Teacher preparation for a school visit
We are preparing visits to 12 schools. Please help us understand how you teach, support pupils, prepare records and review progress. Bring existing materials; the project recorder can fill the form with you. School staff review the description before it is treated as confirmed.
What to have ready
- A school calendar and the current instruction showing which report is due, for which school year, to whom and through which system.
- One blank form used for an individual education plan (IEP), support summary or review, plus a blank report-card layout if relevant. Tell us which version your school actually uses.
- A safe walkthrough of one recently completed task, from the first information request to checking, approval, printing and submission.
- The colleague who knows the process: ideally a special educational needs coordinator (SENCO)/support-team member and a teacher who supplies or uses the information. Invite an administrator/IT colleague only for relevant handovers.
How to answer
Describe the last real occasion. Say who did what, using which file or screen, and how you know. “Not known”, “not used” and “sources disagree” are useful answers. Estimates should name the unit and period, such as minutes per review; label them as estimates.
Use blank forms or examples with identifying details removed. For this workflow visit, pupil names, identification numbers, diagnostic reports and account passwords are not needed. Ask before copying a document, taking a screenshot or recording. [S5, S7]
After the visit, check the school-only draft supplied by the team. Correct factual wording, distinguish school deadlines from EDB deadlines, and identify what still needs checking. A different colleague may confirm the part they know.
Information to collect from every school
Use the same questions across 12 schools, while keeping each school’s actual terminology and exceptions. Record school phase, sector, school year, visit date, respondent role/code and recorder first. The school list and visit dates remain to be assigned.
| Louisa item | Ask for the actual practice | Evidence reference |
|---|---|---|
| a IEPs assessments list | Which pupils/documents, school year, required copies and recipient? Check applicability before using 30 November. | Current return instruction and blank form |
| b c d Report cards | How many terms? Issue date, internal collection date, fields, approval and actual transfer step for each term. | Calendar blank layout exact screen |
| e IEP progress | When are goals reviewed, by whom, against which criteria, and how are parent/pupil views recorded? | Blank IEP review section and schedule |
| f Year end review | Is this an individual pupil review or a school-level review? Capture exact title and purpose separately. | Blank form title school year version |
| g Grant reporting | Which grant, school type, year, report, approver and submission channel? Check the 2026/27 changes. | Applicable current circular or school notice |
Systems and handovers
For each actual system, capture its exact screen name, module, fields used, original information source, export/import format and manual copying. Keep CloudSAMS, SEMIS, vendor products and Excel distinct. An export file does not prove that two systems can exchange information automatically. [S9]
Trace all six roles: provide → enter/consolidate → check → approve → print if used → upload if used. At each step record the person/role, input, output, method, next recipient and how a correction is returned. A role may cover several steps. [S0]
A guided visit and a usable evidence note
Suggested 60-minute session, to agree with the school: 5 minutes for purpose/material permissions; 15 for a recent task; 15 for records and dates; 15 for systems and responsibilities; 10 for read-back and next steps. Reuse existing meetings where practical. Pilot with the first school and adjust confusing wording; retain a version and change log. [S6]
Questions that invite facts
- Q1 Please take us through the last time you prepared this record. What triggered it, and what did you open first?
- Q2 Which information was already available, and which did you request again? Can you show a blank example?
- Q3 What happens when a teacher corrects a value after review? Who updates the other copies?
- Q4 Which step took effort last time? What is the amount per task, over which period, and is it timed, counted or recalled?
- Q5 Where do teachers already notice strengths, interests or progress beyond grades, including ordinary/middle-attaining pupils? What opportunity followed?
- Q6 Which single useful output would help? How would you check its accuracy and the total effort across teacher, SENCO and administrator?
Keep observation and interpretation separate
Fictional example EV01: During a blank-form demonstration, the recorder saw three fields copied from Excel to Word. The teacher estimated 20 minutes per review; no timer was used. Source: demonstration step 3 and teacher account. Possible interpretation: duplicate entry may create work. Proposed change: test reuse of those fields. Neither a time saving nor a validated finding has been established.
For each useful example record: date/context, role/code, what happened, support/prompt actually provided, observable response/output, exact source, evidence type, checker and correction history. Keep missing information missing. Existing pupil work can explain the workflow without collecting identifiable pupil records.
Verified references and school specific checks
F01 EDB’s reference collection lists separate support registers, IEPs, support summaries, and individual and school-level year-end reviews. Ask for the exact form and version used at this school. [S1]
F02 The September 2026 guide says IEP effectiveness should be assessed at least twice a year, more often where necessary. This does not establish a universal 30 November IEP progress-review date. [S2 §3.1.3, printed p 16]
F03 For the applicable Learning Support Grant (LSG) arrangements,30 November concerns student information returns and relevant supporting copies; 31 August concerns the school-level year-end evaluation through SEMIS. Confirm school type, year, documents and any current EDB notice. Term-report dates remain school-specific. [S3 paras 8, 27 and Appendix 1]
F04 Reference IEP and individual review forms include strengths/interests or non-academic development. Ask where such evidence already lives; do not infer gifted identification, diagnosis or intervention effectiveness from a visit example. [S4a pp 1–2; S4b p 3]
F05 From 2026/27 the Composite Support Grant for Non-Chinese Speaking (NCS) Students combines the two former NCS support grants. For item g, confirm the grant and year before reusing older forms. [S8 paras 2–5, 22]
F06 CloudSAMS and SEMIS are distinct named EDB systems. Retain the school’s wording, then verify the screen/module and data route; “Simis” in notes is not sufficient identification. [S2 §9.2; S9]
These are reference checks, not findings about the 12 schools. For each date keep four values distinct: school year, external due date, internal collection date and evidence/version. A claim of automatic transfer needs a demonstrated route and its limitations.
When a school visit is finished
Use the stages below as a proposed coordination rule for Michael. The visit itself, a complete record and school confirmation are different milestones. The app records evidence states and versions; it does not independently verify facts.
| Stage | Human completion check | App or tracker action |
|---|---|---|
| D0 Prepare | Confirm school/phase/year, contact role, visit arrangement, applicable sources and materials. | Coordinate outside the form; leave unassigned fields blank. |
| D1 Record | Record what was covered, with sources and unknowns. Account for all a–g rows, systems and six roles. | Save draft; partial records are allowed. |
| D2 Discuss | School, visit date and recorder entered; unresolved points visible with a next action. | Save for meeting review; export the saved version. |
| D3 Check | Review sources, coverage and applicability; resolve conflicting entries and check critical facts. Keep reported statements labelled. | Record cross-check when its field rules pass. This does not require every row to be source-verified. |
| D4 Close visit | School read-back/corrections recorded; no critical question outstanding; required follow-ups finished or an agreed exclusion documented. | Manual tracker sign-off, with reviewer/date/version. No automatic closed-visit badge is implemented. |
Cross checking and corrections
Compare teacher account with an existing blank form/instruction or a second colleague’s relevant knowledge. If sources disagree, retain both and assign a question; do not average them or choose the convenient value. Changing checked content can invalidate the earlier check and school confirmation.
Before closing, ask the school: Does this describe your practice? Which dates are internal or external? Which corrections remain? Every follow-up needs a question, owner role, agreed target date when known and closure evidence. School confirmation does not approve product scope or establish a validated research finding.
Michael coordination sheet for 12 schools
Planning slots only. Keep SCH01–SCH12 and add the confirmed school names later; these rows are not visited schools or live app records. Keep school-level counts separate from the number of teachers or interviews. Record D0–D4 and the saved VISIT ID/version when known.
| Slot | School phase year | Visit date and stage | Record version and checker | School read back and next action |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SCH01 | ________ | ________ | ________ | ________ |
| SCH02 | ________ | ________ | ________ | ________ |
| SCH03 | ________ | ________ | ________ | ________ |
| SCH04 | ________ | ________ | ________ | ________ |
| SCH05 | ________ | ________ | ________ | ________ |
| SCH06 | ________ | ________ | ________ | ________ |
| SCH07 | ________ | ________ | ________ | ________ |
| SCH08 | ________ | ________ | ________ | ________ |
| SCH09 | ________ | ________ | ________ | ________ |
| SCH10 | ________ | ________ | ________ | ________ |
| SCH11 | ________ | ________ | ________ | ________ |
| SCH12 | ________ | ________ | ________ | ________ |
Use the 12 visits consistently
After each visit check coverage against P2 and log issues before the next visit. A practical proposed review sequence is after schools 1, 4, 8 and 12; dates and assignees remain open. Keep core questions stable and log revised wording, so later comparisons preserve context.
Compare tasks, fields, handovers, exceptions and desired outputs. Report the denominator: for example, schools answering a question, not automatically all 12. Missing/not asked/not applicable differ. Twelve selected schools do not by themselves establish Hong Kong-wide prevalence or research validity.
Team members can fill the existing app with the teacher and supply a school-only Word/PDF for review. Current app roles apply to the whole workspace; do not treat them as school-specific teacher access. Word edits do not import automatically. Research participation, reuse, institutional roles and outcome measures need separate agreement.
Sources and decisions before the visits
References checked on 3 November 2026. Official facts, proposed visit arrangements and school-specific answers must retain their separate status. Use the current school notice where a date or form differs, and record the discrepancy for checking.
S0 Louisa school visit checklist
Sections 1–3; a–g reporting rows; five staff questions and six-step workflow including print/upload.
S1 EDB SENSE common forms
Items 1–10 and school-type variants.
S2 EDB integrated education guide September 2026
§3.1.3 printed pp 14–16 (PDF 20–22); §9.2 printed pp 76–78 (PDF 82–84). Chinese edition also checked.
S3 EDB Circular 6/2019 updated 22 June 2026
Scope p 1; para 8 p 5; para 27 p 10; Appendix 1 p 12. DSS arrangements differ; verify the applicable instructions.
S4a EDB blank IEP reference
pp 1–2 strengths/interests, goals, implementation and criteria; p 3 review.
S4b EDB individual primary pupil year end review
p 3 §3.2.4 non-academic development. Use the secondary variant where applicable.
S5 PCPD data protection principles overview
DPP1 necessary/proportionate collection and purpose notice; DPP2 accuracy/retention; DPP3 use. The visit’s minimal collection is a project recommendation.
S6 GOV UK guidance on interviews
Design the interview; do the interview; after the interview. Method reference, not Hong Kong school policy.
S7 GOV UK guidance on notes and recordings
Privacy and consent; what to record; collecting materials.
S8 EDB Circular 4/2026 NCS composite grant
Paras 2–5 merger from 2026/27; para 22 earlier grant balances.
S9 Hong Kong Government smart campus response
15 July 2026 response part 2 on CloudSAMS; SEMIS name cross-checked in S2 §9.2.
Before scheduling, agree: the 12-school list and phase/sector mix; contacts and interview arrangements; who records/checks/obtains read-back; permitted material handling, recipients, retention and correction contact; and the criterion for closing each visit. No visit dates, named assignments or response deadlines are committed by this pack.