2021 CAIS Accreditation Guidelines

Updated On: August 1. 2023

Table of Contents

Introduction – Purpose of Accreditation

Setting the Stage

Starting the School Self Study Process

Using the Self Study Template and Producing the School Self Study Report

The Peer Review

School Improvement Action Plan

Accreditation Decision-Making: Member Schools

Accreditation Decision-Making: Applicant and Candidate Schools

Accreditation Professional Learning

Index of Charts

External Documents

�� CAIS National Standards Framework (updated August 2023)

�� CAIS National Standards Framework (for schools with visits in 2023-2024)

�� Open Glossary of Terms

CAIS Website Portals

⚑ CAIS Connect For member resources, including Accreditation resources

Accreditation Guidelines

�� Table of Contents Page

Introduction – Purpose of Accreditation

Canadian Accredited Independent Schools (CAIS) share a commitment to excellence and a passion for improvement. Accreditation supports Independent Schools to achieve both of these imperatives in a constantly changing world and increasingly competitive landscape.

CAIS Schools recognize that they exist in a dynamic educational environment and continually seek to enhance their already-enriched education programs. In the complexity of today's world, Schools are responding to the growing need for a focus on well-being and mental health, while ensuring student safety in both physical and virtual environments. They are operating more strategically to ensure their long term strength and permanence through actions such as maintenance of enrolment, increasing fundraising results and creating alternative revenue streams Child protection, pluralism, environmental sustainability, 21st century skills and competencies and global citizenship are all areas that call for more attention These changing landscapes create complexity and also provide opportunities for Independent Schools to ensure ongoing relevance and contribution to a sustainable future

CAIS Accreditation supports continual improvement in all aspects of Independent Schools The School’s Vision, Mission, Values and Strategy underpin all decisions made by School Leaders and the Board School Strategy is rooted in robust research, data analysis and understanding of the needs of the internal community and external trends The CAIS Accreditation Process is both a tool to support the development of School Strategy and a set of Standards to scaffold continual improvement.

The 2021 CAIS National Standards Framework and Accreditation Process are aligned with the CAIS Mission:

Strategic Direction, Education Program and School Operations are the three pillars that work reciprocally to represent successful Schools. As required for CAIS membership, meeting the 2021 CAIS National Standards demonstrates achievement of a high level of quality and validates a commitment to the pursuit of excellence

The 2021 CAIS National Standards are bold, inspiring and future-facing measures of quality in education. The Indicators of Effective Practice demonstrate how the Standards come to life in a School In a landscape that is not static, CAIS Schools recognize that continual improvement is an

“Continual school improvement through the advancement of standards, support and a strong Canadian network.”

essential component of long term strength and permanence. Schools commit to ongoing efforts to strive for aspirational goals in order to meet the current and future needs of their students.

The CAIS 2021 National Standards define effective practices while the Accreditation Process provides the structure for whole School improvement. The Accreditation Guidelines, that define the Self Study and Peer Review processes, are intentionally designed for Schools to use the Standards, Indicators of Effective Practice and Guiding Questions as a framework for an ongoing process of reflection. While setting high standards, the Accreditation Process is respectful of the unique missions of the CAIS member Schools.

This opportunity to leverage the CAIS National Standards for School improvement extends beyond the Self Study and Peer Review Processes. CAIS has modelled its Leadership Development, Research and Resource provision in a way that allows Schools to live the effective practices articulated in the National Standards on an ongoing basis. The Indicators of Effective Practice within each Standard are the cornerstone of the CAIS Leadership Praxis The Standards Framework guides the resources highlighted in the weekly CAIS Top 12 newsletter and CAIS Connect, and provides the structure for CAIS Benchmarking

CAIS Values Learning

We believe learning is at the heart of what we do. Continual whole School improvement leads to better outcomes for students.

CAIS Accreditation provides value for Independent Schools by:

● promoting a reflective and collaborative School improvement process;

● engaging the School community in a Self Study process to enrich understanding across all areas of School function and how they work together to achieve overall strength and permanence;

● validating current programs and services and supporting planning for future growth and development;

● providing feedback in a comprehensive report that informs School Strategy;

● empowering Schools with the agency to create School Improvement Action Plans that align with the School’s Strategy;

● providing a benchmark to measure a School’s growth over time - each cycle providing new opportunities to concretely assess advances since the last Accreditation;

● creating opportunities to situate continual improvement as a core leadership opportunity within a School;

● confirming for the School community, the Board and prospective families, that the School has effective practices in place for each of the three pillars: Strategic Direction, Educational Program and School Operations;

● Fulfills a requirement for regular membership in CAIS

In Canada, where education is governed provincially, our National Organization encourages Schools to provide more than the provincial requirements in terms of program and opportunities for students We are proud that our Schools meet the highest of Standards while remaining unique in their vision, mission, and values

CAIS’ Standards Framework and Accreditation Protocol are congruent with the internationally accepted criteria and core standards adopted by the International Council Advancing Independent School Accreditation (ICAISA). In 2019-20, CAIS completed a thorough self study and hosted a peer review process. In 2021, ICAISA reconfirmed its recognition of CAIS and its Accreditation Program.

CAIS has been approved as a member in good standing.

Standards Update

The CAIS Standards Council and Accreditation team regularly review the Standards and Indicators of Effective Practice In Spring 2023, the Standards Council approved three changes to the IEPs (the addition of 3 12, 11 7, and the removal of 11 5 in the previous set These changes are reflected in this document CAIS National Standards Framework (updated August 2023)

Schools with visits in 2023-2024 should continue to use this set of Standards from the CAIS National Standards Framework..

The CAIS Accreditation process takes time and it’s worth it.

Setting the Stage

In this section:

→ Jump to: Value and Support Provided by the Accreditation Cycle

→ Jump to: What Happens during the Accreditation Cycle?

→ Jump to: The Accreditation Process

→ Jump to: Alignment with other Accrediting Organizations

→ Jump to: Unforeseen Challenges

�� Table of Contents

Value and Support Provided by the Accreditation Cycle

The Accreditation Cycle is intentionally designed to provide continuous value and support to Schools. Schools will:

● Experience continuous engagement that is embedded within the on-going life and function of the School

● Have opportunities to self-assess and create plans that fit within the School’s current Strategy and annual plans

● Access CAIS Connect Standard-specific resources that will support School Leaders, the Board, faculty and staff during the Self Study process as well as support the development, implementation and assessment of the School Improvement Action Plan.

The Five Year Cycle

Graphic 1: The Five Year Cycle

What Happens during the Accreditation Cycle?

Year 1: Self Study

● The CAIS Accreditation process is launched through presentations by the CAIS Executive Director and Head of School, to the Board, faculty and staff.

● The School Self Study process uses the National Standards and Indicators of Effective Practice as a guide to gather and analyze existing Documentation and to answer the Guiding Questions

● The School uses the findings of the Self Study to consider possible areas for growth and next steps for improvement.

Year 2: Peer Review and Accreditation Decision

● During the four day Peer Review, the Peer Review Team validates the School’s Self Study Report through observations, informal conversations, focus group discussions and interviews.

● A Peer Review Report is produced and shared with the Head of School

● The School Improvement Action Plan is initiated and submitted to CAIS

● The CAIS Evaluation Council makes an accreditation decision.

Year 3: School Improvement Action Plan

● School Improvement Action Plan Implementation: Year 1.

● School Improvement Action Plan Update submitted to CAIS, including evidence of work achieved to address recommendations made in the previous year.

Year 4: School Improvement Action Plan

● School Improvement Action Plan Implementation: Year 2.

● School Improvement Action Plan Update submitted to CAIS including evidence of work achieved to address recommendations made in the previous year

Year 5: School Improvement Action Plan

● School Improvement Action Plan Implementation: Year 3

● School Improvement Action Plan Update submitted to CAIS, including evidence of work achieved to address recommendations made in the previous year.

● The School Leadership Team reflect upon the last four years of the Accreditation Cycle and discuss progress made, to identify key priorities for the upcoming Self Study.

The Accreditation Process

We are framing the Accreditation Process as an inquiry & action cycle It is supported by both internal and external research and feedback The internal process is rooted in a reflective Self Study involving widespread community engagement The external process is rooted in a reflective Peer Review

The Self Study focuses on conversations and discussions stimulated by existing documentation and CAIS Guiding Questions The Self Study moves from a comprehensive review and critical analysis of the effectiveness of current practices to a self-assessment of future possibilities This process concludes in the development of a Strategy-aligned School Improvement Action Plan that sets goals, priorities and timelines as the School plans forward for the future.

This Self Study is validated through external feedback from both a Peer Review Team and the CAIS Evaluation Council. Reciprocal conversations take place among the Peer Review Team, stimulated by the School’s Self Study. This process calls for the Peer Review Team to review, observe, probe and discuss in order to reflect on the School’s analysis provided in the self-assessment. In turn, the Peer Review Team generates commendations and recommendations which inform the Accreditation decision, but more importantly, further direct the School Improvement Action Plan.

Key questions continually drive these processes and reinforce conversations within the School community as well as within the Peer Review Team.

● What currently exists?

This leads to a deeper understanding of the current state of operations and practices at the School. What are your current policies, procedures, guidelines and practices? What does the data from constituent surveys say? What do you say in your handbooks, communications, and publications?

● What does it matter?

This question prompts a critical analysis determining the extent to which current operations and practices are effective.

● What’s possible?

Determining possible future directions allows a School the agency to determine its own next steps.

● What now?

The culminating result of these processes is the School Improvement Action Plan, which is implemented accordingly throughout the remainder of the Accreditation Cycle

Graphic 2: Accreditation Process at a Glance

Alignment with other Accreditation Organizations

CAIS Member Schools are committed to maintaining high standards and often have obligations to multiple oversight bodies who provide evaluations for quality assurance. Most Schools are required to follow their provincial curricula and are inspected regularly to ensure they are meeting regional requirements. Occasionally, a School may also be affiliated with a program-specific authorizing body (e g , International Baccalaureate, Canadian Council for Montessori Administrators, Association of Waldorf Schools of North America) or with another accrediting body approved by the International Council Advancing Independent School Accreditation (i e , Council of International Schools or New England Association of Schools and Colleges)

Oversight, Compliance and Whole School Improvement

Provincial Inspection for Oversight and Compliance

Provincial Ministries of Education

● different visit schedules depending on province

Program-Specific Oversight and Compliance

Authorizing bodies such as:

International Baccalaureate

● every five years

Canadian Council for Montessori Administrators

● every five years

Association of Waldorf Schools of North America

Chart 1: Oversight, Compliance and Whole School Improvement

Accreditation for Oversight and continuous Whole School Improvement

ICAISA*-approved Accrediting bodies such as:

Council of International Schools

● every five years

New England Association of Schools and Colleges

● every ten years with mid-cycle check ins

* ICAISA is the International Council Advancing Independent School Accreditation

In the case where a School would like to align their CAIS Accreditation Process with a program-specific authorizing body:

● CAIS will work with the School and program-specific authorizing body in advance of the Peer Review to determine the degree to which the authorization will be accepted by CAIS.

● Where there is redundancy in the Indicators of Effective Practice between the two bodies, the School will not be required to answer both in the Self Study. The School will be required to address any Indicators of Effective Practice that appear in the CAIS framework only.

● The starting date of the CAIS Peer Review must be no more than two years after the date of the authorization report issued to the school.

● The School is responsible for providing CAIS with all reports, status updates and formal communications regarding the program-specific evaluation and authorization status.

● For Member schools, the Evaluation Council will make an Accreditation decision.

● For Candidate schools, the Evaluation Council will make a recommendation to the CAIS Board for an Accreditation decision.

In order to qualify for this process all enrolled students in all divisions must be following the curriculum from the program-specific authorizing body. Other Schools with partial integration of the curriculum from the program-specific authorizing body will be evaluated by CAIS on an individual basis.

For IB Schools, please see the CAIS / IB Alignment Guidelines - Standards 4-7.

In the case where a School would like to align their CAIS Accreditation Process with another ICAISA-approved accrediting body:

● CAIS will work with the School and accrediting body in advance of the Peer Review to determine which protocol will be used.

● CAIS will provide a minimum of one Peer Review Team member.

● The Peer Review Report will be submitted to both accrediting bodies.

● For member schools, the Evaluation Council will make an Accreditation decision.

● For candidate schools, the Evaluation Council will make a recommendation to the CAIS Board for an Accreditation decision

● All subsequent response reports will be received by both accrediting bodies

CAIS will work with the School and accrediting body to align timelines as appropriate

Unforeseen Challenges

As described above, Schools are continuously engaged at each stage of the Accreditation Cycle and the timing of future reviews and reports are known and can be proactively planned for. That said, there are times when Schools may face an unforeseen challenge.

The CAIS Evaluation Council will consider extension requests for a Peer Review on an individual basis.

An extension request may be considered for extraordinary circumstances such as:

● Natural disaster (eg flood, earthquake, fire)

● Sudden health crisis (pandemic, major illness/accidents/death)

● Major accidents that affect School facilities

● Campus relocation

The following circumstances are not generally considered to be adequate rationale for an extension request:

● A change of the Head of School or Chair of the Board

● A change in the Leadership Team

● Capital projects

● Legal challenges

In the extraordinary circumstance that an Accreditation extension is required, the following process should be followed:

● Extension requests must be submitted in writing to the Evaluation Council through the CAIS Executive Director.

● The request must be signed by both the Head of School and the Chair of the Board.

● The Evaluation Council will make a recommendation to the CAIS Board for final decision.

Extensions will only be granted once per Accreditation Cycle for a maximum of up to 12 months.

Occasionally, CAIS may need to extend a School’s Peer Review timeline. These decisions will be made in discussion with the Head of School.

CAIS Values Community

We believe we are stronger when we come together to learn from and help one another.

Starting the School Self Study Process

In this section:

→ Jump to: Accreditation as a Process of Inquiry and Action

→ Jump to: Standards Framework as a Basis for Self Study

→ Jump to: CAIS National Standards Framework

→ Jump to: Key Roles

→ Jump to: Preparing for Success

→ Jump to: Agency and Value for Schools during the Self Study

�� Table of Contents

Accreditation as a Process of Inquiry and Action

As described in Section I, inquiry is foundational to an effective Self Study process involving widespread community engagement. This internal review focuses on reflective discussions stimulated by existing documentation and CAIS Guiding Questions. The Self Study process provides the opportunity for a comprehensive review and critical analysis of the effectiveness of current practices. This self-assessment leads to the development of goals, priorities and timelines within a School Improvement Action Plan that sets the School’s direction as it looks to the future

Graphic 3: Self Study

Standards Framework as a Basis for the Self Study

Using the National Standards Framework and Indicators of Effective Practice as a guide, Schools will engage their communities to gather, review and analyze Documentation and to examine the Guiding Questions

CAIS National Standards Framework

The 2021 CAIS National Standards Framework is based upon three foundational pillars: Strategic Direction, Education Program and School Operations. (Note that schools with visits in 2023-2024 should use this version of the 2021 CAIS National Standards Framework.)

Graphic 4: National Standards Framework at a Glance

Each of the 12 CAIS National Standards have a summary statement that describes the key elements and how they contribute to the School’s overall success. CAIS Accreditation is based on a School’s effectiveness within all 12 Standards.

Standards Framework Pillars at a Glance

The Standards Framework is purposefully designed to provide clear alignment between three key sections: Indicators of Effective Practice, Documentation and Guiding Questions.

INDICATORS OF EFFECTIVE PRACTICE (IEPs)

Each of the 12 Standards are broken down into a number of related Indicators of Effective Practice (IEPs) These IEPs are clear statements that represent effective practices within the Standard

Graphic 5: Standards Framework Pillars at a Glance

A subset of IEPs are deemed Prime Indicators. These Indicators are foundational to the successful function and viability of a School. The magnitude of risk to a School in relation to these Indicators is considered greater than other IEPs.

The establishment and maintenance of Prime Indicators is an expectation of Accreditation. In the case where a Prime Indicator has not been met (i.e., the School must address recommendations in order to be effective), the Accreditation decision will be deferred until the School has addressed the recommendation and has demonstrated that the IEP has been met. Further details regarding Prime Indicators can be found in Section VI and Section VII.

✔ DOCUMENTATION

Documentation provides tangible evidence of current practices within the School community. Documentation will include the School’s Strategy (i e strategic plan), handbooks, policies, procedures and guidelines These, among other documents, are an important starting point for Self Study Subcommittees when they begin the Self Study process

Documentation also includes an analysis of community feedback There is an expectation that School community feedback is sought regularly through surveys, focus groups and other means Comprehensive constituent surveys should also be completed, at minimum, every three years Schools are encouraged to customize surveys to fit their own School context

The Self Study Process asks Schools to analyze multiple years of data in order to identify themes and trends over time These analyses will provide context and background for the Guiding Question discussions that will follow

Prime Indicators Model

Graphic 6: Prime Indicators Model

➜ GUIDING QUESTIONS

Guiding Questions are intended to illuminate the IEPs and support Schools to discuss, debate and reflect upon current practice Simply put, if the IEP is the “what,” Guiding Questions ask Schools to reflect on their processes and the outcomes of their practices Guiding Questions typically ask “how, why and to what extent” does the School demonstrate its alignment with and effectiveness in achieving this concept.

It is important to note that CAIS has been intentional in the wording of the Guiding Questions

The answers are meant to provide a rich opportunity for self-critique rather than a description of a procedure that already exists. Those are more easily provided as Documentation. Instead, the response to Guiding Questions is a self-assessment on how and why an approach is being taken and to what extent it is effective in the School context, based on processes and outcomes.

For example, a School will provide a Gender-Equity Policy as Documentation. The question will address how the School knows that the process of implementing this policy is effective and has achieved the desired outcome.

Below is an example of the layout of the National Standards Framework:

Indicator of Effective Practice - 1.1*

The School's purpose and value proposition are effectively reflected in its vision, mission and values

✔ Documentation

Statement of vision, mission and values

Head of School’s message within:

● Student Handbook

● Parent Handbook

● Employee Handbook

● Website

➜ Guiding Questions

1. To what extent is the School's purpose and value proposition effectively expressed through the vision, mission and values?

2.How does the School effectively communicate its vision, mission, and values to members of the School community?

3. When, why and how were the vision, mission and values last reviewed and/or revised and what was the outcome?

Chart 2: Standards Framework Layout Structure

Key Roles

The Self Study process is an opportunity for research, self-reflection, learning and growth. During the Self Study, the entire School community will explore current practices related to each of the CAIS 12 National Standards.

★ Head of School

During the CAIS Accreditation launch, the CAIS Executive Director presents an overview of the CAIS organization and the value of Accreditation for Independent Schools to the Board, faculty and staff The Head of School clarifies the connection between continuous whole School improvement and the School’s mission This is extended to include how the CAIS Accreditation process will be of support to the creation and implementation of the School’s overall Strategy

The Head of School provides ongoing support and reinforcement of these connections throughout the process.

★ Board Chair

The Board Chair supports the work of the Head of School to set a tone for the Accreditation process. The Chair helps the Board understand the value of the Self Study process to inform School Strategy. As well, the Chair will lead the Standard 3 Governance Accreditation Subcommittee.

★ Self Study Leader

The Self Study Leader is selected by the Head of School to coordinate the process This person has the ability to motivate, to organize and to support the School community through the Accreditation process Ideally, the person in this role has time allocated in their schedule for this project The Self Study Leader comes from within the School community, and from either the School’s Operations or Education Program Some schools may wish to assign two or three Self Study Leaders to work as a team

The Self Study Leader role provides an important opportunity for leadership development In year one, this leader is responsible for planning the Self Study, organizing the School community into Subcommittees and coordinating the completion of the Self Study Report In year two, this leader works with the CAIS Accreditation Coordinator to arrange the four-day Peer Review Visit, and may be involved with the School Leadership Team to create the School Improvement Action Plan. In the years that follow, this person may support areas of growth prioritized by the School, reinforcing the value and benefit of the concrete steps toward continual improvement.

Support is provided to the Self Study Leader through the Accreditation Office including individual meetings and group meetings with other Self Study Leaders when needed.

★ Self Study Steering Committee

The work towards the 12 National Standards can be completed by subcommittees with a Chair designated for each. The twelve Chairs make up the Self Study Steering Committee and are responsible for representing and supporting the subcommittee members throughout the Self Study process The Self Study Committee Chairs also act as editors for the subcommittees’ sections of the Self Study Report

Selection of Self Study Steering Committee members is at the discretion of the Self Study Leader, in consultation with the Head of School and/or the School’s Leadership Team

Participation on the Self Study Steering Committee is a leadership opportunity and may align with the School’s planning for professional growth and leadership development

★ Self Study Subcommittee Members

Self Study Standard Subcommittees are composed of faculty, staff and School Leaders. The Self Study process is an opportunity for community members to better understand all areas of School function It helps people from across the School community understand all roles and how they contribute to a Schools’ overall success For example, faculty representatives on a School Operations Subcommittee may help teachers understand the processes of enrolment. Conversely, admissions staff participating on Education Program Subcommittees will understand the classroom experience from teacher and student perspectives in deeper ways that may help with future admissions conversations.

It is important to have a mixture of members with expertise related to the Standard area as well as members who do not. A diverse group will bring novel perspectives and present multiple possibilities for growth.

In some cases, Standard areas are a shared responsibility by the entire School community For example, risk management, pluralism, child protection, environmental sustainability, information technology and well-being will appear in multiple Standards

★ Parents and Students

Parents and students provide unique perspectives for the School Self Study and will contribute to Subcommittee groups as appropriate

Preparing for Success

Like any authentic learning or teaching experience, honest self-assessment establishes a starting place for growth Subcommittees that engage in fulsome documentation review and Guiding Question discussions will capture the current practices, as well as identify strengths and areas for growth The result will be an authentic Self Study Report A fulsome Self Study Report helps the Peer Review Team prepare for the review meetings and focus groups that inform the Peer Review Report Early planning decisions for the Self Study contribute to a practical outcome

Context is also important Schools have robust timetables and busy annual planning calendars Success of the Self Study process depends largely on ample scheduled time for research, consultation, dialogue, and report writing

As the Self Study process nears completion, consider how to build in more community engagement The final stages may present additional opportunity for School community members who have not been as actively involved, to join in for the final editing stage There is value in an objective “cold reader”

During pre-planning, the Self Study Leader should consider the following:

● What will ensure maximum engagement and include a cross section of faculty and staff from both Education Program and School Operations functions?

● How will the Subcommittee Chairs be selected? Is this voluntary?

● What selection process will ensure that multiple perspectives are represented in each subcommittee?

● What are realistic Subcommittee meeting times (e.g., full days during the year, beginning or end of the School year, combined professional learning days, continuously as extensions to staff/faculty meetings or leave it up to each Subcommittee to plan themselves)?

● How much time during the year is needed? Plan a workback schedule starting with the submission of the School Self Study Report to CAIS, eight weeks prior to the Peer Review

● Does it make sense to focus on all 12 Standards at once? How can the Self Study schedule be planned in a way that is manageable for all involved?

● Around which busy times of year, major holidays and events should the Self Study schedule be planned?

● Which School community members have the skills and capacity to also provide support near the end of the process (revising, editing and/or providing technical support)?

● How will ideas during discussions be captured (e.g., Google Docs)?

● What other technology platforms will be helpful to employ for Subcommittee meetings (e.g., Google Meet, Zoom meetings etc.)?

Pre-Planning

The table below provides a high level overview of the pre-planning process for the Self Study A more detailed Summary Checklist for School Self Study Planning Template is available to support Self Study Leaders in tracking their progress

Self Study Pre-planning Process

When Action

12 months+ prior to Peer Review Accreditation presentations by the CAIS Executive Director to the School Faculty, Staff and Board

CAIS Director of Accreditation confirms with the Head of School: the Peer Review date and describes the Peer Review Team composition

Self Study Leader designs and implements a robust and inclusive Self Study process along with the Self Study Steering Committee.

6 months prior to Peer Review Peer Review Team is confirmed and communicated to the School. Agreements and confidentiality forms signed.

3 months prior to Peer Review Self Study Leader works with the CAIS Accreditation Coordinator to organize the Peer Review travel, accommodations and transportation plans

2 months (minimum) prior to Peer Review

School submits the Self Study Report to CAIS

Self Study Leader works with CAIS Accreditation Coordinator and the Peer Review Facilitator to finalize the Peer Review schedule and logistics.

Chart 3: Self Study Pre-planning Process

Agency and Value for Schools during the Self Study

Schools have agency to personalize the experience throughout the Accreditation Cycle Schools will:

● Begin by creating a plan for the Self Study Review that aligns with the School’s annual plan and priorities.

● Determine how and when to engage the School community; choose how subcommittees are selected and organized, and how often subcommittees will meet;

● Begin to draft a School Improvement Action Plan based on the self-assessment summaries in the School Self Study Report. This School Improvement Action Plan for Urgent Recommendations from the Peer Review Team will be required by CAIS 6 weeks after the visit.

Using the Self Study Template and Producing the School Self Study Report

In this section:

→ Jump to: School Self Study - A Guided Inquiry

→ Jump to: School Self Study Report

→ Jump to: How to Use the School Self Study Report Template

→ Jump to: Self Study Report Organization Recommendation

�� Table of Contents

School Self Study - A Guided Inquiry

CAIS has developed a Guided Inquiry Overview & Sample Template to support schools in the self study process which will eventually culminate in a finalized Self Study Report.

Guided Inquiry Overview

STEP 1 → Survey all Indicators of Effective Practice for awareness and understanding

STEP 2 → Collect all documentation to help gain understanding of the following inquiry questions:

What currently exists?

● What is our current state?

● How does our community think we are doing?

STEP 3 → Discuss each Guiding Question and record the main points. The following questions are to be used to guide the intent of your inquiry:

● Why do we do things this way?

● Why have we made these decisions?

● Are our practices effective?

● Are we intentional or have we simply always done it this way?

● If it is an area of change, how far have we come from our previous practices?

STEP 4 → Read, reflect upon, discuss, debate and summarize your discussions of the Guiding Questions for the Indicator of Effective Practice

STEP 5 → Synthesize findings and self assess practices against the Indicator of Effective Practice

What does it matter?

● Are our practices as good as they can be?

● How do we know our practices are effective?

● Are we relevant and sustainable?

STEP 6 → Repeat Steps 2-5 for EACH Indicator of Effective Practice.

STEP 7 → Read, reflect upon, summarize your findings within each Indicator of Effective Practice for the entire Standard

STEP 8 → Synthesize the areas of strength based on Step 7

STEP 9 → Synthesize the areas for growth based on Step 7.

What’s possible?

● What do we aspire to be?

● How might we get there?

● What are our options?

STEP 10 → Self assess practices for the entire Standard

STEP 11 → Begin to draft School Improvement Action plan

What now?

● Where to next?

● What actions should we take to get better?

School Self Study Report

Each National Standard is articulated through a number of Indicators of Effective Practice (IEPs) Schools assess the effectiveness of their current practice in relation to the IEPs through research into their current Documentation, and robust reflection and deliberation provoked through the Guiding Questions During the Self Study process, Self Study Subcommittee members have the opportunity to critique and discuss School practices related to each indicator

The completion of the Self Study Report is a major accomplishment in the CAIS Accreditation Cycle It is submitted to CAIS two months prior to the scheduled Peer Review for an initial review and feedback, after which the revised Self Study will be made accessible to the Peer Review Team.School Self Study Report includes:

1 The School Profile Template that provides basic information about the School

2 List of participants for each Standard

3 Documentation that is relevant across Standards Template, including Student, Parent and Employee Handbooks, job descriptions and professional learning

4 Professional Learning Documentation Across Standards Template

5. A summary of each of the 12 CAIS National Standards including Indicators of Effective Practice, Documentation, Guiding Questions and Self Assessment.

6. A Standard summary of Areas of Strength, Areas for Growth and Next Steps.

Self Study Report File Organization Recommendation

Organization of information throughout the Self Study process is a choice made by the School based on the School’s data management systems. The list below is a file organization suggestion. Create:

● Copies of all documents that will be linked in the template.

● A master folder for the entire Self Study Report.

● A sub-folder for each Standard.

● Sub-folders for each Indicator of Effective Practice.

● List or chart giving details on access to individual folders and/or files. Refer to Chart 5Link Access Levels

File Organization Recommendations

File 0 Sub-folder Includes:

● School Profile Template

● Documentation Relevant across Standards Template

● Professional Learning Documentation Across Standards Template

Self Study Report Master Folder

Standard 1 Sub-folder IEP 1.1 Sub-folder with documents

IEP 1.2 Sub-folder with documents ...and so on

Standard 2 Sub-folder IEP 2.1 Sub-folder with documents

IEP 2.2 Sub-folder with documents and so on

Standard 3 Sub-folder IEP 3.1 Sub-folder with documents IEP 3.2 Sub-folder with documents and so on

Standard 4 Sub-folder IEP 4.1 Sub-folder with documents

IEP 4.2 Sub-folder with documents

...and so on

...and so on ...and so on

Chart

Table of Contents

6: File Organization Recommendation

How to Use the Self Study Report Template

Section 1: Participants in the Standards Process

Who participated in the preparation of this Standard?

Full Name Title / Position

Excerpt from template

In order to provide context to the written sections, names with the School title/position of each member of the Subcommittee who participated in the preparation of the Standard, are listed in this section Additional names of those who may have assisted with revising and editing are not necessary

Section 2: Documentation

✔ Documentation

Data and information prepared by the Leadership Team to inform discussions of strategy at Board meetings, within the past year

Board and Board committees' annual goals and work plans for the past year

List of current Task Forces and Ad hoc Committees including mandate, goals and timelines for each

Excerpt from template

Links to Documentation are to be inserted into the template in the box provided. Documentation is primarily composed of the School’s Strategy documents, policies, procedures and/or guidelines, examples of data analysis and records of professional learning If schools do not have documents requested indicate “in development” or “not developed”

Student, Parent and Employee Handbooks, as well as Job Descriptions for Faculty, Staff and Leaders, are to be linked only once at the beginning of the report Page number references are to be indicated in the Documentation section within the template

● All supporting documentation needs to be provided in the form of links in the Self Study Report

● In some cases, requested Documentation is of a sensitive nature The school can assign appropriate access according to the levels below The school can accomplish this by giving specific access to certain folders as necessary

● Permission for access to documentation can be closed on the following timeline:

○ Peer Review Team - once draft report is finalized

○ CAIS Staff - Once Peer Review report is approved

Link Access Levels

Level Description

1

“Anyone with the link can access”

Access set to “View Only”

2

Password protected files (when link is clicked the user will need to enter in school provided log-in details to access files)

Access set to “View Only”

3

Password protected files for selected Peer Review Team members only (when link is clicked the user will need to enter in school provided log-in details to access files)

Access set to “View Only”

4

There may be situations when access to a document is granted for a limited time period.

Access set to “View Only” and not shared

Chart 5: Link Access Levels

People with access to files

CAIS Staff, Peer Review Team

CAIS Staff, Peer Review Team

Selected Peer Review Member(s)

Peer Review Team Chair

Section 3: Answers to Guiding Questions

The Guiding Questions are designed intentionally to illuminate each IEP Schools do not write “to” the IEPs directly but rather in answering the questions, the IEPs will be addressed

➜ Guiding Questions

1. How does the Board ensure the continued relevance of the School’s vision, mission and values?

2. To what extent is the Board engaged in the establishment, review and adjustment of the School’s strategy as well as involved in on-going strategic generative discussions?

3 How does the Board monitor the current state of the School, progress with its strategy and ensure that the vision, mission and values are reflected in the School’s programs?

Enter your School Response here (750 Words Maximum)

Example excerpted from template

Answers to each of the Guiding Questions are placed directly in the template box marked “School Response” The word count is based on 250 words maximum per question If a response to one question is brief and less than 250 words, responses to the other questions may be longer

Section 4: Indicators of Effective Practice Rubric Self-Assessment

At the conclusion of each IEP, space is provided for the to self-assess (by adding an x in template box) the School’s effectiveness of current practice This rubric acknowledges that, even in a situation where the current practice is exemplary, there is always opportunity for further growth

Indicator of Effective Practice 3.1*

The Board effectively oversees the development and implementation of the School’s strategy.

Assess the school’s effectiveness of current practice in relation to the Indicator of Effective Practice based on the analysis of findings. Indicate your response in the appropriate box.

There is significant opportunity for this practice to be improved in order to be effective.

There is opportunity for this practice to be improved in order to be effective.

This practice is effective.

This practice is exceptional.

Growth is needed Growth is needed Growth is still possible Growth is still possible

Excerpt from template

Guidelines

Section 5: Standard Summary Statements

The summary chart provides an opportunity to gain comprehensive understanding of practice in relation to the Standard as a whole, through the review of the self-assessment of each IEP

Please transfer the School’s self-assessments from this standard into the summary table below Indicator of Effective Practice There is significant opportunity for this practice to be improved in order to be effective

3.1 The Board oversees the development and implementation of the School’s Strategy and approves statements of the School's vision, mission and values, its Strategy and its annual strategic priorities

3.2 Board members have a clear understanding of the Board roles, their legal duties including fiduciary responsibilities, and the expectations and duties of individual Board members.

Excerpt from template

Summary Questions

Answers to the summary questions can be presented in bullet form Conclusions should be drawn from Indicators of Effective Practice, Documentation and answers to particular Guiding Questions

Based on the overall reflection and analysis, summarize your findings below

1. What are the School’s greatest strengths in regard to this Standard?

● Answer here

● Answer here

2.What areas for growth does the School wish to make with regard to this Standard?

● Answer here

● Answer here

3.What are possible next steps for this Standard?

● Answer here

● Answer here

Excerpt from template

Section 6: Overall Accomplishment

While considering the collective self-assessments from the individual Indicators of Effective Practice, assess your overall accomplishment of this Standard

Standard 3 –Governance

Effective governance is critical to the long-term success of Independent Schools Effective Boards steward and safeguard the health of their Schools for future generations. The Board ensures the School has a clear strategic direction, provides appropriate risk oversight, ensures the School has leadership capacity and resources and effectively manages Board performance.

Excerpt from template Accreditation Guidelines

There

Growth is

Growth is

Growth is

Growth is still

is significant opportunity for this practice to be improved in order to be effective.

There is opportunity for this practice to be improved in order to be effective.

This practice is effective.

This practice is exceptional.

needed

needed

still possible

possible

SECTION IV

The Peer Review

In this section:

→ Jump to: The Peer Review

→ Jump to: On-site or Hybrid Options

→ Jump to: Composition and Selection

→ Jump to: Roles and Responsibilities

→ Jump to: Preparing and Budgeting

→ Jump to: Sample Schedule

→ Jump to: Peer Review Report

→ Jump to: Peer Review Communication

�� Table of Contents

The Peer Review

The Peer Review is a key component of the Accreditation Cycle It is the time when the School community proudly opens its doors and celebrates its uniqueness The Peer Review Team follows a structured process of validating the School’s Self Study Report and assesses the extent to which the School’s practices are effective and contribute to achievement of the overall CAIS National Standards.

When validating the Self Study Report, the Peer Review Team prepares to provide the School with helpful external feedback. Reciprocal conversations take place among the Peer Review Team, stimulated by the School’s Self Study. This process calls for the Peer Review Team to review, observe, probe and discuss, in order to reflect on the School’s analysis provided in the self-assessment. In turn, the Peer Review Team generates commendations and recommendations that inform the Accreditation decision, but more importantly, further directs the School Improvement Action Plan

It is important that the Peer Review Team be transparent with faculty, staff and School Leaders and that they know:

● The Peer Review Team is not evaluating individuals in the school.

● Classroom visits will be brief (not typically more than ten minutes in any one class)

● Virtual meetings will not be recorded.

On-site or Hybrid Options

The Peer Review can take place on-site or in a hybrid format Before the Peer Review Team is composed, the Head of School will indicate preference for an on-site or hybrid review during a meeting with the CAIS Director of Accreditation

For hybrid reviews, Peer Review Team members representing the following Standards must be on-site: School Purpose, Leadership, Educational Program Foundation, Learning and Teaching, Student Well-being and Support, Essential Concepts, Custodial Care, and Facilities and Infrastructure The Peer Review Team members representing the following Standards may participate virtually, at the request of the host School: Governance, Human Resources, Finance

Graphic 7: The Peer Review

and Recruitment, and Community Engagement. These members will participate in the Peer Review through virtual meetings as needed with School Leaders and the Peer Review Team at scheduled meetings.

Composition and Selection

Peer Review Teams are composed of leaders from across the CAIS network As part of CAIS membership, a Head of School serves as Chair or Vice Chair of a Peer Review Team every three years As well, Heads of School annually nominate School Leaders from their own school to be considered for future Peer Review Teams Peer Review Team members bring experience and competencies to the process and are united in the purpose to be helpful to the School in supporting continuous whole School improvement

In addition to the Chair, the Peer Review Team is composed of a balance of Education Program and School Operations Leaders Typically, this includes a Business Officer, leaders with expertise in Enrolment, Advancement, Marketing and Communication and/or Human Resources, and leaders with experience in curricular and co-curricular programming.

Additionally, there is a Governance representative, often the current or past Chair of a CAIS School Board The following chart indicates minimum Peer Review Team numbers The size may be modified at the request of the host School, or on recommendation by CAIS.

Peer Review Team Numbers

On-site ⬇

● School Purpose

● Leadership

● EP foundation

● Learning and Teaching

Standards →

Small School (0-199)

Minimum Total 7 Peer Review Team Members

Medium- Small School (200-399)

Minimum 8 Peer Review Team Members

Medium School (400-599)

Minimum 9 Peer Review Team Members

Medium- Large School (600-799)

Minimum 10 Peer Review Team Members

Large School (800+)

Minimum 11 Peer Review Team Members

● Student Well-being and Support

● Essential Concepts

● Custodial Care

● Facilities and Infrastructure

Chair Vice-Chair Education Program x2

Chair Vice-Chair Education Program x3

Chair Vice-Chair Education Program x3

Chair Vice-Chair Education Program x4

Chair Vice-Chair Education Program x4-5

On-site or Hybrid option ⬇

● Governance

● Human Resources

● Finance and Recruitment

● Community Engagement

Governance Business Officer

School Operations

Governance Business Officer

School Operations

Governance Business Officer

School Operations x2

Governance Business Officer

School Operations x2

Governance Business Officer

School Operations x2-3

If a School has a unique program, they may request additional international expertise to the Peer Review Team that is not available within the CAIS community The School may suggest the characteristics and experiences they are seeking, along with potential candidates to consider The selection of Peer Review Team members is made by CAIS The School will incur any additional expenses related to non-CAIS Peer Review Team members Any non-CAIS Peer

Chart 7: Peer Review Team Numbers

Review Team members must participate on a voluntary basis. Peer Review Team members are never paid to participate.

How are Peer Review Teams Selected?

CAIS is dedicated to building teams that will support the needs of the School. As part of the Peer Review Team building process, the CAIS Director of Accreditation speaks with the Head of School to discuss School context, current areas of strength and recognized areas for growth. Individuals who may pose a conflict of interest to the School will also be identified.

Successful reviews are underpinned by mutual respect and trust. For this reason, the Chair of the Peer Review Team is selected based on the leadership style, experience and skill set as articulated by the host Head of School. The Chair of the Peer Review Team is a current CAIS Head of School. This is an important choice that is given ample consideration by the Director of Accreditation in consultation with the host Head of School. All potential Peer Review Team members are required to complete the Peer Review Application Form that outlines details of relevant education, expertise and experience.

Decisions on Peer Review Team members are made by CAIS. At no time will a Head of School be permitted to select specific individual(s) to serve on the Peer Review Team at their School.

Roles and Responsibilities

The Chair of the Peer Review Team is a current or recently retired CAIS Head of School who leads the Peer Review Team and liaises with the host Head of School The Chair of the Peer Review Team is generally responsible for the Strategic Direction Standards including Standard 1School Purpose and Standard 2- School Leadership

The Vice Chair of the Peer Review Team is a current CAIS Head of School, Deputy Head or another Senior Leader This person will support the Chair in their role, and will contribute to both Education Program and School Operations Standards.

The Governance Member is a current or past Chair of a CAIS School Board This person participates in the Peer Review, at minimum, on Sunday and Monday This person has responsibility for Standard 3- Governance.

The Peer Review Team has at least two Education Program members This may include leaders with experience in, and responsibility for, curricular and/or co-curricular programs. In the case of a School that has a Boarding or Homestay program, a leader with related experience will be on the Peer Review Team.

The remainder of the Peer Review Team is composed of School leaders with experience in the areas of School Operations members. Every team will include a Business Officer who is

responsible for Standard 11- Finance. Leaders with expertise in Advancement, Enrolment, Human Resources and/or Marketing and Communications will be selected depending upon the specific priorities of the School.

Confidentiality is essential to the integrity of the peer review process. All Peer Review Team members are required to sign a Confidentiality Agreement upon acceptance of the role. Additionally, each member signs a further Confidentiality Addendum at the beginning of the Peer Review that deals with the specifics related to handling the Accreditation documentation and discussions with the School community.

All Peer Review Team members sign a Peer Review Team Agreement which is an acknowledgement of their role and responsibilities including the following:

● Attend a virtual school-specific orientation session facilitated by the assigned CAIS Peer Review Facilitator

● Attend the four day CAIS Accreditation Peer Review

● Complete report writing as assigned, at latest one week from the last day of the review period.

● Provide back-up writing support for another Peer Review Team member

● Maintain availability for further feedback during the revision and editing of the Peer Review Report.

● Follow the CAIS Writing Style Guide for Accreditation

● Follow guidelines set out in the Peer Review Team Agreement including timelines, obligation for disclosure, interview guidelines.

Role of the CAIS Peer Review Facilitator

Each Peer Review Team is supported by a CAIS Peer Review Facilitator Peer Review Facilitators are typically retired School leaders who bring rich knowledge and expertise of Independent Schools and the CAIS Accreditation Process In assigning a CAIS Peer Review Facilitator, consideration is given to previous relationships with the Host School that may pose conflicts of interest.

CAIS Peer Review Facilitators are employed by CAIS and act as a liaison between the School and the Peer Review Team The main responsibilities of the CAIS Peer Review Facilitator include:

● Pre-Review:

○ Facilitates the virtual school-specific orientation session for the Peer Review Team

● During Review:

○ Liaises between the host School and the Peer Review Team

○ Provides support to the Peer Review Team members including ensuring the schedule stays on track, assisting with scheduling challenges, facilitating focus groups and guiding the Peer Review Report writing process.

○ Attends debriefing sessions with the host Head of School and the Peer Review Team Chair

○ Supports the Peer Review Team Chair as needed.

● Post-Review:

○ Assists with the revision and editing of the Peer Review Report.

○ Attends the follow up meeting with the Head of School and CAIS Director of Accreditation to check the Peer Review Report for accuracy

○ Attends the Evaluation Council meeting to provide context of the Peer Review process and answer questions during the Accreditation decision-making process.

If during the course of the Peer Review, the Peer Review Facilitator is of the opinion that there is a serious problem either within the Peer Review Team or between the Peer Review Team and the School Leadership, the Peer Review Facilitator will immediately notify the CAIS Director of Accreditation and Executive Director so that the situation can be managed and mitigated. Similarly, if the Peer Review Facilitator becomes aware of a serious safety issue at the host School, the issue should be raised with the Head of School immediately so that it can be dealt with as soon as possible

Preparing and Budgeting

Peer Review Team members are volunteers who make a commitment to support a School’s Accreditation process. They attend a general overview session and a school-specific orientation session, and they are available for four days of the Peer Review visit as well as follow up time for the completion of the Peer Review Report. The School is responsible for any expenses related to travel and accommodation during the Peer Review. Team members are expected to arrive at the school by 12:00 noon Sunday. The Accreditation Coordinator will liaise with Peer Review Team members regarding arrival and departure days/times. The host School will provide meals for the Peer Review Team, including the meals below. Peer Review Team members participating virtually may submit receipts for meals as communicated by the Accreditation Coordinator.

● All meals begin with lunch on Sunday and end with lunch on Wednesday

● Breakfast at the hotel or in the meeting room for on-site members, as preferred by the School. Lunch is to be provided in the Peer Review Team meeting room, although some members will choose to eat with students, faculty and/or staff

● Dinner on Sunday evening, including the Board, School Leaders and the Peer Review Team.

● Monday as a working dinner, provided in the Peer Review Team meeting room.

● A meal on Tuesday evening, hosted by the school at a local restaurant, location at the discretion of the Head of School

● Some Schools may wish to provide a welcome package to the visiting Peer Review Team, usually composed of school-branded merchandise. It is important that these gifts remain modest in nature.

The School is responsible for arranging travel to and from the hotel each day for on-site team members Team members are asked to save all expense receipts related to travel to the School

Any expenses incurred by the Peer Review Team will be submitted to CAIS and later summarized for the host School which will reimburse CAIS.

Name Tags and Security Cards

The School is asked to prepare name tags and security cards for Peer Review Team members on site so that they are easily identifiable and can move around the School as needed.

Meeting Room

On-site, the School is asked to provide a meeting room that can be locked and that will remain a confidential work space for the duration of the Peer Review process. This room will have wireless internet access and additional power sources for laptops and a printer. It would be ideal to have a screen or monitor through which virtual team members can participate

The School is also asked to provide a second meeting room where Zoom call and breakout meetings can be held.

Peer Review Team members participating virtually will ensure they have a confidential space to work in with dependable internet support

Technology Support

In both on-site and hybrid models, many meetings will be conducted virtually The School is asked to designate a virtual meeting platform (e g , Google Meet, Zoom, Microsoft Teams) and to set up a meeting schedule in collaboration with the CAIS Peer Review Facilitator It may be helpful to set up a new account for the duration of the review so it does not conflict with the School’s on-going meetings and/or any virtual learning schedules A member of the School’s IT team is asked to be available for a pre-review technical check and support during the Peer Review

Supplementary Materials

The School is asked to provide the Peer Review Team with the following:

● Printout of master timetable and daily class schedules for the School, showing faculty names, subjects taught and locations.

● Printed map of campus and floor plan of building(s)

● Printed and digital list of all faculty and staff, including photos, if possible.

Sample Schedule

The purpose of the Peer Review is to validate the School Self Study Report. Over the four day period, the Peer Review Team works efficiently to meet School community members, make observations, attend focus groups and become familiar with the School campus. Since the School continues operating, every effort is made to conduct the Peer Review without disrupting the School’s regular schedule. The CAIS Accreditation Coordinator works with the Self Study Leader to create a Peer Review Schedule that is customized to their School and will meet the needs of the Peer Review Team The sample schedule below provides an overview of the four day review

Peer Review Schedule Overview

Schools will be provided with a more detailed template in consultation with the Accreditation Coordinator and the Peer Review Facilitator Note that all times are approximate and are local to the School Sunday Noon

The Self Study Leader and host Head of School will meet the CAIS Peer Review Facilitator upon arrival

12:30 p.m.

1:00 p.m.

3:00 p.m.

4:00 p.m.

Peer Review Team assembles in a confidential meeting room on-site with virtual access for any remote team members

Peer Review Team Meeting continues over lunch

Student-led Campus Tour

Board Focus Group Pre-Meeting

● Attended by the Board Chair, Peer Review Team Chair, Vice Chair, Governance Team Member and CAIS Peer Review Facilitator

● Non-attending PRT members collaborate and organize for upcoming meetings

● School Leadership does not attend)

4:30 p.m.

Focus Group with the Board of Directors (75-90 minutes)

● Attended by the Board of Directors, the full Peer Review Team and the CAIS Peer Review Facilitator

● The Chair and Governance Representative will lead the discussion, supported by the PRF The Business Officer may have questions; other PRT members observe

● School Leadership does not attend

6:00 p.m. Reception and dinner hosted by the School

● Attended by the Board, School Leadership Team, On-site Peer

Review Team members and the CAIS Peer Review Facilitator

7:30 p.m. On-site Peer Review Team members return to the hotel

Monday

7:30 a.m.

Peer Review Team - breakfast at hotel or at School

8:00 – 8:30 a.m. Meeting of the host Head of School, Peer Review Team Chair and CAIS Peer Review Facilitator

Throughout the day School Assembly (optional)

Pre-scheduled interviews between the Peer Review Team and School Operations Leaders

Pre-scheduled interviews between the Peer Review Team and Education Program Leaders

Pre-scheduled focus group meetings

Classroom visits, focus groups, interviews and informal observations and conversations continue

Lunch Lunch in the school dining hall and/or Peer Review Team meeting room

Afternoon

Pre-scheduled interviews, classroom visits, focus groups, interviews and informal observations and conversations continue

4:00 p.m. Reception with Peer Review Team

● Attended by all available Faculty and Staff, Peer Review Team members and the CAIS Peer Review Facilitator

5:00 p.m.

Peer Review Team Meeting over dinner in the onsite meeting room

7:30 p.m. On-site Peer Review Team members return to the hotel and meet for optional social time

Tuesday

7:30 a.m.

Peer Review Team meeting over breakfast at hotel or at School

8:00 – 8:30 a.m. Meeting of the host Head of School, Peer Review Team Chair and CAIS Peer Review Facilitator

Throughout the day

Pre-scheduled interviews between the Peer Review Team and School Operations Leaders

Pre-scheduled interviews between the Peer Review Team and Education Program Leaders

Pre-scheduled focus group meetings

Classroom visits, focus groups, interviews and informal observations and conversations continue

Lunch Lunch in the school dining hall and/or Peer Review Team meeting room

Afternoon Pre-scheduled interviews, classroom visits, focus groups, interviews and informal observations and conversations continue

4:30 p.m.

8:00 p.m.

Wednesday

7:30 a.m.

8:00 – 8:30 a.m.

8:00 a.m.

11:00 a.m.

12:00 p.m.

Peer Review Team Meeting followed by dinner at a local restaurant

On-site Peer Review Team members return to the hotel

Peer Review Team meeting over breakfast at hotel or school

Meeting of the host Head of School, Peer Review Team Chair and CAIS Peer Review Facilitator

Classroom visits, informal observations and conversations continue and all final writing requirements are met

Peer Review Team Meeting

Peer Review Team Meeting continued Lunch in the Peer Review Team room (or School’s dining facilities)

1:30 p.m. Exit interview

● Attended by host Head of School, Board Chair, Peer Review Team Chair and CAIS Peer Review Facilitator

1:30 p.m.

2:30 p.m.

4:30 p.m.

Peer Review report writing and consolidation time

On Site Peer Review Team members depart

Peer Review Chair and Peer Review Facilitator depart

Chart 8: Peer Review Sample Schedule

The Peer Review Report

The Peer Review Report is composed of three main components including Commendations, Recommendations and Professional Peer Advice

Commendations highlight areas in which the Peer Review Team believes a School has exceptional practices, exceeding the expectations of an Indicator of Effective Practice

Recommendations are issued when there is opportunity for improvement related to a specific Indicator of Effective Practice

Professional Peer Advice are ideas that the School might wish to consider. They are intended to provide peer input that the School might find useful Given their optional nature, Professional Peer Advice will be shared in an addendum at the end of the report

In addition to providing Commendations, Recommendations and Professional Peer Advice, the Peer Review Team will consider the prioritization of Recommendations for the School and Evaluation Council Schools will respond to Recommendations through the School Improvement Action Plan and annual Updates Feedback should be addressed within a reasonable time frame, which may vary given the nature of the Recommendations

For urgent issues related to health and safety or an issue of financial viability, a response is required within 6 weeks In areas where there is an opportunity or significant need for practices to be addressed, the advice might be given for the School to prioritize this within one year In the case of less urgent Recommendations, the School will have the agency to decide how they relate to School Strategy and prioritize them within their School Improvement Action Plan

Peer Review Communication

All Schools are required to announce to their community that a Peer Review Team will be on-site for four days during the Accreditation review process. Schools are encouraged to include an overview of the CAIS organization and the Accreditation process in their announcements.

At the conclusion of the Peer Review, an Exit Meeting will be held between the Peer Review Team Chair, CAIS Peer Review Facilitator, host Head of School and Board Chair of the School. The Peer Review Team Chair will share significant trends from the review, including key strengths, key areas for growth and any issues related to health and safety. They will also share an overview of next steps in the process and how Accreditation decisions are made

The Peer Review Team does not make the decision on Accreditation, nor should any assumptions relating to the decision be made by either the Peer Review Team or the School The Accreditation decision is made by the CAIS Evaluation Council and the CAIS Board This process should not

dissuade Schools from continuing work on their School Improvement Action Plan. Schools can be refining their proposed priorities and tactical plans in anticipation of receiving their draft review in the coming weeks.

During the Exit Meeting, the School will be reminded of the CAIS Communication Policy that indicates that the School may not disclose, either internally or publicly, the decision on the School’s Accreditation until the Peer Review Report has been finalized, reviewed by the CAIS Evaluation Council and the Accreditation or Reaccreditation decision has been made by the CAIS Evaluation Council and confirmed by the CAIS Board. At this point the decision and the final Peer Review Report will be communicated and released to the School. In publishing any portion of the Peer Review Report internally or publicly, a balanced report should be communicated, accurately reflecting the totality of the results The School may also choose to publish portions of the School Improvement Action Plan

Peer Review– Year 2 Summary

CAIS Support ⬇

● Peer Review planning and logistics

● Four day Peer Review

● Draft Peer Review Report is completed edited and checked for accuracy with Head of School

● Final Peer Review Report shared with School

● CAIS Evaluation Council will review the Peer Review Report and the School Improvement Action Plan

● Accreditation Decision by Evaluation Council and CAIS Board

The School Actions ⬇

● Peer Review planning and logistics

● Host four-day Peer Review

● Head of School reviews the Draft Peer Review Report for accuracy

● Draft and submit School Improvement Action Plan to CAIS

● Begin implementation of the School Improvement Action Plan

● Communication of results to School community

Chart 9: Peer Review – Year 2 Summary

School Improvement Action Plan

In this section:

→ Jump to: Purpose and Opportunities for Agency

→ Jump to: School Improvement Action Plan

�� Table of Contents

Purpose and Opportunities for Agency

The School Improvement Action Plan is an opportunity for Schools to shape their work in Years

Two to Five of the Accreditation Cycle Schools do not need to wait until the Peer Review Report is issued before beginning to draft their priorities and tactics for next steps Throughout the Self Study process, the School has been assessing their areas of strength as well as areas for growth

The Self Study acts as a research tool to inform continual whole School improvement and School Strategy The School can build on the momentum of the Self Study to draft a School Improvement Action Plan based on what they already know needs to be done

Ideally, the Self Study and Peer Review processes will align Accreditation And Strategic Planning Processes

Accreditation Process ⬇ Strategic Planning Process ⬇

Year 1 → Self Study

Year 2 → Peer Review

Year 3 → School Improvement Action Plan Year 1

Year 4 → School Improvement Action Plan Year 2

Year 5 → School Improvement Action Plan Year 3

Chart 10: Accreditation and Strategic Planning Processes

Conclude Strategy Cycle

Launch Strategic Planning Cycle integrating Self Study and Peer Review findings

Launch revised School Strategy

Annual Implementation Plan aligned with School Improvement Action Plan

Annual Implementation Plan aligned with School Improvement Action Plan

In the case where alignment in timing as described in the chart above is not possible, the Accreditation process can still contribute to the School’s Strategy. Strategic direction in this case

Accreditation Guidelines

Contents

will draw from areas of strength and areas for growth in the Self Study Review, as well as the validation through the Peer Review Report and Accreditation decision from the CAIS Evaluation Council. Context for School Strategy can also be accomplished through alignment with the School Improvement Action Plan.

School Improvement Action Plan Steps

● Following the submission of the Self Study Report 8 weeks prior to the Peer Review - School’s begin consideration of goals within the School Improvement Action Plan, and may choose to begin a draft based on the findings from the School's Self Study

● Four-day Peer Review - validation of the School’s Self Study Report

● 8 weeks following the Peer Review

● Draft Peer Review Report shared with the School

● Development of the School Improvement Action Plan reflecting feedback from the Draft Peer Review Report

● Peer Review Report

● Finalized School Improvement Action Plan

● Evaluation Council and CAIS Board to make Accreditation decision based on the review of both the School Improvement Action Plan and Peer Review Report

Graphic 8: School Improvement Action Plan Steps

School Improvement Action Plan

The School Improvement Action Plan invites Schools to:

● Summarize priorities

● Articulate appropriate actions or tactics

● Indicate the resources needed for success

● Consider the desired outcome and how success will be assessed

Timing

As stated above, once the School has completed and submitted the Self Study Report to CAIS, work on the School Improvement Action Plan may begin. As a result of the Self Study, School Leaders will have a clear sense of areas of strength and areas for growth. At this point, they may choose to consider how these align with their existing Strategy and what priorities they might consider setting moving forward This work builds upon the reflective process momentum

If the Peer Review Team has identified recommendations prioritized as URGENT, the school will submit a School Improvement Action Plan to CAIS within 6 weeks of the visit indicating their plan to address the recommendations Urgent recommendations should be addressed within months

Step 1 - Drafting the School Improvement Action Plan

Using the Standards rubrics and summaries within the School Self Study Report, the School’s Leadership Team will discuss and draft the School Improvement Action Plan using the CAIS provided template. The School Improvement Action Plan should have clear alignment with the School’s strategic priorities and strategic implementation dashboard.

Components of the School Improvement Action Plan include:

Priorities that are self and Peer Review-initiated areas for growth. These priorities will be updated upon receipt of Peer Review Report recommendations.

Actions that are the specific tasks which lead to the realization of the priority.

Responsibility that includes the person(s) responsible for the specific task, including job title to ensure continuity of the School Improvement Action Plan if there is a staff change.

Resources should include:

● Financial

● Human

● Professional Learning

● Time/ Spatial

Timeline as it relates to priority level including month and year. The chart below provides guidelines in determining the priority level of actions within the School Improvement Action Plan.

Assessment Criteria that describe how the School will know they have accomplished their goal.

Prioritizing Action Required – School Improvement Action Plan

URGENT ACTION - within months

These actions are related to safety or immediate well-being of students and financial stability of the School.

Example: Health & Safety, Child Protection, Financial Viability

HIGH PRIORITY ACTION SHORT TERM ACTION

Recommended to begin addressing within one year, doesn’t need to be completed within one year

These actions have been identified by the School and/or Peer Review Team as an area with significant need for practices within this Standard to be improved.

Example: Develop and implement Faculty and Staff Performance Management Policy and Procedure.

Recommended to begin and complete within two years

These actions have been identified by the School and/ or Peer Review Team as areas with opportunity for practices within this Standard to be improved.

Example: Review and document Faculty and Staff Professional Learning Policy and Procedure.

LONG TERM ACTION

Recommended to begin and complete within three years

These actions are typically longer term projects which require wider involvement and/or multiple steps of implementation.

Example: Expand the School’s local, national, and global partnerships.

Chart 11: Prioritizing Action Required – School Improvement Action Plan

Step 2 - Development of the School Improvement Action Plan

After the four day Peer Review, the team will complete the Draft Peer Review Report. The CAIS Team will review and edit the report for consistency. It will be shared with the Head of School for feedback on accuracy and discussed in a meeting with the CAIS Director of Accreditation, the Peer Review Team Chair and Peer Review Facilitator. Once the Head of School’s feedback is appropriately incorporated, it is considered to be the Final Draft Peer Review Report.

After any necessary revisions are made, the School will receive the Final Draft Peer Review Report. It will include general observations, commendations and recommendations that will be organized by Standard and categorized as Urgent, High Priority, Short-term and Long-term. The Final Draft Peer Review Report does not include an Accreditation decision. This decision is made by the CAIS Evaluation Council and CAIS Board and will come in the next step. See Section VI.

The School will have 6-8 weeks to review the Final Peer Review Report and update the School Improvement Action Plan. Urgent recommendations MUST be addressed within 6 weeks. For Schools that chose to draft a School Improvement Action Plan in advance of receiving the Peer Review Report and the Final Draft Peer Review Report it is likely that the plan that was developed will have many similarities, as well as some differences These may be considered as the School finalizes their School Improvement Action Plan to be submitted to CAIS

The Final Draft Peer Review Report and School Improvement Action plan with Urgent Recommendations will be presented to the CAIS Evaluation Council to inform the decision making process

During Year 5 of the Cycle, it is recommended that the School Leadership Team and Self Study Leader reflect upon the last four years of the Accreditation Cycle to discuss the following points which will set the stage for the upcoming Self Study:

● Which Standards have been most impacted as a result of the School Improvement Action Plan?

● Were there unanticipated outcomes during the Self Study, the Peer Review and the School Improvement Action Plan work?

● What factors contributed to the success, and what will be done differently for the next cycle (i e , planning structure, community engagement, connection to School annual planning)?

● To what extent has the Accreditation process supported the development of School Strategy and implementation?

● For the next Self Study process, what would be continued, changed or stopped?

● How did the Accreditation Cycle support the School Leadership development program?

● Who might be the next staff/faculty members identified as potential Self Study Leaders?

Year 1-5 Summary Overview

CAIS Support ⬇

● Peer Review date is confirmed by CAIS

● Cohort Meetings for Self Study Leaders Peer Review Team is selected

Year 1 → Self Study

The School Actions ⬇

● Head of School joins CAIS Executive Director in a launch presentation to the School community

● Confirm Self Study Leader with CAIS

● Self Study Leader participates in the Cohort Meetings

● Self Study Leader begins planning

● Self Study Subcommittee work commences using the CAIS National Standards Framework

●

● Peer Review planning and logistics

● Four-day Peer Review

● Draft Peer Review Team Report is completed

● Draft Peer Review Report edited

Year 2 → Peer Review

● Draft Peer Review Report checked for accuracy with Head

● Final Draft Peer Review Report shared with School

● CAIS Evaluation Council will review the Peer Review Report and the School Improvement Action Plan

● Accreditation Decision by Evaluation Council and CAIS Board

Year 3 → Action Plan

Implementation

Year 1

● Peer Review planning and logistics

● Self Study Report is prepared and submitted to CAIS

● Host four-day Peer Review

● Head reviews the Draft Peer Review Report for accuracy

● Draft and submit School Improvement Action Plan to CAIS

● Continued implementation of the School Improvement Action Plan

● Communication of results to School community

Progress considered by CAIS Continued work using the School Improvement Action Plan Implementation

● Implement School Improvement

Year 4 → Action Plan

Implementation Year 2

Year 5 → Action Plan

Implementation Year 3 and Reflection in Preparation for Year 1

Action Plan and submit annual report to CAIS detailing progress in areas of school improvement

Progress considered by CAIS Continued work using the School Improvement Action Plan Implementation

● Implement School Improvement Action Plan and submit annual report to CAIS detailing progress in areas of school improvement

Progress considered by CAIS Continued work using the School Improvement Action Plan Implementation

● Implement School Improvement Action Plan and submit annual report to CAIS detailing progress in areas of school improvement

● Begin the planning process for the next Cycle.

Chart 12: Year 1-5 Summary Overview

Accreditation Decision-Making: Member Schools

In this section:

→ Jump to: Accreditation Decisions

→ Jump to: The Evaluation Council and CAIS Board

→ Jump to: Decision Making - Member Schools

→ Jump to: Annual School Improvement Action Plan Updates

→ Jump to: Accreditation Revocation

→ Jump to: Accreditation Decision Appeals

→ Jump to: Communication of Accreditation Decisions to the School

→ Jump to: Communication of Accreditation Status to the School Community

Table of Contents

Accreditation Decisions

Accreditation decisions are made at the CAIS Evaluation Council and CAIS Board meetings This will generally be within, and at maximum, six months after the Peer Review In the case of Member Schools, the Accreditation decision will be to affirm Accreditation status or defer the decision on Accreditation status until the School addresses recommendations as identified by CAIS and communicated to the School following the Evaluation Council meeting

As described in Section V, the Peer Review Team will consider the prioritization of Recommendations for the information of the School and Evaluation Council The Peer Review Team will use a rubric as follows:

Peer Review Rubric – Member Schools

HIGH PRIORITY ACTION

Level 1

STANDARD NOT MET

There is significant opportunity for practices within this Standard to be improved The actions required are typically longer term projects which require wider involvement and/or multiple steps of implementation. Although two plus years are needed to meet this Standard, the School must begin addressing these

Level 2

STANDARD MET

Level 3

STANDARD MET

Level 4

STANDARD MET

Recommendations within one year.

SHORT TERM ACTION

There is opportunity for practices within this Standard to be improved in order to be effective Standard is met assuming that the Recommendations are addressed within one year and completed within two years

LONGER TERM ACTION

Practices within this Standard are effective. Opportunities for growth are addressed within the 5-year cycle.

LONGER TERM ACTION

Practices within this Standard are exceptional. Opportunities for growth are addressed within the 5-year Cycle.

Step 1: Prime Indicators

A subset of Indicators of Effective Practice (IEPs) are deemed Prime Indicators. These indicators are foundational to the successful function and viability of a School. The magnitude of risk to a School in relation to these indicators is considered greater than other IEPs.

The establishment and maintenance of effective practices in these areas is an expectation of Accreditation. In the case where a Prime Indicator is not met (i.e., the School must address recommendations in order to be effective), the Standard within which the Prime Indicator is situated is also not met. The Accreditation decision will be deferred until the School has addressed the Recommendation and has demonstrated that the IEP is met.

Peer Review Team Rating for Prime Indicators Evaluation Council Decision

1

There is significant opportunity for practices within this Standard to be improved in order to be effective

Standard not met and Accreditation decision deferred

2

There is opportunity for practices within this Standard to be improved in order to be effective.

Practices within this Standard are effective.

4

Practices within this Standard are exceptional

Advance to Step 2

Advance to Step 2 3

Advance to Step 2

Chart 13: Peer Review Rubric – Member Schools

Prime Indicator Rubric – Member Schools

Step 2: Standards

In the case where all Prime Indicators are met, the Peer Review Team will apply the following rubric to indicate priorities for the School and Evaluation Council to consider.

Standards Rubric – Member Schools

Peer Review Team Rating for Standards

1

There is significant opportunity for practices within this Standard to be improved in order to be effective.

2

3

4

There is opportunity for practices within this Standard to be improved in order to be effective.

Practices within this Standard are effective

Practices within this Standard are exceptional.

Evaluation Council Decision

Standard not met and Accreditation decision deferred.

Standard met subject to addressing Recommendations within one year. Accreditation reaffirmed.

Standard met Accreditation reaffirmed

The Evaluation Council and CAIS Board

The Evaluation Council is composed of CAIS Board members, both CAIS member Heads of School and Independent members. The Evaluation Council has the dual responsibility to uphold the CAIS National Standards and to respect the unique nature of the School under review

The Evaluation Council meets regularly throughout the academic year. Upon receipt of the Final Draft Peer Review Report, the School’s Accreditation decision will be placed on the next meeting agenda of the CAIS Evaluation Council

The purpose of the Evaluation Council’s review is to understand the basis of the Peer Review Team’s conclusions in its draft report and to determine whether the Evaluation Council is comfortable with those conclusions The Evaluation Council will determine if there are any specific issues that should be raised with the CAIS Board

The CAIS Peer Review Facilitator will present the Draft Peer Review Report to the Evaluation Council The Evaluation Council will be provided access to the Peer Review Report, the Peer Accreditation

Chart 14: Prime Indicator Rubric – Member Schools

Chart 15: Standards Rubric – Member Schools

Review Team’s voting results on each standard as well as the School’s Improvement Action Plan with responses to urgent recommendations outlined.

Prioritizing Action Required For Evaluation Council And CAIS Board – Member Schools

URGENT ACTION - within months

These actions are related to safety or immediate well-being of students and financial stability of the School.

Example: Health & Safety, Child Protection, Financial Viability

Recommended to begin addressing within one year, doesn’t need to be completed within one year

These actions have been identified by the School and/or Peer Review Team as an area with significant need for practices within this Standard to be improved

Example: Develop and implement Faculty and Staff Performance Management Policy and Procedure

Recommended to begin and complete within two years.

Recommended to begin and complete within three years

These actions have been identified by the School and/ or Peer Review Team as areas with opportunity for practices within this Standard to be improved

Example: Review and document Faculty and Staff Professional Learning Policy and Procedure.

These actions are typically longer term projects which require wider involvement and/or multiple steps of implementation

Example: Expand the School’s local, national, and global partnerships.

Chart 16: Prioritizing Action Required For Evaluation Council And CAIS Board – Member Schools

Decision Making – Member Schools

Before an Accreditation decision is reaffirmed or deferred, the Evaluation Council considers any Recommendations deemed urgent. A request is made for the School to address these in an expedient manner, the timeline for which is determined by the Evaluation Council.

Once any urgent matters are addressed, the Evaluation Council will reaffirm or defer the Accreditation decision based on the consideration of Standards Met and Standards Not Met.

Standard Met – A Standard is met when there are no high priority Recommendations. In cases in which all the Standards are met or met subject to addressing Recommendation(s) in the short term (one year), the Evaluation Council will affirm Accreditation and notify that outcome to the CAIS Board at the Board’s next meeting With the Evaluation Council’s decision, the School’s Accreditation will be extended for a new five-year term The CAIS Team will report that outcome

to the School and, upon receiving that report, the School may make the Peer Review Report’s conclusions public.

If Standards have been met subject to addressing Recommendation(s) in one year, the School will submit an School Improvement Action Plan Update within one year reporting on the School’s response to the identified Recommendations.

Standards Not Met – In cases in which there are Standards not met, the Evaluation Council will defer the decision on Accreditation for one year and notify the outcome to the CAIS Board at the Board’s next meeting. During this time, the School will maintain its pre-Peer Review status. The School will be asked to submit a School Improvement Action Plan Update within one year of reporting on the School’s response to the identified Recommendations for the Standards Not Met.

The CAIS Team will inform the School of the decision regarding the submitted School Improvement Action Plan Update together with the timeframes for responding to the Recommendations. Upon receiving that notification, the School may make the Peer Review Report’s conclusions public

If the Evaluation Council accepts the School’s first response to the Recommendations in their annual School Improvement Action Plan Update, the Council will affirm the School’s Accreditation and notify that outcome to the CAIS Board at the Board’s next meeting Upon the Evaluation Council’s decision, the School’s Accreditation will be extended for a new five year term from the year of the Peer Review If the Evaluation Council does not accept the School’s first response to the Recommendations, the School’s Re-accreditation will continue to be deferred and the School will be asked for a further response to Recommendations within a timeframe determined by the Evaluation Council

If the Evaluation Council accepts the School’s response to the Recommendations in the second annual School Improvement Action Plan update, it will affirm the School’s Accreditation and notify that outcome to the CAIS Board at the Board’s next meeting Upon the Evaluation Council’s decision, the School’s Accreditation will be extended for a new five year term from the year of the Peer Review.

If the Evaluation Council does not accept the School’s second response to the recommendations, the School’s Re-accreditation will continue to be deferred and a Focused Visit will be made to the School. A Focused Visit is an on-site visit by three CAIS representatives, usually the CAIS Executive Director, a CAIS Board member and a third individual designated by the CAIS Executive Director who has expertise in the area in question, to review the School’s progress under the Standard in question. The Evaluation Council will review the Focused Visit Report and formulate a recommendation to the CAIS Board as to what should be done regarding the School’s Accreditation.

Probationary Status – In cases in which there are Standards not met within the expected timelines, the Evaluation Council may move the School’s Accreditation status to “probationary.” The Evaluation Council will outline a timeframe in which the School will need to demonstrate that they effectively addressed the Recommendation(s) and make a resolution to the CAIS Board. The CAIS Board will make a decision on the resolution at the Board’s next meeting.

The CAIS Team will inform the School with the timeframes for responding to the Recommendations. Upon receiving that notification, the School will be required to remove indication of CAIS Accreditation from public communications.

The School will submit a School Improvement Action Plan Update with the response to Recommendations within the timeframe set out by the Evaluation Council. The response to Recommendations will be reviewed by the Evaluation Council.

If the Evaluation Council accepts the School’s response to Recommendations, the Evaluation Council will remove the School’s probationary status, and the School will follow the regular reporting requirements as determined by the Evaluation Council’s decision. This outcome will be communicated to the CAIS Board at the Board’s next meeting

If the Evaluation Council does not accept the School’s Action Plan, the Evaluation Council will report that determination to the CAIS Board and the CAIS Board will either revoke the School’s membership in CAIS, or will extend the School’s probationary status for a specified timeframe There is no presumption or obligation on the CAIS Board to extend a School’s probationary status, and, if a School’s probationary status is extended, it would be rare for probationary status to be extended for a second time

For more information regarding the decision-making process, please refer to the GG-201 Accreditation Decision-Making Flowchart for Members policy posted on the CAIS website

Annual School Improvement Action Plan Updates

Accreditation decisions and next steps are communicated through a letter from the CAIS Executive Director to the Head of School and Board Chair.

Schools can expect this letter within one week following the meeting of the Evaluation Council and/or Board meeting. Following the Accreditation decision, the School provides an annual update to CAIS including the updated School Improvement Action Plan Update with evidence of progress towards Recommendations as well as plans for next steps through the Cycle.

If the Accreditation decision was deferred, the School Improvement Action Plan Update will provide the basis for the Accreditation decision. If the School’s Accreditation was confirmed, it is

shared with the Evaluation Council in order to ensure the School is successfully meeting the Action Steps self-identified through the School Improvement Action Plan.

Accreditation Revocation

Where there is a fundamental problem at a School, the Evaluation Council will report to the CAIS Board in order for the Board to consider whether more immediate action should be taken with respect to the School’s Accreditation. Accreditation is revocable during the five year Accreditation term. From time to time, information may come to CAIS’ attention outside the normal Accreditation Cycle that is a problem of a serious nature. Although it is impossible to construct a list that encompasses all potential problems, some examples would be:

● Criminal activity

● Insolvency

● School does not provide a safe environment

● School has misled CAIS

● School does not share CAIS’s fundamental values

● School’s academic program is not close to CAIS quality

● Failure to address Urgent and High Priority Recommendations within a reasonable timeframe

In such a case, the problem will be brought to the attention of the CAIS Board which will consider what action by CAIS is appropriate This could lead to information requests, a Focused Visit to the School and/or, in serious enough cases, removal of CAIS Accreditation

Accreditation Decision Appeals

Member Schools may appeal Accreditation decisions to the CAIS Board, following the GP-205 Accreditation Appeals Procedure policy, within 15 days of the date of the letter detailing the Board’s decision. An appeal must be provided in writing, including signatures of both the Head of School and Board Chair of the School to the CAIS Executive Director. If an appeal is granted a hearing will take place and schools will be notified accordingly.

Communication of Accreditation Decisions to the School

All decisions will be shared with the Head of School and Board Chair of the School through a written communication from the Executive Director of CAIS The contents of these letters may be shared with the School community but only if they are published in full

In the case of Proprietary Schools, the Accreditation status letters and Peer Review Reports are sent to the Board Chair, Head of School and the Owner of the School. CAIS encourages Schools to share all correspondence and reports with the full Board of the School.

Prior to receiving this written communication of the CAIS Evaluation Council and Board’s Accreditation decision, a School must not make any internal or public announcement regarding the Accreditation decision Rather, School Leadership is encouraged to update the community on the process and next step timelines

Communication of Accreditation Status to the School Community

As outlined in Section IV of the Peer Review, all Schools are required to announce to their community that a Peer Review Team will be conducting the review over four days In advance of the review, Schools are encouraged to include an overview of the CAIS organization and the Accreditation process in their announcements or communications

It is the responsibility of all CAIS Schools to represent their Accreditation status accurately, both publicly and internally, as a measure of accountability and as part of the School improvement process. CAIS requires all Member Schools to include the standard CAIS logo in a variety of areas, including the School’s website, promotional materials and/or prospectus. On first reference in written material, Schools are expected to use the full name of "Canadian Accredited Independent Schools". The abbreviated form of the name CAIS may be used on second and continuing references. Schools are invited to download the CAIS logo style guide and assets offered in various formats.

CAIS will not make an announcement when a member (or candidate) School’s membership or candidacy changes Any School who has its membership or candidacy status revoked, or withdraws from membership or candidacy, must cease using the applicable CAIS logo immediately on its website and in all marketing materials

Peer Review Report

The Peer Review Report belongs to the School for which it was written and, once approved by the CAIS Evaluation Council and the CAIS Board, should be shared with the School community both as a statement of accomplishments and as a vehicle for School improvement. In publishing any portion of the Peer Review Report internally or publicly, a balanced report should be communicated, accurately reflecting the totality of the results. The School may also choose to publish portions of the School Improvement Action Plan.

Self Study Reports are confidential and will only be shared with CAIS and Peer Review Teams In response to inquiries from the public, CAIS will disclose only whether a School is Accredited, seeking Accreditation or not Accredited Information regarding a Candidate or Member School’s progress in the Accreditation process or issues of concern will not be made public by CAIS

Accreditation Decision-Making: Applicant and Candidate Schools

In this section:

→ Jump to: Steps to Becoming a Candidate School

→ Jump to: Accreditation of Candidate Schools

→ Jump to: The Evaluation Council and CAIS Board

→ Jump to: Decision-Making for Candidate Schools

→ Jump to: Accreditation Revocation

→ Jump to: Accreditation Decision Appeals

→ Jump to: Communication of Accreditation Decisions to the School

→ Jump to: Communication of Accreditation Status to the School Community �� Table of Contents

Steps to Becoming a Candidate School

Schools interested in applying for CAIS membership should contact Tracey Nolan, Executive Assistant to arrange a time to speak with the Executive Director about CAIS, the value of membership and the Accreditation process In order to apply for membership, Schools have to have been in continuous operation and viable for a minimum of five years The CAIS Executive Director will tour the School and have an initial meeting with the Head of School, Leadership Team and the Board of the School.

Following the initial visit from the CAIS Executive Director, the School will submit a Membership Application Package and pay the application fee. CAIS will review the application within three months of its receipt and contact the Head of School to arrange a one-day visit by the Applicant School Review Team, which will include two CAIS School Heads (one being a CAIS Board member) and a Business Officer. After the one day review is conducted, the Applicant School Review Team will submit the Applicant School Report including a recommendation on whether the applicant is ready to become a Candidate.

This report is finalized within two months following the visit from the Applicant School Review Team. All information will remain confidential to CAIS and the Applicant School Review Team. This report is put forward to the CAIS Evaluation Council.

The CAIS Evaluation Council reviews the report and makes a recommendation to the CAIS Board of Directors, which makes all final decisions on applicant acceptance. The report will be discussed at the next Evaluation Council meeting, generally within three months of submission, and a recommendation will be made to the CAIS Board based on the assessment of the capacity of the School to meet all Standards in the subsequent three years. Following the CAIS Board meeting, the applicant will receive a letter from the CAIS Executive Director detailing the Board’s decision The applicant will also receive a summary of the Applicant School Report outlining the observed areas of strength and areas for growth If Candidate Status is not granted, the School will be invited to re-apply in the future

If Candidate Status is granted, the School will prepare for a full Peer Review, engaging in a Self Study internal review process and meeting all National Standards Peer Reviews will occur within three years after a School has been granted Candidate status Accreditation of Candidate Schools

The Peer Review process will be the same as described for re-Accreditation of a Member School except for one variation in the decision-making system (see chart below) The Peer Review is arranged on a mutually agreed upon date with the Director of Accreditation

As described in Section V, the Peer Review Team will consider the prioritization of Recommendations for the information of the School and Evaluation Council The Peer Review Team will use a rubric as follows:

Peer Review Rubric – Candidate Schools

HIGH PRIORITY ACTION

Level 1

STANDARD NOT MET

There is significant opportunity for practices within this Standard to be improved. The actions required are typically longer term projects which require wider involvement and/or multiple steps of implementation. Although two plus years are needed to meet this Standard, the School must begin addressing these Recommendations within one year.

SHORT TERM ACTION

Level 2

STANDARD NOT MET

Level 3

STANDARD MET

There is opportunity for practices within this Standard to be improved in order to be effective Standard is met assuming that the Recommendations are addressed within one year

LONGER TERM ACTION

Practices within this Standard are effective. Opportunities for growth are typically not short-term priorities. To be addressed within a 5-year cycle.

LONGER TERM ACTION

Practices within this Standard are exceptional. Opportunities for growth are typically not short-term priorities. To be addressed within the 5-year Cycle.

The resulting Peer Review Report will be presented to the CAIS Evaluation Council who will make a recommendation to the Board on the application for CAIS Member School status.

Prime Indicators

A subset of Indicators of Effective Practice (IEPs) are deemed Prime Indicators. These indicators are foundational to the successful function and viability of a School. The magnitude of risk to a School in relation to these indicators is considered greater than other IEPs.

The establishment and maintenance of effective practices in these areas is an expectation of Accreditation In the case where a Prime Indicator is not met (i e , the School must address recommendations in order to be effective), the Standard within which the Prime Indicator is situated is also not met The Accreditation decision will be deferred until the School has addressed the recommendation and has demonstrated that the IEP is met

Prime Indicator Ratings – Candidate Schools

1

There is significant opportunity for practices within this Standard to be improved in order to be effective

2 There is opportunity for practices within this Standard to be improved in order to be effective.

Chart 17: Peer Review Rubric – Candidate Schools

Chart 18: Prime Indicator Ratings – Candidate Schools

In the case where all Prime Indicators are met, the Peer Review Team will apply the following rubric to indicate priorities for the School and Evaluation Council to consider.

Standards Rubric – Candidate Schools

Peer Review Team Rating for Standards Evaluation Council Decision

1

There is significant opportunity for practices within this Standard to be improved in order to be effective.

2

There is opportunity for practices within this Standard to be improved in order to be effective

3

4

Practices within this Standard are effective.

Practices within this Standard are exceptional.

Standard not met and Accreditation decision deferred.

Standard not met subject to addressing recommendations within one year Accreditation decision deferred

Standard met.

The Evaluation Council and CAIS Board

The Evaluation Council is composed of CAIS Board members, both CAIS member Heads of School and Independent members. The Evaluation Council has the dual responsibility to uphold the CAIS National Standards and to respect the unique nature of the School under review.

The Evaluation Council meets regularly throughout the academic year. Upon receipt of the Final Draft Peer Review Report, the School’s Accreditation decision will be placed on the next meeting agenda of the CAIS Evaluation Council.

The purpose of the Evaluation Council’s review is to understand the basis of the Peer Review Team’s conclusions in its draft report and to determine whether the Evaluation Council is comfortable with those conclusions. The Evaluation Council whether there are any specific issues that should be raised with the CAIS Board.

The CAIS Peer Review Facilitator will present the Draft Peer Review Report to the Evaluation Council. The Evaluation Council will be provided access to the Peer Review Report, the Peer Review Team’s voting results on each standard as well as the School’s Improvement Action Plan with responses to urgent recommendations outlined.

Chart 19: Standards Rubric – Candidate Schools

Prioritizing Action Required For Evaluation Council And CAIS Board – Candidate Schools

URGENT ACTION - Must begin addressing within months

These actions are related to safety or immediate well-being of students and financial stability of the School.

Example: Health & Safety, Child Protection, Financial Viability

Level 1 Level 2

HIGH PRIORITY ACTIONMust begin addressing within one year

These actions have been identified by the School and/or Peer Review Team as an area with significant need for practices within this Standard to be improved.

Example: Develop and implement Faculty and Staff Performance Management Policy and Procedure

SHORT TERM ACTIONMust begin addressing within one year

These actions have been identified by the School and/or Peer Review Team as an area with opportunity for practices within this Standard to be improved.

Example: Review and document Faculty and Staff Professional Learning Policy and Procedure

Level 3 and 4

LONGER TERM ACTIONwithin 5 year cycle

These actions are typically longer term projects which require wider involvement and/or multiple steps of implementation.

Example: Expand the School’s local, national, and global partnerships.

Chart 20: Prioritizing Action Required For Evaluation Council And CAIS Board – Candidate Schools

Decision-Making for Candidate Schools

Standards Met – In most cases, a Standard is met when all Recommendations are deemed Level 3 or 4 and there are no Recommendations that are high priority or are Recommendation(s) required to be met within one-year (Level 1 or 2). In cases where all the Standards are met, the Evaluation Council will recommend to the CAIS Board that the Candidate be Accredited. If the CAIS Board accepts the Evaluation Council’s Recommendation, the Candidate will be Accredited for a five-year term and become a full Member School of CAIS. The CAIS Team will report that outcome to the Candidate and, upon receiving that report, the School may make the Peer Review Report conclusions public.

The School will submit an update of their School Improvement Action Plan to CAIS by the date indicated in the accreditation letter.

Standards Not Met – In cases in which not all of the Standards are met, the Evaluation Council may extend the Candidate’s status for up to one year or recommend to the CAIS Board that the Candidate’s status be terminated.

If the Candidate’s status is extended for up to one year, the Candidate will file a report within the extension period on its progress in meeting the standards not met. The Evaluation Council will review the School’s report and recommend to the CAIS Board that either the report be accepted or that the Candidate’s status be terminated.

If the CAIS Board accepts the Recommendation that the Candidate’s School’s report be accepted, the Candidate will be Accredited for a five year term and become a full Member School of CAIS. The CAIS Team will report that outcome to the Candidate and, upon receiving that report, the School may make the Peer Review Report’s conclusions public.

If the CAIS Board accepts a Recommendation that the Candidate’s status be terminated, the School will immediately cease to be a Candidate. The School may reapply to become a Candidate, recognizing that the School will not be accepted as a Candidate unless the matter(s) that led to the School not being accredited have been resolved, or there is a high degree of probability that the matter(s) will be resolved within the three-year period,

Annual School Improvement Action Plan Updates

Accreditation decisions and next steps are communicated through a letter from the CAIS Executive Director to the Head of School and Board Chair.

Schools can expect this letter approximately one week following the meeting of the Evaluation Council and/or Board meeting. Following the Accreditation decision, the School provides an annual update to CAIS that includes the updated School Improvement Action Plan with evidence of progress towards Recommendations and plans for next steps through the cycle

If the Accreditation decision was deferred, the School Improvement Action Plan Update will inform the Accreditation decision If the School’s Accreditation was confirmed, it is shared with the CAIS Accreditation Team in order to ensure the School is successfully meeting the Action Steps self-identified through the School Improvement Action Plan

Accreditation Revocation

Where there is a fundamental problem at a School, the Evaluation Council will report to the CAIS Board in order for the Board to consider whether more immediate action should be taken in respect of the School’s Accreditation. Accreditation may be revoked during the five-year Accreditation term. From time to time, information may come to CAIS’ attention outside of the

normal Accreditation Cycle, that is a problem of a serious nature. Although it is essentially impossible to construct a comprehensive list, some examples would be:

● Criminal activity

● Insolvency

● School does not provide a safe environment

● School misled CAIS

● School does not share CAIS’ fundamental values

● School’s academic program is not close to CAIS quality

● Failure to address Urgent and High Priority Recommendations within a reasonable timeframe

In such a case, the problem will be brought to the attention of the CAIS Board who will consider what action by CAIS is appropriate. This could lead to information requests, a Focused Visit to the School and/or, in serious enough cases, removal of Accreditation

Accreditation Decision Appeals

Applicant and Candidate Schools may appeal Accreditation decisions to the CAIS Board, following the Appeals Policy, within 15 days after the Board’s decision An appeal must be provided in writing, including signatures of both the Head of School and Chair of the Board of the School to the CAIS Executive Director.

Appeal hearings take place within 30 days of the hearing request receipt. The Appeals Committee includes the Chair of the CAIS Board, Chair of the Finance and Audit Committee, Chair of the Standards Council and two additional members from the CAIS Board. The Appeals Committee does not include members of the Evaluation Council, but does include the CAIS Executive Director and Chair of the Evaluation Council in order to answer questions if necessary.

The Appeals Committee will convene following the Appeals hearing to make a Recommendation to the full CAIS Board as to whether the Board’s decision being appealed should be modified.

Communication of Accreditation Decisions to the School

All decisions will be shared with the Head of School and Board Chair of the School through a written communication from the Executive Director of CAIS. The contents of these letters may be shared with the School community but only if they are published in full.

In the case of Proprietary Schools, the Accreditation status letters and Peer Review Reports are sent to the Board Chair, Head of School and the Owner of the School.

CAIS encourages Schools to share all correspondence and reports with the full Board of the School.

Prior to receiving this written communication of the CAIS Evaluation Council and Board’s Accreditation decision, a School must not make any internal or public announcement regarding the Accreditation decision. Rather, School Leadership is encouraged to update the community on the process and next step timelines.

Candidate Schools and Member Schools with unmet Standards will have their decision on Accreditation deferred for one year to allow the School to respond and demonstrate that they are meeting the Standards. During this time the School will maintain its pre-review status.

For more information regarding the decision-making process, please refer to the GG-201 Accreditation Flowchart for Members and the GP-201 Accreditation Procedures policies posted on the CAIS website.

Communication of Accreditation Status to the School Community

As outlined in Section IV, the Peer Review, all Schools are required to announce to their community that a Peer Review Team will be conducting the review over four days In advance of the review, Schools are encouraged to include an overview of the CAIS organization and the Accreditation Process in their announcements or communication

It is the responsibility of all CAIS Schools to represent their Accreditation status accurately, publicly and internally – both as a measure of accountability and as part of the School improvement process

CAIS requires all Candidate Schools to include the CAIS Candidate School logo in a variety of areas, including the School’s website, promotional materials and/or prospectus Candidate Schools must state that they are working to achieve Accreditation by a certain date

CAIS will share the current CAIS Logo Style Guide and Assets with the School

CAIS will not make an announcement when a Candidate School’s membership or candidacy changes Any School that has its membership or candidacy status revoked, or withdraws from membership or candidacy, must cease using the applicable CAIS logo immediately on its website and in all marketing materials

Peer Review Report

The Peer Review Report belongs to the School for which it was written and, once approved by the CAIS Evaluation Council and the CAIS Board, should be shared with the School community

both as a statement of accomplishments and as a vehicle for School improvement. In publishing any portion of the Peer Review Report internally or publicly, a balanced report should be communicated, accurately reflecting the totality of the results. The School may also choose to publish portions of the School Improvement Action Plan.

Self Study Reports are confidential except as they are shared with members of the Peer Review Team. In response to inquiries from the public, CAIS will disclose only whether a School is Accredited, seeking Accreditation or not Accredited. Information regarding a candidate or member School’s progress in the Accreditation process, or issues of concern, will not be made public by CAIS.

SECTION VIII

Accreditation Professional Learning

In this section:

→ Jump to: CAIS Accreditation Launch Presentations

→ Jump to: CAIS Accreditation Workshop

→ Jump to: On-going Virtual Support Meetings

→ Jump to: 2021 CAIS National Standards Portal

→ Jump to: Peer Review Team Virtual Training Sessions

�� Table of Contents

CAIS provides professional learning opportunities and support throughout the Accreditation Cycle

CAIS Accreditation Launch Presentations

Approximately one year prior to a School Peer Review, the CAIS Executive Director makes presentations to both the School Faculty and Staff and the Board Presentations include an overview of CAIS, purpose and value of the Accreditation and an overview of the five year cycle

2021 CAIS National Standards Portal

The 2021 National Standards & Accreditation Process Portal houses all Accreditation-related documents and resources including guidelines, checklists, and templates. CAIS Connect, which houses the 2021 CAIS National Standards Portal, also provides a bank of resources that are organized by the National Standards. If you don't have an account, click here to request one.

Peer Review Team (PRT) Virtual Orientation Sessions

Peer Review Teams participate in two virtual orientation sessions prior to an accreditation visit The first orientation session is led by the Director of Accreditation, supported by the Coordinator and the Peer Review Facilitators (PRFs) It provides an overview of the accreditation process for PRT members going on an upcoming visit This session is offered several times each year

In the second school-specific session, introductions are shared and the team’s Peer Review Facilitator (PRF) guides PRT members for that visit through the CAIS School Google site that

provides all the necessary links to resources required for the visit. Further details are provided in the table below. The school-specific session is only offered once in advance of the visit to that school.

Both of these orientation sessions are required for all Peer Review Team members prior to the Review.

Peer Review Team Virtual Orientation Session Details

Orientation 1Accreditation Overview

Offered several times throughout the year

Orientation 2School Specific

2- 3 weeks prior to Peer Review

● Provides an overview of the accreditation process

● Outlines the roles and responsibilities of PRT members

● Emphasizes the importance of confidentiality

● Broadly outlines the 4 day visit schedule

● Examines unconscious bias

● Highlights the post-visit work

School-specific orientation session:

● Team Member Roles and Responsibilities

● Additional Confidentiality Agreement

● The four-day Peer Review Schedule

● Using the writing assignment templates

● Writing partners

● Procedures and timelines for the Peer Review Report completion

● The host Head of School may make a presentation during this session to share specific and relevant provincial legislation and what the Peer Review Team needs to know and understand about the uniqueness of the School while reading the Self Study report

Chart 21: Peer Review Team Virtual Training Sessions Details

Index of Charts

All Graphics:

→ Jump to: Graphic 1: The Five Year Cycle

→ Jump to: Graphic 2: Accreditation Process at a Glance

→ Jump to: Graphic 3: Self Study

→ Jump to: Graphic 4: National Standards Framework at a Glance

→ Jump to: Graphic 5: Standards Framework Pillars at a Glance

→ Jump to: Graphic 6: Prime Indicators Model

→ Jump to: Graphic 7: The Peer Review

→ Jump to: Graphic 8: School Improvement Action Plan Steps

All Charts:

→ Jump to: Chart 1: Oversight, Compliance and Whole School Improvement

→ Jump to: Chart 2: Standards Framework Layout Structure

→ Jump to: Chart 3: Self Study Pre-planning Process

→ Jump to: Chart 4: Self Study – Year 1 Summary

→ Jump to: Chart 5: Link Access Levels

→ Jump to: Chart 6: File Organization Recommendation

→ Jump to: Chart 7: Peer Review Team Numbers

→ Jump to: Chart 8: Peer Review Sample Schedule

→ Jump to: Chart 9: Self Study – Year 2 Summary

→ Jump to: Chart 10: Accreditation and Strategic Planning Processes

→ Jump to: Chart 11: Prioritizing Action Required – School Improvement Action Plan

→ Jump to: Chart 12: Year 1-5 Summary Overview

→ Jump to: Chart 13: Peer Review Rubric – Member Schools

→ Jump to: Chart 14: Prime Indicator Rubric – Member Schools

→ Jump to: Chart 15: Standards Rubric – Member Schools

→ Jump to: Chart 16: Prioritizing Action Required For Evaluation Council And Cais Board –Member Schools

→ Jump to: Chart 17: Peer Review Rubric – Candidate Schools

→ Jump to: Chart 18: Prime Indicator Ratings – Candidate Schools

→ Jump to: Chart 19: Standards Rubric – Candidate Schools

→ Jump to: Chart 20: Prioritizing Action Required For Evaluation Council And CAIS Board –Candidate Schools

→ Jump to: Chart 21: Peer Review Team Virtual Training Sessions Details