

 

 

0.7

30%

 

 

0.5

20%

 

 

0.3

10%

 

 

0.1

0%

 

 

 

 

 

 

A2

NON RECURRING COST $

 

 

0.9

10K

 

 

0.7

25K

 

 

0.5

50K

 

 

0.3

75K

 

 

0.1

100K

 

 

 

 

 

 

A3

ANNUAL RECURRING COST $

 

 

0.9

20K

 

 

0.7

40k

 

 

0.5

60k

 

 

0.3

80k

 

 

0.1

100k

 

 

 

 

 

 

A4

RISK

 

 

0.9

NO SIGNIFICANT RISK

 

 

0.7

NO KNOWN RISKS

 

 

0.5

SIGNIFICANT RISKS

 

 

0.3

MAJOR RISKS

 

 

0.1

UNMANAGEABLE RISKS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TOTAL

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

AVERAGE = (A1 +  A2 + A3 + A4)/4 =  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SIGNED: ____________________________   DATE:_________________