Model Lyceum (practice school)
The school's published assessment, in full.
Cycle 2 · Confirmed 9/20/2026 · published 9/22/2026 · Instrument: Annex A v3
The school’s digital profile
A1 — Participatory strategic planning
Well-defined goals and action plans based on a critical assessment of the school’s current state, aligned with the national digital-transformation strategy.
Level 3 — Process redesign
Detailed strategic and action plan with input from many teachers, students and parents; ≥50% of staff aware and regularly contributing; plan drives equipment, budget and hiring decisions.
Evidence
- Minutes no. 4 / 12.09.2026 — Development strategy 2026–2030, approved by the pedagogical council
A2 — Data-informed decision making
Strategic and operational decisions are based on systematic data collection and analysis.
Level 2 — Initial coordination
Leadership promotes data-based decisions for differentiation, personalised support, resource and incident management.
Evidence
- Recorded in the team’s working notes
A3 — Learning organisation and knowledge sharing
Collecting and sharing best practice; analysing experience and incidents to revise plans and routines.
Level 3 — Process redesign
Leadership takes the lead, organises monthly experience exchanges tied to the development plan; documented and periodically summarised.
Evidence
- Recorded in the team’s working notes
A4 — Monitoring and evaluation
Use of metrics, data-collection tools and the action plan to regularly analyse and monitor digital-transformation progress.
Level 1 — Accidental
Data collected only as much/rarely as required by the state; analysed only for formal reporting, with no resulting decisions or plan changes.
No evidence recorded for this parameter.
A5 — Leadership support and motivation
Leadership’s active support and motivation of staff implementing digital innovation.
Level 2 — Initial coordination
Leadership encourages teachers, supports pioneers with praise and public recognition.
Evidence
- Recorded in the team’s working notes
B1 — Integrated STEAM / interdisciplinary project-based learning
Pedagogical change toward creative, collaborative, cross-disciplinary, real-world-problem-based learning.
Level 3 — Process redesign
Interdisciplinary, project-based teaching becomes a regular practice for a substantial share of staff.
Evidence
- Head teacher’s file — Lesson observation records from the autumn term
B2 — Changing teacher and student roles
Shift toward a collegial culture: co-planning, cross-discipline integration, peer lesson observation and feedback, team teaching; students contributing to planning and materials.
Level 2 — Initial coordination
A growing minority engage in collaborative teaching activities.
Evidence
- Recorded in the team’s working notes
B3 — Learner-centred assessment
Formative, diagnostic and summative assessment centred on the learner; personalised feedback; self- and peer-assessment.
Level 2 — Initial coordination
Sometimes promoted or coordinated by leadership.
Evidence
- Recorded in the team’s working notes
B4 — Structural changes in curriculum, scheduling, and learning spaces
Systemic, permanent changes to curriculum, scheduling, and learning-space design inspired by new pedagogies (blended learning, project days, outdoor learning, repurposed spaces).
Level 3 — Process redesign
Leadership promotes, monitors and organises sharing of experience.
Evidence
- Recorded in the team’s working notes
B5 — Pedagogical use of digital resources and AI tools in teaching and learning
Whether digital tools and AI applications are used to genuinely enhance pedagogy — not merely accessed (Domain D) and not merely a competence the teacher holds (Domain C), but deployed in lesson design, delivery and learner engagement.
Level 1 — Accidental
Digital tools used occasionally, mainly for presentation or projection; no AI tools used in teaching; no coordination of practice.
No evidence recorded for this parameter.
C1 — Teachers’ digital competence
Teachers’ ability to meaningfully use digital technology to support innovative pedagogy, aligned with DigCompEdu.
Level 2 — Initial coordination
A baseline of certified teachers is established.
Evidence
- Training register — Attendance list from the February in-house training
C2 — Learners’ digital competence
Students’ digital competence, aligned with DigComp 3.0: information and data literacy, communication and collaboration, content creation, safety, problem-solving.
Level 2 — Initial coordination
Some subjects beyond Educația digitală begin addressing it, without cross-subject coordination.
Evidence
- Recorded in the team’s working notes
C3 — Structured professional development, mentoring and coaching capacity
Whether the school has internal mechanisms — not just access to external training — that sustain digital-competence growth among staff, including DigiProf-B/-C uptake and internal “teacher teaches teacher” practice.
not rated yet
C4 — AI literacy and emerging-technology competence
Staff and student understanding of AI systems, their capabilities and limitations, ethical use, and emerging technologies beyond current curricular requirements.
not rated yet
D1 — Network and digital security
Network quality and digital security, anchored to Order 675/2024 Annex 5’s mandatory standards as the binding floor.
Level 1 — Accidental
Meets the minimum floor, but coverage and usage are poorly coordinated: subnets may exist on paper, but management is ad hoc and no one tracks incidents.
No evidence recorded for this parameter.
D2 — Digital devices
Access to modern digital devices for staff and students, anchored to Order 675/2024 Annexes 1, 2 and 4 as the binding floor.
Level 1 — Accidental
Meets the quota and spec minimums; devices are present but used mainly as projection tools, or sit idle outside a few classrooms; no borrowing rules or usage tracking.
No evidence recorded for this parameter.
D3 — IT management
Planning, periodic resource and security analysis, and strategic development of the school’s IT function.
Level 2 — Initial coordination
School has an IT manager (internal or outsourced) responsible for planning; the development plan includes an IT section used for the annual IT budget.
Evidence
- Recorded in the team’s working notes
D4 — User support
Quality of IT and educational-technology user support, including staff satisfaction.
Level 0 — Below floor
Staff or students experiencing IT problems have no recourse of any kind — not even informal self-help.
No evidence recorded for this parameter.
D5 — Software, digital services, and information systems
Systematic use and development of educational and administrative software, digital services and information systems; movement toward interoperable, cloud-based solutions.
not rated yet
Domains at a glance
| Domain | Average level | Rated |
|---|---|---|
| A — Leadership, Governance and Change Management · strongest | 2.2 | 5/5 |
| B — Teaching, Learning and Assessment · strongest | 2.2 | 5/5 |
| C — Human Capacity and Digital Competence | 2.0 | 2/4 |
| D — Infrastructure, Platforms and Digital Ecosystem · weakest | 1.0 | 4/5 |
Minimum equipment/network quantities (Order 675): NOT YET MET
D1 — Network checklist: NON-COMPLIANT (≥2–3 separated, password-protected subnets (administration/teachers, students, guest); Content filtering for the student network)
D2 — Order 675 quantitative equipment check: NON-COMPLIANT (Classroom PCs/laptops (≥50% of classrooms equipped): 7/12; Interactive panels (1 per equipped classroom): 6/12; IT-room PCs (3 room(s) × 15): 14/45; Methodical-centre PCs/laptops: 2/3)
Domain A — Leadership, Governance and Change Management
| Indicator | Level | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| A1 — Participatory strategic planning |
3 — Process redesign
Grew |
|
| A2 — Data-informed decision making | 2 — Initial coordination |
|
| A3 — Learning organisation and knowledge sharing | 3 — Process redesign |
|
| A4 — Monitoring and evaluation |
1 — Accidental
Grew |
— |
| A5 — Leadership support and motivation | 2 — Initial coordination |
|
Domain B — Teaching, Learning and Assessment
| Indicator | Level | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| B1 — Integrated STEAM / interdisciplinary project-based learning | 3 — Process redesign |
|
| B2 — Changing teacher and student roles |
2 — Initial coordination
Grew |
|
| B3 — Learner-centred assessment | 2 — Initial coordination |
|
| B4 — Structural changes in curriculum, scheduling, and learning spaces | 3 — Process redesign |
|
| B5 — Pedagogical use of digital resources and AI tools in teaching and learning |
1 — Accidental
Grew |
— |
Domain C — Human Capacity and Digital Competence
| Indicator | Level | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| C1 — Teachers’ digital competence | 2 — Initial coordination |
|
| C2 — Learners’ digital competence | 2 — Initial coordination |
|
| C3 — Structured professional development, mentoring and coaching capacity | — | — |
| C4 — AI literacy and emerging-technology competence | — | — |
Domain D — Infrastructure, Platforms and Digital Ecosystem
| Indicator | Level | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| D1 — Network and digital security | 1 — Accidental | — |
| D2 — Digital devices |
1 — Accidental
Grew |
— |
| D3 — IT management | 2 — Initial coordination |
|
| D4 — User support | 0 — Below floor | — |
| D5 — Software, digital services, and information systems | — | — |