1. Intelligent accountability for improved outcomes “ We must develop an accountability system that is located from the student level upwards, directly involving and influencing the teacher and principal level, as such a system is more likely to have major effects on the quality of teaching and learning.” (Hattie 2005) 2

2. The best schools … hold themselves to account. The myriad of failed models from around the world confirm that effective accountability can only come from within the profession, with the system intervening only when necessary. Let those who know the work, do the work. Professional trust: effective accountability “Autonomy and accountability go together: greater autonomy in decisions relating to curricula, assessments and resource allocation tend to be associated with better student performance, particularly when schools operate within a culture of accountability.”(PISA in Focus, OECD, 2011)

3. All schools will be expected to engage their local community and peers in an annual cycle of evaluation, validation, reporting, planning and review. Self –evaluation Peer -validation Annual Reporting Planning Differentiated Review Annual Self-Evaluation, Peer Validation, Reporting and Planning “The most effective education systems strike the right balance between clear expectations for all schools and targeted support to help each school drive its own improvement” (TVLC p.12)

4. Meaningful accountability What are you teaching? How are you teaching? How do you know students are learning?

5. Intent – supportive and restorative - Given the findings from the priority review, support will be designed and delivered along a continuum. Two-day design process, involving central, regional DEECD, school principals and others as required. Sets intervention objectives, processes and timelines. Intervention monitored by Regional Services Group. Support and intervention Within 4-year cycle, either: - Principals supported by at least two peer principals, plus an external reviewer or critical friend, to conduct a review of the school’s performance, leading to the development of a 4-year plan. Peer performance review Performance above thresholds - An accredited review team (2 to 4 depending on size and may include principals) is appointed to undertake an in-depth diagnosis of the causes underlying the school’s performance. Focus on school AND community. Feedback to the community by review team. Priority Review Performance below thresholds Exemplary practice review

6. Where the review recommends that intervention is required, tailored interventions will be designed and implemented according to the specific organisational development needs determined by the review. The goal of the intervention will be to restore the school to autonomous operation. Intervention will be designed and delivered along a continuum: –Monitoring and support –Structured Peer support –Tailored External support Intervention to restore autonomy

7. Determining performance thresholds Multiple measures – absolute and relative Multiple years – low performance for three-years running. Performance leads to investigation, it does not determine the intervention. Engagement A significant number or proportion of students absent for more than four weeks per year Achievement Based on three years of NAPLAN data - Reading and Numeracy - for both absolute and growth, moderated by teacher judgements Wellbeing Responses from student surveys used to identify schools that appear to have significant student safety issues

8. Term 2 Consultation