School Review

5. Developing key directions for the next School Strategic Plan

A printable handout version of this guidance is available on the Resources tab.

On the final day of the school review, the school review panel draws on the insights gathered throughout the review to collaboratively develop the proposed key directions for the new School Strategic Plan (SSP), comprising the goals, targets and key improvement strategies (KIS) to improve student outcomes over the next 4 years.

Goals and targets focus on what the school is trying to achieve, and how their progress will be measured. Goals and targets align to the learning and wellbeing outcomes at the centre of FISO 2.0. KIS articulate how the school will achieve their goals and targets. KIS align to the FISO 2.0 core elements.

The key directions for the next SSP are recorded in the final section of the school review report. Once the report has been finalised, the department will populate the key directions from the report to the school’s draft SSP on Strategic Portal Online Tool (SPOT).

For support and advice relating to the key directions for the next SSP, please refer to the School Strategic Plan policy in PAL or contact the School Planning and Annual Reporting Unit at SchoolPlanning@education.vic.gov.au

Process for developing key directions

Over the course of the review process the panel will form a view regarding the next steps for school improvement.

The final panel day is an opportunity for panels to reflect on data and findings from the review process, come to a shared understanding of the school's strengths and areas for growth, agree on next steps, and articulate the most appropriate goals, targets and KIS for the next SSP.

It is recommended that panels spend approximately 5 hours developing the key directions, and that they structure thinking around the following questions:

• Where are we now? Reflection on data and evidence collated throughout the review (approximately 90 minutes).
• What do we want to achieve? Developing goals (approximately 30 minutes) and setting targets (approximately 90 minutes).
• How will we get there? Developing KIS (approximately 90 minutes).

1. Where are we now?

The panel should ensure they have a shared understanding of the school's improvement priorities by reflecting on the data and evidence available through:

• the pre-review self-evaluation (PRSE) report
• current performance data and identified areas for improvement
• the school’s self-evaluation of current practices against the FISO 2.0 core elements, including how effectively these impact student outcomes and any identified practice strengths and areas for growth
• the enablers and barriers to improvement identified through the PRSE, panel discussions and fieldwork
• other findings gathered through fieldwork about school performance, practices and processes.

On the final day, panels can reflect on the data and evidence collated across the review by:

• brainstorming key themes that have arisen throughout the review
• reviewing available data and identifying the most significant areas for growth
• discussing the root cause of issues identified throughout the PRSE, analysis of learning and wellbeing outcomes and fieldwork findings against the FISO 2.0 core elements
• confirming the panel’s FISO 2.0 continua of practice evaluation, noting key areas for improvement for each core element.

2. What do we want to achieve?

Once the panel has agreed on where the school is in their improvement journey, the next step is to identify what the school would like to achieve through their SSP. The panel articulates this through goals and targets.

Goals

Goals are a high-level statement that articulates the student learning and wellbeing outcomes that the school will focus on improving in their next strategic plan.

General guidance for developing goals

• Goals should be developed based on areas where there are the greatest opportunities for growth and improvement in student outcomes, as identified throughout the review.
• Consistent with FISO 2.0, it is expected that all schools will have at least one learning and one wellbeing goal. Schools can also set goals that cover shared learning and wellbeing outcomes in place of or in addition to this requirement.
• Schools can choose to set goals at the broad student outcome level (for example, ‘improve student wellbeing’) or can choose to focus on a specific cohort or area within student learning and/or wellbeing (for example, ‘strengthen the resilience of all students’ or ‘strengthen the literacy of EAL students’).
• Goals should have scope for a range of supporting strategies over the 4-year SSP.
• Goals should be accepted by staff and the community as appropriate.

Recommended process for developing goals

• Draw on the understandings developed in the previous step to identify the areas of student learning and wellbeing most in need of improvement.
• Determine 2 to 4 of these areas as priority areas for focus.
• Articulate the 2 to 4 focus areas as simple and clear goals.

Tailoring goals for different school contexts

• The panel should develop between 2 and 4 goals depending on school context, to ensure a sharp and narrow focus. Smaller schools can choose to pursue 2 goals in total, where medium to large schools can choose up to 4. It can be appropriate for very large schools to choose up to 5 goals.
• Schools can choose to set a specific goal for both literacy and numeracy. However, schools whose next steps for improvements in student learning outcomes are foundational, supporting both literacy and numeracy (such as documenting a viable and guaranteed curriculum or developing a pedagogical model), can be best served by a single broader student learning goal. Once these foundations have been achieved, it may then be appropriate to focus on separate literacy and numeracy goals in subsequent strategic plans. Schools with sustained high performance in a given area can identify goals in other areas with greater opportunity for growth, or alternatively can specify a goal to maintain high performance in the area of strength, or to focus on a particular cohort or sub-area within it. For example, the school might look to a different area of learning or wellbeing, or, within an area of general high performance, focus improvement efforts on a priority cohort where data indicates there are opportunities for growth.

Things to avoid when developing goals

• Expressing goals as a statement saying ‘how’ the school will improve (this would be a KIS).
• Focusing on improving leadership or teaching practice (this would be a KIS).

Targets

Targets are the measures of achievement of the goals.

General guidance for developing targets

• Targets measure the outcomes of all students.
• Targets should be developed using student data that will enable schools to meaningfully measure progress towards the student outcomes articulated in the goals.
• Targets can identify separate measures for specific cohorts of students where appropriate (for example, English as an Additional Language (EAL), Koorie, disability, at risk).
• Targets are expressed as a percentage of students (for example, XX% of Year 7 students) and should include a baseline figure and a numerical target
• Review panels should use multiple datasets to measure progress against each goal.
• Schools are encouraged to use the FISO 2.0 system measures where appropriate for their context. These measures have been identified as having the largest impact on and correlation to positive learning and wellbeing outcomes.
• In addition to the standard data sets in Panorama, review panels can also utilise other data sets that support the school to track their progress towards their goals, including locally generated data.

Recommended process for developing targets

• Identify which data sources will most effectively measure progress towards the goals.
• Consider which additional data sources can be used to triangulate progress (for example, including measures from NAPLAN data, measures in Panorama about secondary completion rates and exit destinations, Victorian Curriculum teacher judgement data and a learning-related factor from Attitudes to School Survey (AtoSS) to track improvements in student learning outcomes).
• Identify a baseline for each different measure which articulates where the school is now. Express the baseline as a percentage of students or cohorts (for example, XX% of Year 7 students).
• Identify an appropriate target for the 4-year period, expressed as a percentage of students. Panels should consider how percentages translate to the number of individual students in their cohort as well as the performance of similar schools.
• If appropriate or needed given the school’s data, identify any priority cohorts that should be captured within targets and set sub-targets or separate targets for these cohorts.

Tailoring targets for different school contexts

• Each goal should have a maximum of 3 to 4 targets per goal, noting that small schools may have fewer.
• High performing schools can set a ‘maintain’ target figure.
• Targets should draw on multiple data sets where possible. For small schools with challenging data contexts, it can be sufficient to include 2 targets per goal. Medium to large schools should include at least 3 data sources to ensure they are able to triangulate and verify their data. Larger schools can include 4 targets per goal to capture the breadth of their work.
• The data sets chosen for targets can vary between schools based on their context, the findings of their review, and their future directions for improvement.
• New schools will not have baseline data available when setting targets – in these instances it can be appropriate for schools to draw baseline figures from similar school performance.

Things to avoid when developing targets

• Expressing targets without a numerical figure (for example, ‘improve the percentage of students assessed at age expected level of the Victorian Curriculum by teacher judgements’, which lacks a baseline figure and target figure).
• Using phrases like ‘state average’ or ‘similar schools average’ as a target (for example, ‘will be at the same level as the state average’). This should be avoided as state averages and similar school averages change each year. If schools wish to reference similar school or state averages, they should do this using a baseline figure drawn from that dataset, and then set their own target (for example, 'increase the percentage of students assessed at the age expected level of the Victorian Curriculum by teacher judgements from 75% (2024 similar schools average) to 80%’).
• Using only one data source (for example, NAPLAN) for all targets in one goal. Multiple sources of data support schools to build a more accurate and holistic picture of progress towards a goal, as well as allowing schools to triangulate data so that they can verify their progress.

3. How are we going to get there?

Once the panel has established the long-term goals for improvement, they identify how the school will reach these goals through changes in practices and processes across the school.

Key improvement strategies

Key improvement strategies (KIS) are the high-level strategies that the school will implement to achieve the goals and targets.

General guidance for developing KIS

• KIS are strategies that articulate ‘how’ the school will achieve their goal through changes to practice.
• KIS are aligned to one or more of the FISO 2.0 core elements.
• They will be operationalised through the next 4 Annual Implementation Plans (AIP).
• They take between 2 and 4 years to complete.
• They are focused on strengthening leadership practices, teaching practices, or whole school processes.

Recommended process for developing KIS

• Based on the discussion in ‘1. Where are we now’, identify the root causes and factors contributing to the learning and wellbeing areas identified for improvement in the goals.
• Identify the FISO 2.0 core elements that correspond to these root causes and will enable the changes in student outcomes articulated in the goals.
• Consider what the next logical step is for the school to move towards the level of excellence for each core element as articulated through the FISO 2.0 Illustrations of practice.
• List possible KIS in order of sequential implementation (for example, it can be necessary for the school to document the scope and sequence of the curriculum (Teaching and learning) before focusing on developing systems and processes to support the moderation of student work (Assessment)).
• Narrow down to a maximum of 2 to 4 KIS that are achievable across the next 4 years per goal, with consideration to sequencing and impact. Record any proposed actions against each KIS to support the development of AIPs.

Tailoring KIS for different school contexts

• Each goal typically has 2 to 4 KIS that the school will implement over the 4-year SSP. Smaller schools can choose to pursue 2 KIS while medium and larger schools may choose to pursue 3 or 4.
• A maximum of 2 to 4 KIS per goal should be set, depending on school size.
• Review panels can advise that some goals have more KIS than others, based on the level of practice change required and the resources the school will dedicate to each goal (for example, ‘improve student learning’ can require 4 KIS, while ‘improve student outcomes in STEM’ can require 2).

Things to avoid when developing KIS

• Articulating a KIS that will take less than 2 to 4 years (these can be captured in the AIP).
• Expressing a high-level outcomes statement which should be captured as a goal.

Overall example of a goal, targets and KIS