Av. Professor Mario Werneck, 3002 Buritis Belo Horizonte Minas Gerais Brazil 30575-180 +55-31-3378-6700 eabh@eabh.com.br eabh.com.

br

Ongoing Curriculum Alignment Process Background The Ongoing Curriculum Alignment Process (OCAP) is a multi-pronged method for maintaining alignment between the curriculum and core beliefs of the school. This process is not subject-specific, but dynamic, ongoing, and simultaneous for all areas of curriculum. Although this follows a designated cycle, the process is about encompassing all aspects of curriculum to tie back into comprehensive, student-centered curriculum. Two-Year Review Cycle This cycle, a major component of the Ongoing Curriculum Alignment Process, incorporates seven tasks, each of which is informed by the External Evaluation Processes of the PYP, MYP, and AdvancED (each of which informs the other, particularly in terms of the basis for continual growth through whole school improvement and department-level improvement goals). These External Evaluation Processes are each informed by self-assessment designated by the evaluation agency. Each of these processes takes into consideration how the school uses assessment and learning objectives to inform goals and teaching. Task 1 School-wide Foundational Elements A core planning team of students, board members, parents, teachers, and school leadership refines the school-wide mission, beliefs and values, vision, and student learning objectives. These agreements underpin all decisions and ensure that additional components of the Ongoing Curriculum Alignment Process move the school towards achieving an evolving vision. Task 2 Departmental Foundational Elements The departments of the school tailor departmental mission statements, belief and values statements, vision statements, and student learning objectives that are considerate of the particular needs of those departments while ensuring the successful attainment and alignment of school-wide elements created in Task 1; these departmental foundational elements fit beneath and support the school-wide foundational elements. Task 3 Learning Targets Each department reviews standards, benchmarks, and grade level indicators to ensure they build to student success of school-wide learning objectives. Task 4 Units of Study All units are designed using the UbD format of backwards design, with each department using a particular model adapted to its program. Units are reviewed to ensure the overarching aims of each unit are appropriate vertically, horizontally, in reference to departmental learning targets, and in reference to school-wide learning objectives. For most years, this task is intended for review and very slight adjustments. This task occurs twice during the review cycle (Task 4 and Task 7), and establishes a timeline for all other tasks. Unit reviews are conducted between April and June of each year, and may continue into the following school year in August, so that exiting and entering teachers are aware of the continuum of learning. Every fifth year, this process incorporates actual rearrangement of elements of the continuum within a department, where necessary.
Affiliations: Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Secretaria de Estado da Educao-MG Association of American Schools in South America Association of American Schools in Brazil

IB World School, PYP IB World School, MYP

Av. Professor Mario Werneck, 3002 Buritis Belo Horizonte Minas Gerais Brazil 30575-180 +55-31-3378-6700 eabh@eabh.com.br eabh.com.br

Task 5 Transdisciplinary Skills The Learner Profile, departmental-specific transdisciplinary skills, and 21st century skills, are acknowledged in all unit plans. This process of review, which is an extension of Task 4, examines the suitability of inclusion, horizontally and vertically, of these skills, and ensures that teaching as laid out in the unit plans is designed to foster appropriate development. Task 6 Resources and PD Teams evaluate resources currently available in each department to account for overlap and need. These teams also evaluate areas of need for professional development and training. Task 7 Units of Study All units are designed using the UbD format of backwards design, with each department using a particular model adapted to its program. Units are reviewed to ensure the overarching aims of each unit are appropriate vertically, horizontally, in reference to departmental learning targets, and in reference to school-wide learning objectives. For most years, this task is intended for review and very slight adjustments. This task occurs twice during the review cycle (Task 4 and Task 7), and establishes a timeline for all other tasks. Unit reviews are conducted between April and June of each year, and may continue into the following school year in August, so that exiting and entering teachers are aware of the continuum of learning. Every fifth year, this process incorporates actual rearrangement of elements of the continuum within a department, where necessary. External Evaluation Processes There are three agencies that evaluate aspects of the school. The particular process for each evaluation agency is unique, but there are also many parallel elements across the three processes. Each agency sends a team of evaluators every five years to assess the effectiveness of teaching, learning, assessment, and the use of data; the management of programs and curriculum; and the allocation of resources and professional development. Each process follows these broad steps (along with unique requirements), and is informed by each other, and by the Two-Year Review Cycle. Administrative Self-Review Each process is guided by standards (i.e., sections on philosophy, curriculum, etc. for PYP and MYP; sections on purpose, government, etc. for AdvancED). The educational leadership team, programme coordinator, or school improvement coordinator must establish a timeline for internal review well ahead of any deadlines for the submission of documentation, and the first step is an internal review by the administrative team. The results of this process, along with the whole school review, inform departmentlevel and whole school improvement plans. Whole School Self-Review by Committee The educational leadership team, programme coordinator, or school improvement coordinator create committees for whole school self-review. The number of committees is determined by the structure of standards designated by the evaluation agency. Each committee is headed by a chairperson who selects other members of her or his committee. The committee must consist of at least one of each of the following: a classroom or core subject teacher of the programme (one each of PYP and MYP for the AdvancED evaluation); an aide or non-core subject teacher of the programme; an administrator; support staff involved in maintenance, technology support, or office administration; a student in the programme (one each of PYP
Affiliations: Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Secretaria de Estado da Educao-MG Association of American Schools in South America Association of American Schools in Brazil IB World School, PYP IB World School, MYP

Av. Professor Mario Werneck, 3002 Buritis Belo Horizonte Minas Gerais Brazil 30575-180 +55-31-3378-6700 eabh@eabh.com.br eabh.com.br

and MYP for the AdvancED evaluation); a parent of a student in the programme (one each of PYP and MYP for the AdvancED evaluation); and a member of the governing board. Goal Setting The process of self-review provides the chairpersons with information about areas of the evaluation that require attention. Chairpersons write summaries of committee findings. The educational leadership team, programme coordinator, or school improvement coordinator use these findings as a basis for the creation of goals that address areas that committees found require attention. Department-Level / Whole School Improvement Plan Goals determined from self-review committees and formulated by the educational leadership team, programme coordinator, or school improvement coordinator are compiled to create a department-level or whole school improvement plan. The format of the individual plan is designated by the evaluation agency (and may additionally require a report), but the contents of this plan will take into consideration ongoing or concurrent processes outlined in the plans created for the other two agencies. When each educational leadership team, programme coordinator, or school improvement coordinator takes into consideration the actions implemented in plans created for the other two agencies, we ensure that there is greater communication between departments, that actions are not repeated, and that all stakeholders continually work to achieve the same goals. Preparation Each agency requires particular documentation in preparation for the visitation. Additionally, the educational leadership team, programme coordinator, or school improvement coordinator examines the progress of goal achievement and finalizes any ongoing processes. Visitation The educational leadership team, programme coordinator, or school improvement coordinator ensures that the evaluators are able to understand school growth with ease, ensuring that all stakeholders can take necessary roles during the visitation, including the training of student ambassadors. There may also be a need to train new teachers not yet comfortable with spontaneous observation. Any training is completed well in advance of the visitation. Transparent Review of Visitation and Evaluation Each agency provides the educational leadership team, programme coordinator, or school improvement coordinator with evaluation findings. These findings are shared with all stakeholders, and from these findings, a special committee is created (unless the leadership team or coordinator has already created this team) to review, update, and create new goals for the department-level or whole school improvement plan. This review, update, and creation of new goals must consider the remaining two improvement plans as well. Special Committee Review The special committees created to review, update, and create new goals for the department-level or whole school improvement plan conduct this process annually until it is once again time for administrative selfreview. NWEA Measures of Academic Progress The MAP is a computerized, adaptive assessment the school is able to align to the Common Core State Standards a basis for school adopted standards. The detailed, swift feedback is used to inform instruction that can take into consideration each students academic level and individual strengths.
Affiliations: Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Secretaria de Estado da Educao-MG Association of American Schools in South America Association of American Schools in Brazil

IB World School, PYP IB World School, MYP

Av. Professor Mario Werneck, 3002 Buritis Belo Horizonte Minas Gerais Brazil 30575-180 +55-31-3378-6700 eabh@eabh.com.br eabh.com.br

Delivery The MAP is given three times per school year (August, February, and May), providing educators information about growth and validating each individuals areas of strength and weakness. Professional Development Test results are collaboratively reviewed three times per school year, and are always available for teacher review through an online system. The MAP coordinator determines in advance the type of training that will be necessary to provide before or after a test is delivered and reviewed. This evaluation of professional development needs takes into consideration the familiarity of faculty with the use of test data to instruct and differentiate. It also takes into consideration Task 6 of the Two-Year Review Cycle, and recommendations based on External Evaluation Processes. Data Use MAP data is used to inform instruction, scaffolding, differentiation, learning target evaluation, and units of study evaluation (Tasks 3 and 4 of the Two-Year Review Cycle). MAP data is one slice of the information that is collected by teachers and teams that is funneled back into the learning process. For more information about assessment as an aspect of the learning process, please refer to department-level assessment policies.

Affiliations: Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Secretaria de Estado da Educao-MG Association of American Schools in South America Association of American Schools in Brazil

IB World School, PYP IB World School, MYP

Av. Professor Mario Werneck, 3002 Buritis Belo Horizonte Minas Gerais Brazil 30575-180 +55-31-3378-6700 eabh@eabh.com.br eabh.com.br

This Ongoing Curriculum Review Process is based on research from the following sources. The majority of the framework is based on the work of Gail Seay and her curriculum team at the American School of Doha. American School of Doha: Strategically Speaking. (n.d.). American School of Doha. Retrieved April 15, 2013, from http://www.asd.edu.qa/page.cfm?p=943 Britton, M., Letassy, N., Medina, M., & Er, N. (2008). A Curriculum Review and Mapping Process Supported by an Electronic Database System. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 72(5), 1-6. Carpenter, D., & Carpenter, M. (2009). All Aboard!. Learning & Leading with Technology, January, 18-23. Curriculum and Instruction - Curriculum & Instruction Documents. (n.d.). Academy School District 20. Retrieved April 15, 2013, from http://asd20.org/education/components/scrapbook/default.php? sectiondetailid=12492&&PHPSESSID=ca4cf6eaf449f351525db37ca465ac6d Dolence, M. (2004). The Curriculum-Centered Strategic Planning Model. Educause Center for Applied Research Research Bulletin, 2004(10), 1-11.

Affiliations: Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Secretaria de Estado da Educao-MG Association of American Schools in South America Association of American Schools in Brazil

IB World School, PYP IB World School, MYP