VIS Operating Document Review Schedule Updated April 2014

Disclaimer: Documents are updated and reviewed on an as needed basis. A rationale for changing policies is indicated in the table
below. Document reviews and updates are intentional and proactive. They are reactive only when the implementation of a policy or
curriculum piece has proven to be ineffective. The timing of the reviews is determined as a response to active listening by school
stakeholders to one another and not in accordance with prescribed cycles or timelines.

Key
Documents
School Policies
Language
Policy

Last
Review

Rationale for Review

Who was
involved

Background notes

February
2014

Active use of policy brought minor

discrepancies to Jurgas attention.
Recommendations by Language
team were reviewed and adopted.

Jurga,
Deirdre,
Ausra,
Rebecca

Assessment
Policy

February
2014 (still
needs
tweeks)
November
2012

Adjusted assessment schedule,

reports recommend reviewing it
together at the beginning of each
school year
Planned review F 2014 due to
growing need for services and
formal structures. Ausra recently
attend NFI inclusion event as a
first step in getting us current.
Created a service learning policy
based on principles of the
programme at United World
College in Maastrict. An update is
needed so that MYP CAS is
referenced and ties to PP and
Exhibition Actions are made
explicit.
Policy implementation
demonstrated minor
contradictions in the policy that
were pointed out by Tony and Jeff.
There were addressed in 2014 as

Jurga, Ausra,
(edits)Deirdr
e, Rebecca

Agne B. contributed to original draft

after attending IB Lang. Policy
training. Incorparotated lang policies
elements shared by PYP Coordinator,
Kristen
This policy marks a best-case
scenario. Teachers require more pd to
fully grasp all aspects of the
assessment process
Programme is expanding and
developing ahead of the policy.
Rebecca collaborated on this with
peers at IB Inclusion event.

Learning
Support
Policy

Service
Learning
Policy

November
2012
Anticipate
review in
2015

Appropriate
Use of
Technology

December
2013 and
refined in
2014

Rebecca,
Leigh (no
longer at
VIS)
Irma, Jasper,
Rebecca

Community action has not caught on

as student initiated events. Students
still expect/require modeling and
guidance by adults, but substantial
progress has been made this year.

Katherine,
Deirdre,
Antanas

Katherine, in consultation with PYP

peers and the team of Antanas and
Deirdre, drafted separate policies. The
two very were similar in content and
spirit and therefore they were readily

Key
Documents

Last
Review

Bring Your
Own Device

Spring
2013
Refined
2014

Admissions

Spring
2013

Curriculum Documents
POI
Spring
2011

PYP Maths

Fall 2013

Rationale for Review

a result of a cyber bulling incident.

Move to MYP building and desire
to train and trust kids with
technology. It was obvious that
the battle against their freedom to
use their devices would be a
waste of staff time. We have
empowered school to take strong
action on rare occasions of
significant violations of the policy.
Ex. cyberbullying
Need review in 2015 to reflect
demongraphic changes. We
foresee problem of loss of student
diversity due to growth in
reputation among Lithuanians.
Original basis for founding the
school was to serve this
populations so it does not mean
that this is negative. This is am
area that need investigation.
Recommendations from PYP
authorization team

Confusion as to which standards

to select in ManageBac. PYP uses

Who was
involved

Deirdre,
Antanas,
Rebecca
(shared
director with
School
Council in
advance of
criticism)

Background notes

combined.
A need to get with the times and a
belief that one-to-one programmes
are not necessary in an era in which
all students have their own devices.
Laptops and tablets are always
available for those in need on a
device.

Vilte (former
admissions
officer),
Rebecca,
Liisa and
Liza
(Meeting of
Stakeholders
)

Already Initiated conversations with

School Council to prepare them for
difficult decisions to come. Survey
results will provide insights into the
reasons for choosing VIS. Is it
because we share common values or
is it due to language? Also, VIS has
grown to full capacity in advance of
planned growth.

Jon Adams,
members of
frm. PYP
team
Katherine,
Laura,

Plan to review in 2014-2015 as part of

the self-study and induction of new
PYP Coordinator
Lithuanian and PYP Scope and Sequence
compared to ensure both sets are

Key
Documents

Last
Review

Rationale for Review

4 cohorts rather than identifying

by grade, etc.
Needed to realign units with age
appropriate literature and range of
genre and to prevent repetition of
writing modes. Establishes the
minimum in terms of number
and range of books read/ writing
pieces published and assessed by
rubric.

PYP Literacy
Plan

Spring
2013

PYP Science
and Social
Sciences
Math
benchmarks

2014-2015 As part of the POI review, science

and social studies concepts will be
reviewed for horizon
2010
PYP would benefit from aligning
in need of the Marzano rubrics to our
review
programme
They should also include math
concepts in addition to skills
2010 in
Teachers find them difficult to use
need of
in their current form.
review
Currently
Active use of Khan Academy has
under
allowed
revision
teachers to differentiate more
effectively. Demonstrating the
opportunity differentiation in a

Language
benchmarks
MYP Maths

Who was
involved

Background notes

Kristen,
Marie
Leigh,
Debra,
Kristen,
Laura, Dalia,
Laura L.

integrated into the VIS programme.

Vilte,
Rebecca,
Suzanne, Jon

Marzano standards were as scoring

scales in an effort to standardize
assessment throughout PYP

Vilte,
Rebecca,
Suzanne, Jon
Deirdre,
Anastacija,
Antanas

Cont. this effort was not successful as

teachers found the standards too
different from PYP scope and sequence
Lithuanian standards were compared to
Haess and Haess scope and sequence.
Dee to continue

This was completed but to varying

degrees of success/quality. New
teachers either require a more
prescriptive approach or ignore the
designated recommendations in favor
of their own. We need to review the
need to respect the written curriculum
and reiterate that
Changes to it should have a clear
rationale.
Loosely pegged to national curriculum.

Key
Documents

MYP
Language A

MYP
Language B

MYP Science
MYP Design
Technology
MYP Arts
MYP
Humanities

MYP P.E.

Last
Review

2012
planned
for
summer
2014
2012
planned
2015
review
2012

Rationale for Review

curriculum document has been a

challenge.
Current students cannot access all
of the texts in the written
curriculum so differentiation of
texts in necessary for some
classes.
Irma and Mehtap will attend MYP
Language B workshop in October
to assist improving Language B
French and Lithuanian. Language
B English will also be reviewed

2014

Antanas is reconsidering units to

reflect new MYP Subject guides
and observations of student needs

2012
review
ongoing

Move from Humanities to

Individuals and Societies will
mandate review of content.
Assessment changes are in place.
Plans are in place to collaborate
with ISE and ISL in this area.

Always
and
never;)

Staff Documents

Who was
involved

Background notes

Jurga, Laima,
Rebecca
Upcoming
Jeff

Vertical planning documents were

developed and are in use on ManageBac
More extensive information on writing
modes in required

Irma, Agne
B., Mehtap,
Milda, Jurga

Vertical planning documents were

developed and are in use on ManageBac

Deirdre and
the internet
Antanas,
Deirdre

Vertical planning documents were

developed and are in use on ManageBac
Changes from traditional computer
science were initiated by Jurate and
further developed by Antanas

Rebecca,
Jurga and
Ministry of
Education
Jasper,
Ricardo in
the future

Units pegged to Lithuanian curriculum

which is concept driven and easy to
adapt to MYP framework and English A
programme
Physical education teachers that can
teach IB have been a struggle to
recruit.

Key
Documents

Last
Review

Code of Ethics

2011
upcoming

Staff
Standards
and Job
Description
Teacher
Appraisal
Rubrics

2012

Head
Appraisal

S 2013

Support Staff
Appraisal

To do

Learning
Principles

2013
retreat

Norms of

2013

S 2013

Rationale for Review

Code of Ethics is reviewed every

three years as the pre-service
meeting.
Previous documents were derived
from Lithuanian state resources
and reflected a scope of work
alone.
Teacher appraisal process was
revised to ensure feedback
conversations were useful to both
the teacher and leadership team.
This was the first year it was
implemented in full.
Internationally qualified coach and
VIS parent developed a 360 Head
Appraisal. Process was monitored
by Ben in Fall 2013. Feedback
was anonymously submitted by 5
parents, 5 teachers and 5 School
Council members.
Rebecca has collected samples
from AISH with plans to adapt
them to VIS.
VIS continues to work to
standardize some teaching
practices and attitudes toward
learning. This may help.
These are reviewed every three

Who was
involved
Suzanne, Jon

Rebecca
And
approved by
SC
Mixed 14
member
MYP/PYP
team

Ben Harvey
(intl coach)
Rebecca

Background notes

Current school council requested we

include our relationship to
environment.
These were derived from materials
shared by
the Principals Training Center.
Previous system was overly time
consuming and did not serve the
needs of the staff. Elements were kept,
but process was simplified and
adjusted to reflect our school context
and curriculum specifics (IB).
None previously available

Rebecca and
School
Council
Rebecca,
Deirdre,
Kristen

No formal took in use.

Full teaching

Originally adopted in 2010 and are a

None previously available. Derived from

PTC document (check source).

Key
Documents

Last
Review

Collaboration

retreat

Core Values
and
Aspirational
Values
Teacher
Handbook

2013
retreat

Rationale for Review

Who was
involved

years to account for turnover of

staff, etc.
Core values were developed by
long-term VIS teaching staff and
aspirational by new staff (less
than 2 years).
Instead of a manual, they are
given a table of Decision Makers
This identifies where teachers
should go with questions. The
term Decision Makers refers to
who has the authority to give a
final answer to a particular
question.

staff

Annually

Changes in MYP criteria have

mandated changes to report.

Deirdre in
response to
external req.

PYP Progress
Report

2012

PYP team

Governance
Manual

2014 with
some
additions
in process

Changes in final progress report

will reflect revision of
benchmarks. Also, parents will
require training on MB
The table of contents was pulled
from AISH archive. School
documents were collected and
gaps were filled in (ex. Finance
section). Minor recs from SC will

Other
MYP Progress
Report

2012

Full teaching
staff

Background notes

helpful reminder of how we work

together.
VIS experienced a significant influx of
new staff and a simultaneous move to
a new MYP building in 2013.

Rebecca and Handbook was reconceived due to the

all interested fact that no one refers to it. During
teachers
new staff orientation teachers are
walked through the school
procedures. The Desion Maker table
needs to be updated to reflect
changes in org. structure.

Rebecca
School
Council
Meeting of
Stakeholders

VIS moved to an ongoing assessment

using ManageBac and produces one
final report card in Summer as an exit
doc.
Ultimately, we would like to move to
ongoing assessment using
ManageBac.
Stakeholders: Torben, Liisa, and
School Council: Leda, Egle, Marius,
Deirdre and Nicolas provided
comments which were incorporated
by Director. Final draft approved April

Key
Documents

Last
Review

Definition of
Patriotism

2011

Definition of
Internationali
sm

F 2014
staff
retreat

Mission/Vision

2004 /
2010
minor
review
every two
years
2009

PTA By-laws

School
Services
Agreement

2012

By-laws

2012

Rationale for Review

be added this summer

Without an explicit definition of
what it means to be a patriot we
can find ourselves amidst
nationalists.

Who was
involved

Grade 5
class and
Rebecca

Background notes

2014
Celebration of Lithuanian
Independence day is done in a
conceptual manner so that all
students can participate in a
meaningful way
Effectively fighting the 3 Fs.

Staff has developed this in

tongue in cheek exercises, but
we aim to create criteria that we
can use in events, etc.
The review and approval of the
Governance Manual has shed light
on the possible need to reconsider
the vision .

Teaching
staff

Founders,
past PYP
team, minor
reviews
ongoing

Minor word-smithing has been on-going

Mission has been revisited with teaching
staff, and parents every second year.

Document fine as is. It serves to

remind parents that they are not a
lobbying organization, but a
support network.
Language was strengthened to
allow VIS to pursue outstanding
debts with vigor and to expel or
fail to renew the agreement with
students for bullying.
Meeting of Stakeholders initiated
changes minor changes in
document. Initial interest

Rebecca,
Liisa, former
PTA
president
Rebecca,
Vytas, Daiva
(lawyer)

Based on document shared by ISE

Liisa, Liza,
Rebecca,
Daiva

Liisa Gravesen sought to ensure that VIS

by-laws are consistent with Lithuanian
law on non-profits. . This was confirmed

Legal issues with parents have

necessitated review. Tuition increases
require an addendum, but not a full
revision.

Key
Documents

Last
Review

Rationale for Review

stemmed from a desire to confirm

roles and responsibilities.

Who was
involved
Filonova

Background notes

by AAA Legal Services (Daiva Filonava

attorney).