creating a new vision for public education in texas (from tasa)

7/31/2019 Creating a New Vision for Public Education in Texas (from TASA)

1/36

Creating a New Vision forPublic Education in Texas

A Work in Progressor Conversation

and Further Development

Respectully Oered bySuperintendent Participants in the

Public Education Visioning Institute


2/36


3/36

i

Creating a New Vision forPublic Education in Texas

A Work in Progressor Conversation and Further Development

Respectully Oered by Superintendent Participantsin the Public Education Visioning Institute

Texas Association o School Administrators406 East 11th Street

Austin, TX 78701-2617

512-477-63611-800-725 TASA (8272)

May 2008Austin, Texas

2008 by Texas Association o School Administrators/Texas Leadership Center. All rights reserved. Permission

is granted to duplicate all or portions o this document, provided that appropriate credit is given to TASA/Texas

Leadership Center.

TEXASLEADERSHIP

CENTER


4/36

ii

Acknowledgements

We extend thanks and appreciation to the ollowing:

OurDesignTeam,whodevelopedthestructureoftheinitialdesignoftheseriesofmeetingsandspeakersand,withourinput,structuredeachsuccessivesession.Design

TeammembersincludedCathyBryce,TomCrowe,AnnetteGrifn,DougOtto,JeffTurner,FrankKelly,LennieHay,JohnHorn,KeithSockwell,SusanHolley,andJohnnyVeselka.

Ourguestspeakerswhostimulatedourthinking.

Ourleadfacilitatorandcoordinatorforwritingthisreport,JohnHorn;alongwithKarenAnderson,whoassistedwithfacilitationinthenalcriticalsessions;andSusanHolley,RozKeck,andBettyJoMonk,whoalsohelpedwiththereport.

Ourco-sponsors:theTexasAssociationofSchoolAdministrators;theTexasLeadershipCenter;KeithSockwell,whoconceivedoftheinitiative;andtheSHWGroup,whichprovided nancial support.

Ourschoolboardsanddistrictsthatsupportedourparticipation.

For more inormation, contact:

Johnny VeselkaExecutiveDirector,TexasAssociationofSchoolAdministrators [email protected]

Susan HolleyAssociateExecutiveDirector,TexasAssociationofSchoolAdministrators [email protected]

John HornSenior Associate, Schlechty Center or Leadership in School [email protected]

Keith SockwellChie Executive Ocer, Cambridge Strategic [email protected]

Frank S. KellyDirectorofEducationalFacilitiesPlanning,[email protected]

Je Turner

Superintendent,[email protected]


5/36

iii

Table o Contents

Introduction ...................................................................................................................................1

UseofThisDocument....................................................................................................................1

Major Conceptual Themes .............................................................................................................2

The Vision ......................................................................................................................................4

Transormed Systems or Making the Vision Reality ......................................................................5

A Moral Imperative: Why We as Public Education Leaders Must Speak and Act Now ...................7

OurDeclarationofCommitment .................................................................................................11

Principles and Premises We Embrace ............................................................................................12

Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 12

ArticleI: TheNewDigitalLearningEnvironment................................................... 13

Article II: The New Learning Standards ................................................................... 14

Article III: Assessments or Learning ......................................................................... 15

Article IV: Accountability or Learning ..................................................................... 17

Article V: Organizational Transormation ................................................................ 19

Article VI: A More Balanced and Reinvigorated State/Local Partnership ................... 21

Legislative Initiatives Required .................................................................................................... 22

Appendix A

The Story Behind the Visioning Institute .......................................................................... 23

Appendix B

Meetings, Topics, and Participants ................................................................................... 26

Our Purpose .....................................................................................................................26

The Schedule/Topics/Resource Speakers ...........................................................................27

Participating Superintendents ...........................................................................................28


6/36

iv


7/36

1

Introduction

The Public Education Visioning Institute was born rom the work and ideas o thirty-ve public

school superintendents who came together as a community o learners to create a new vision or

public education in Texas. As the representatives o over 1.2 million students, we who were part o

that group were rustrated with the present direction, but realized no clear picture was availableto rame a conversation regarding a preerred uture. We were also concerned that the principal

architects o the present system are politicians, business leaders, and their policy advisorsnot

superintendents, not principals, not teachers, and not parents or school board members. Educators

and parents have vital contributions to make and their insights and commitments should be

utilized. We knew it was time to begin a new and dierent kind o dialogue. We also elt that the

only meaningul way to address the issues and challenge underlying assumptions was to dene

and express a vision, based on relevant belies, principles, and premises.

The Visioning Institute held its rst o eight workshops on September 6-7, 2006. That rst

workshop ocused on examining the culture and structure needed in schools to meet the needs o

learners in a more global environment with attendant new expectations. Subsequent workshops

held in 2007 explored moral and intellectual leadership, the nature o the uture learner,

assessment systems and accountability mechanisms, and more innovative ways to use resources.

We believe the work accomplished over the last 21 months o learning and intense dialogue has

made us better leaders. It is our sincere hope that it will inspire others toward the common goal o

making public schools better or all Texas children.

Use o This Document

We perceive this document as a work in progress describing what we believe and the

possibilities we see or the uture o public education. It should be viewed as a basic resource orall who want to join this conversation, urther develop these ideas, and bring to ruition the results

it envisions.

Our urgent desire is that this document be used to begin disciplined dialogue, stimulate questions,

identiy problems, and rame issues that will eventually lead to strategic actions at the local level

and in governmental capitols. Our intent is or it to serve as a catalyst or the development o

specialized publications, presentations, and legislative testimony.

These statements o principle and supporting premises urnish the oundation or developing

an understanding and commitment to a shared set o values and a common vision or public

education in Texas, our public schools, and their success on which our democracy depends. We

propose these to serve as a stimulus or conversations that will result in renements and revisionsrom our colleagues, local communities, and other interested persons and organizations. This

work can be used to create a community-based, bottom-up movement capitalizing on new and

existing alliances with proessional organizations, local business leaders, and similar groups. To

quote author Margaret Wheatly, All great things begin with a conversation between two people.

We are committed to seeing that the conversations continue and that the transormations we seek

become a reality.


8/36

2

Major Conceptual Themes

Why a New Direction and Why Now

Every parent has a dream that their children will be happy and successul. Our communities and

the schools that serve them should equally share in that dream and have a plan or making thatdream a reality. Preparing students or success in the workorce is secondary to preparing children

or success in lie. The core business o schools is to provide engaging, appropriate experiences or

students so that they learn and are able to apply their knowledge in ways that will enrich their

lives and ensure their well-being. Unortunately, the present bureaucratic structure has taken away

that ocus and replaced it with a system based on compliance, coercion, and ear. I proper ocus

is to be restored, the system must be transormed into one based on trust, shared values, creativity,

innovation, and respect.

Engaging the Digital Generation

In todays digital world, most students come to school computer and technology savvy. With

their iPods, iPhones, computer games, MySpace pages, and text messaging, they routinely usemultimedia and internet resources in their daily lives. Technology development has also resulted

in widespread change in the way students learn. To keep students ully engaged, schools must

adapt to this new and rapidly changing environment. They must embrace the potential o new

technologies and make optimum use o the digital devices and connections that are prevalent

today to make learning vibrant and stimulating or all.

New Learning Standards or a New Era

A transormed system that meets the diverse needs o students in a digital environment demands

new learning standards. Standards should refect the realities o the age and recognize that

students are not just consumers o knowledge, they can be creators o knowledge as well.

Standards should ocus on development o the whole person, tapping curiosity and imagination,

and providing opportunities or all talents to be cultivated, nurtured, and valued.

From Misuse o Standardized Tests to Unleashing the Power o Assessment

Assessment should inorm accountability, but the present practice o one-shot, high-stakes

assessment has ailed the test. Appropriate and varied assessment using multiple tools or dierent

purposes inorms students, parents, the school, the district and the community about the extent

to which desired learning is occurring and what schools are doing to improve. For assessment

to be o any value, it must move rom the present autopsy model to one that more resembles

a daily check up, which continuously identies student strengths, interests, motivations,

accomplishments, and other inormation necessary so that teachers can design the learningexperiences that will best meet each students needs.

Accountability that Inspires

Accountability systems o themselves do not produce excellence. Excellence can only come rom

commitment and meaning. The present accountability system has created schools in which the

curriculum is narrowed and only academic abilities are valued. Students become expert test takers

butcannotretainorapplywhattheyknowinacontextotherthanthetestenvironment;and


9/36

3

creativity, problem solving, and teamwork are stifed. The punitive approach and reeree model

embraced by that system have hindered the success o students and schools. A more appropriate

coaching model is needed to transorm the system into one that inspires and stimulates.

Transorming our Schools rom Bureaucracies to Learning Organizations

Bureaucracies value power and authority, while learning organizations are driven by belies andvalues. Schools must be transormed rom their current bureaucratic orm, characterized by rules

and sanctions, punitive accountability systems, routines, and standardization o everything, to

learning organizations where only the mundane is standardized and standards are used to nurture

aspirations and accommodate human variables. Learning organizations maintain a clear sense

o doing the right thing and doing it well, shared commitments and belies, common purpose

and vision, trust, accountability, and use o standards to inspire. Bureaucracies discourage and

are disruptive to innovation and cannot create the dynamic conditions that oster superior

perormance o teachers and students. Learning organizations capture the learning o adults, share

it, and support its application so that capacities to improve student learning are extraordinary.

Saying No to Remote ControlThe shit in power in setting education policy rom the local community to the state and ederal

government has resulted in a system where schools eel more accountable to the Legislature

than to their students and their communities. The school districts role has been relegated to

one o compliance, and the local community has been denied the opportunity to make the more

important decisions and choices regarding the education o the children and youth who live there.

A more balanced and reinvigorated state-local partnership is needed to create the type o schools

that can best provide the learning experiences to help students succeed in todays world.


10/36

4

The Vision

We envision schools where all children succeed, eel sae and their curiosity is cultivated. We see

schools that oster a sense o belonging and community and that inspire collaboration. We see

learning standards that challenge, and intentionally designed experiences that delight students,

develop their condence and competence, and cause every child to value tasks that result inlearning. Ultimately, we see schools and related venues that prepare all children or many choices

and that give them the tools and attitudes to contribute to our democratic way o lie and live

successully in a rapidly changing world.

In this context we see:

Schoolsthataresafehavensforstudentsphysicallyandemotionally,wherestudentsandteachers eel liberated to develop and nurture the whole person.

Studentswhoareencouragedtocultivatetheircuriosityandwhorealizequestionsaresometimes more important than answers.

Aculturethatinspiresalltodotheirbestandacurriculumthatisrelevant,challenging,and meaningul.

Learningstandardsthatreectdevelopmentofthetotalrangeofstudentcapabilitiesand that enable students to acquire the knowledge, skills, and attitudes they need tosuccessully contribute to our democratic ideals and to compete in todays digitallyconnected world.

Highlearningstandardswithreasonablevariationtochallengeeverychildandmotivatehim or her to success.

Studentswhohaveaccesstothetoolsoftechnologyandwhovaluetheuseofthosetoolsin learning and communication.

Studentswhoowntheirlearning,whocanrememberwhattheylearned,andwhocanapply it wherever and whenever needed.

Studentswhoknowthatdevelopmentofalltheirtalentsisvaluedandfosteredbytheschool, their amilies, and the community at large, and who know saety nets and secondchances are there to help them succeed.

Multipleassessmentsthatassistintheongoinglearningprocessandthatserveasapositiveinfuence in motivating students to succeed.

Studentswhoarepreparedforlife,forpursuingfurthereducation,fortakingtherststepson their career paths, and recognizing all options open to them.


11/36

5

Transormed Systems or Making the Vision Reality

The schools we need are community-owned institutions. They are designed and established as

learning organizations, treating employees as knowledge workers and students as the primary

customers o knowledge work. They are ree o bureaucratic structures that inhibit multiple paths

to reaching goals. Reliance on compliance is minimized, and generating engagement throughcommitment is the primary means to achieving excellence. Leadership at all levels is honored and

developed. All operating systems have well-dened processes that are constantly being improved.

Attention o leaders is ocused on the dominant social systems that govern behavior, beginning

with those that clariy belies and direction, develop and transmit knowledge, and that provide

or recruitment and induction o all employees and students into the values and vision. The

evaluation, boundary, and authority systems are submissive to the directional system, allowing

or major innovations to fourish, new capacities to emerge, missions to be accomplished, and the

vision to be realized in an increasingly unpredictable world.

In this context we see:

Schoolsthatarekid-friendlyandsafe,withmultipleandvariedlearningspacesincorporating state-o-the-art technology, and possessing the capacity, in alliance with thecommunity, to meet the needs o all children and youth.

Schoolsthatarestaffedbycompetent,committedadultswhoaresupportedandappreciated, and who understand their rst priority is the children they serve.

Schoolsthatoperateinpartnershipwiththestate,whichprovidesadequatenancialresources in an equitable manner, establishes rameworks or learning standards, suppliestechnical support, and enables assessment and accountability systems that inorm thecommunity and the public about the quality o the schools and level o student success.

Schoolsthatfosterasenseofcommunity,wherelocalcitizensknowthattheschools

belong to them and they are responsible or the quality o education and creating thecommunity conditions in which great schools can fourish.

Aschoolgovernancestructurethatprovidessignicantinsulationfromdirectpoliticalcontrol and short-term political expediency, a structure in which the legislature is arbiterand source o only major state educational policy matters and does not involve itsel inminute decrees and directives or imposing one-size-ts-all regulations.

Schoolsthatsupportandinvestheavilyinthecontinuouslearninganddevelopmentofalltheir employees, with a ocus on substantive improvement, leading to enhanced studentsuccess.

Schoolswithleaderswhoserve,support,andensurethatstudentengagementisandremains the rst ocus.

Districtsthatenterandsustaincollaborativepartnershipswiththosewhoprepareteachers,ensuring that beginning teachers have had some eld experience to ready them or teachingin engagement-centered schools.

Districtsthatrecruit,induct,andpromoteteacherswholovelearningandkids,relishtheconditions in which they teach, work collaboratively, and see themselves as designers andleaders, along with their traditional roles as planners, presenters, and perormers.


12/36

6

Schoolswherestudentsadvancebasedontheirlearningandperformanceinsteadofseat time, courses are dominant over classes, and use o time and space is fexible andinnovative.

Assessmentprocessesthataredesignedtoinforminstructionintimelyways,honorstudenteedback, are comprehensive and air, and do not rely on a single standardized test or

important decisions. Schoolboardmemberswhoarefocusedonensuringthatthesystemisresponsiveto

student, sta, and community needs and that the common good o all students prevails.

Accountabilitysystemsthataredesignedtoinspireandthatarefoundedonhighexpectations, a sense o airness, trust, and complete condence in the measures employed.

Schoolsandcommunitiesthat,withstateandfederalsupport,transformthepresentbureaucratic institutions into organizations that recognize knowledge work as requiringdierent conditions within which sta and students can excel.

Acceptanceofthefactbyschoolsandcommunitiesthatthelackofsuccessofmanystudents today is less a problem o the students than o the systems that dene currentschools and the communities in which they unction.

Newlearningstandardsdictatingmajorchangesinhowschoolsareorganized,theassumptions and belies on which their culture and structure are based, meaning theactory model must give way to more fexible ways o achieving the standards.

Schoolsthatembracetheir(schoolboardmembers,inparticular)fundamentalroleinbuilding the communities needed or great schools.


13/36

7

A Moral Imperative:Why We as Public Education Leaders

Must Speak and Act Now

not to nd out new principles, or new arguments, never beore thought

o, not merely to say things which had never been said beore; but to place

beore mankind the common sense o the subject, in terms so plain and

rm as to command their assent, and to justiy ourselves in the independent

stand we are compelled to take. Neither aiming at originality o principle

or sentiment, nor yet copied rom any particular and previous writing, it

was intended to be an expression o the American mind, and to give to that

expression the proper tone and spirit called or by the occasion.

ThomasJeffersononthepurposeofwritingtheDeclarationofIndependence

TheframersoftheDeclarationofIndependenceprovidedinspirationforthismonumentaltaskwe

have elt compelled to undertake. While making no claim that this work is in any way comparable

to their epic accomplishment, we have used what they did to inspire us, as a metaphor to rame

ourownefforts,andtoreectourdeeplyheldbeliefintheassertionofThomasJeffersonthat

learning is essential to liberty.So in that sense, we, like them, nd that we can no longer keep quiet

and continue to endure the injustices the present bureaucratic school system is imposing on our

youth and their uture.

External orces are creating requirements or public education that are detrimental to children

and their teachers, as well as to the systems and communities in which they live and work, and,

ultimately, to our democratic way o lie. We assert that the major present reorm eorts, in spiteo some positive impacts, are resulting in a multitude o unintended negative consequences that ar

outweigh the benets.

We concur that major changes in our schools are needed, but we disagree with the present

direction and major assumptions and polices in place (and similar ones that are contemplated)

to achieve that end. Thereore, we assert that schools must be transormed based on a dierent

set o assumptions and belies i they are to accomplish their intended purpose in this new world

that is so dramatically dierent rom the nineteenth andearly twentieth century world in which

their basic orm and structure originated. This document refects our sources o discontent, but

more importantly it clearly conveys what we are or and declares our resolve to work toward the

transormations needed.

Our collective experience and our intensive study o what is happening in our schools and

communities lead us to conclude that the uture o public education is at risk and will not survive

i the present direction continues. It is time to redirect this concern, energy, eort, and support

or improvement to create a positive commitment to the education o our youth by transorming

systems that better meet the needs o 21st century learners.


14/36

8

Educating Our Youth: A Shared Responsibility

Thecreationofasystemofpubliceducationisaprimaryresponsibilityofthestate;however,the

operation o the system is a local unction. The present situation has been brought about by state

(and ederal policies) advancing the alse notion that education is a unction that can be directed

rom government capitols instead o rom the community. There is a huge dierence in the state

seeing itsel as having major responsibility or providing or school systems and assuming theauthority or operating those systems by remote control.

The state legislature seems to have orgotten that all independent school districts were created by

a vote o the people who lived in those districts. Those voters probably never conceived that the

day would come when the local districts they created would become little more than satellite state

agencies or enorcing regulations.

This shit in power has resulted in multiple layers o bureaucratic regulations that become more

onerous and complex with each governmental action. Government policymakers, in an eort

to correct what they perceived as ineciency and ineectiveness in public education, have over-

mandated and over-regulated the local unction. Multiple and largely punitive accountability

provisions were created to ensure compliance. Though this continual prolieration o prescriptiverules and requirements is probably well-intentioned, its impact on schools is inherently

counterproductive. Rather than ocusing eorts on student success, school districts have been

orced to behave like infexible and unresponsive bureaucracies, more accountable to policies set

by the government and their enorcement agencies than responsive to meeting the needs o their

students and the communities they serve.

Finally, this shit in power has stripped the local community o a sense o ownership o its schools

and denied its citizens the right and opportunity to make meaningul choices about the quality and

nature o education it desires or its youth.

We believe the present direction will not result in excellent schools or the properly educated

citizenry we need. The narrow ocus o state and ederal compliance systems does not promotethe ull range o students abilities that parents want and society needs. The voices o people in

our local communities are not being heard, which will ultimately result in diminished support and

involvement at a time when they are needed most.

Restoration o Local Authority

The local/state partnership in providing public education is ounded on a set o core values: equity,

adequacy, and liberty. Equity and adequacy are associated with the states responsibility to und

public education, while local control o decisions that matter is embedded in the concept o liberty.

The value o local control, however, has been superseded by the dominant value o state control.

In 1949, as a result o the Gilmer-Aikin Act, public education unding in Texas took a new turnand began a new commitment to quality and equity with the state providing the largest share o

operational costs. In contrast to recent times, the state set some standards but did not try to run

the schools. Today, the burden or nancing the schools has shited to the local level with most

nancial support coming rom local property taxes, while the authority to run the schools has

shited to the state, not unlike the plight o the original thirteen colonies. This over-reliance on

the local property tax orced the creation o a share the wealth system to correct equity issues,

urther straining the sense o local control and community ownership.


15/36

9

Similarly, the locus o control or educational policymaking was originally envisioned to be

centered in the local community. Today, students, teachers, administrators, parents, school boards,

other local residents, and businesses live the nightmare o state and ederal micromanagement.

New laws are thrust on schools and communities rom the state and ederal levels without

opportunity or signicant participation rom the local level, yet schools aithully implement the

biennial spate o new laws and rules. This stranglehold by the state is causing the tolerance levelo those most aected to reach a breaking point, resulting in unbearable levels o rustration,

particularly or students and teachers.

We believethe state is interested in quality local schools and that our responsibility as local

leaders is to work diligently within our own districts to improve, but we cannot in good

conscience advocate policies that interere with real improvements that are so badly needed.

We believe strongly in accountability, but accountability or the right things done in the right way

or the right purpose. We cannot support a system that relies on one-shot testing, pushes a myth

o objectivity, and punishes students and teachers based on alse conclusions about student success

and development.

We believe the state/local partnership should encourage community capacities to meet the needso the 21st century learner in ways that develop the ull range o a students abilities and talents.

We must restore the right o local communities to have a signicant say about what the learning

standards should be and how they are to be met and assessed.

The Federal Role: Less Control, More Support

In the context o shared responsibility, the role o the ederal government should become one

o research, support or solutions to major problems that transcend state and local boundaries,

dissemination o inormation, and protection o constitutional rights.

The ederal government has circumvented local and state authority by regulating many school

and classroom unctions over the past several decades. The No Child Let Behind(NCLB) Actgreatly accelerated this trend, and regardless o its intent, discretion o local school boards,

administrators, and teachers has been drastically diminished.

This has been done through a contractual arrangement, the terms o which exchange state and

local control or ederal dollars. The same legal scheme could be used to create a nationalized

system with nationally-mandated curriculum, assessments, and accountability mechanisms. This

approach, despite the national interest it portends to advance, will urther marginalize the sense o

local ownership, community, and responsibility and will signicantly reduce the local support and

community capacities needed to unction in optimum ways. It will, in act, result in the opposite o

what was probably intended. Schools must be allowed to unction in ways that build communities.

We believethat the urther removed rom the unction o local schools, amilies, and centers olearning the policymakers are, the greater the likelihood that special interests will prevail to the

exclusion o the voices o school leaders, communities, and amilies, orchestrated public hearings

notwithstanding. The schools cannot be run either eectively or eciently rom Washington any

more than rom Austin. Local schools and communities may not always unction as well as they

should, but removing their authority generally instead o specically is not the answer.


16/36

10

A New Vision and Direction Needed

We are compelled to oer a new vision that is based on our experience within our own

communities. We listen and continuously search or new knowledge and ways to help parents

realize their dreams or their children. What we envision comes directly rom the aspirations o

our citizens, parents, community leaders, students, teachers, and school board members who we

interact with every day. The uture we see is tempered by the insights and belies derived rom ourproessional judgment, experience, and what we have learned rom our communities and each

other. The voice we refect is a cry rom home or great schools and a better tomorrow or our

children.

We believe that certain premises, principles, and belies should drive a vision that is 21st century

in its character. We have articulated those principles in the section that ollows. A vision that

can rame the debates and conversations is needed to create the deeper understandings and

commitments o all who care about the uture. We have painted a picture o a dynamic vision o

learner success in a global, digital world and the organizational structures and supports necessary

to realize that vision. We have proposed some strategies or action as well.

We believe this endeavor will result in major changes in state policies and local practices, betterpublic education opportunities, and stronger communities. To bring about these changes, we will

engage citizens o the local communities and elected ocials in open and inormed conversations

ocused on the agendas contained in this document and the subsequent topics they will generate.


17/36

11

Our Declaration o Commitment

ThewritersofTheDeclarationofIndependenceexpressedtheirbeliefsonwhichtheirvisionof

the new nation was based. They also elt a responsibility to enumerate the wrongs that justied

their separation rom the tyrannical king and his parliament. We too, have shared our belies, and

a general description o the preerred uture we believe can and must be created.

The principles and premises we embrace are dened in this section. We think o these principles

on which the schools can be transormed, in a metaphorical sense, as analogous to the Articles o

Conederation and the United States Constitution. We know they do not rise to that magnitude

o importance or clarity o expression o the philosophical underpinnings o our great nation, but

we sincerely believe that moving in this new direction or educating the young is undamental to

the survival o the nation o the ree they envisioned and created. We see the Federalist Papers as

symbolic o the conversations or understanding that must be stimulated and provided or now.

We pledge ourselves to act on these belies, to pursue these ends, and to be willing to take the

personal and proessional risks required, or we do not believe the next generation will have the

opportunity open to us today. It is with that sense o responsibility and urgency that we take onthis enormous task, the rst o which is to invite those who may share our discontent and the

possibilities o our approach to join us in seeking understanding, in improving it, and in taking the

strategic actions necessary to begin and sustain this critical journey o transormation.


18/36

12

Principles and Premises We Embrace

Introduction

Belies Behind the Vision:

Belies create vision and drive action. Purpose-driven organizations are clear about what theybelieve, who they are, why they exist, what vision they seek to realize, and what missions they

must accomplish. The assertions we make here are the basis or our vision. They orm the

oundation or what we see or a new direction and uture or public education in Texas.

Importance o the Digital Revolution:

We believe that the new digital environment will have more impact on the generation and

transmission o knowledge than anything since the invention o the printing press. Like the mid-

teenth century scribes and monks who were suddenly conronted with new roles, leaders in

public education must adapt to these new realities or ace extinction. The current culture and

structure that prevail in most schools will not meet the needs o these new digital natives, norwill they result in the improved learning opportunities and engaging experiences our students

deserve.

Re-raming Required or Changing the Conversation:

We believe it is our duty to help rerame the problems and challenges o public education in this

new context. We oer these assertions to stimulate dierent conversations and to provide impetus

or legislative actions so that public education in Texas can take a new turn or a vibrant uture.

Bureaucratic Stranglehold/State Dominance Must Go:

We believe this transormational process must rescue schools rom the bureaucratic stranglehold

o over-regulation and the government-imposed and antiquated actory model that now ormstheir character. The state cannot have great schools and strong communities as long as it insists

on the real power and authority residing in Austin, or the long arm o control carries with it

the high cost o the very bureaucratic structures or compliance that render local schools and

communities incapable o responding to changing needs. A new, more balanced and re-invigorated

state/local partnership based on the principles embodied in this document can make Texas the

leader in which all can take great pride in the schoolspride in ownership and in a new sense o

community committed to the common good.


19/36

13

Article I: The New Digital Learning Environment

Statement of Principle

Digitization and miniaturization o inormation processing power are expanding exponentially

and are changing the world, our lives, and our communities at an overwhelming speed. To be

viable, schools must adapt to this new environment. We must embrace and seize technologys

potential to capture the hearts and minds o this, the rst digital generation, so that the work

designed or them is more engaging and respects their superior talents with digital devices and

connections.

Supporting Premises

We hold that:

Thetechnologiesthatmakethisnewdigitalworldpossiblemustbeviewedasopportunities and tools that can help us in educating and socializing the young both in andoutside the school.

Thevirtualsocial-networkconnectedandtech-savvygenerationwillnottoleratetheone-size-ts-all mass production structures that limit learning to particular times and placesand conventions.

Thepotentialoflearninganywhere,anytime,anypath,anypacemustbeembraced.Future learning will be a combination o learning at school, virtual learning, learning athome, and in the community.

Schoolsmustreachouttothosewhowouldeducateathomeorinsmallnetworksandwelcome their involvement in the school community.

Virtuallearningshouldbecomethenormineverycommunitytomeettheneedsof

students who preer such an environment.

Thesecondaryschoolcreditsystemshouldbeexpandedbeyondschoolwallssothatanyplace/any time learning, including virtual learning, are equally valued and supported.

We(families,schools,churches,youthorganizations,etc.)cannotcontrolaccesstoinormation by the young and recognize that once existing boundaries no longer exist.

Childrenandyouthneedrolemodelsandadultguidanceandconnectionsevenmorethanin the pre-digital era, but the role o adults is dierent, becoming one that is more aboutacilitating understanding, raising questions, and designing engaging tasks that producelearning than lecturing and instructing.

Schoolleaders,includingboardmembers,mustworktobringthepublicintoconversationsthat are needed not just to support these transormations but to help shape them andcreate ownership.


20/36

14

Article II: The New Learning Standards


The new digital environment demands new learning standards or students so that they will have

the values and the capabilities to live, learn, and earn in a ree society surrounded by a world that

is truly global, connected, and increasingly competitive in scope and character.

Supporting Premises

We hold that:

Standardsshouldbeclear,attainable,andhighenoughtoprovideforasystemofstudentperormance variance where all can experience success and challenge.

Learningshouldbespeciedtotheprofoundlevel,thatis,studentsareabletoapplytheir learning to new situations, to synthesize, solve problems, create knowledge, andcultivate and utilize the ull range o their capabilities.

Learningstandardsshouldembracedevelopmentofthewholepersontobuildstudentscapacity to shape their own destiny as individuals and as contributing members o society.

Standardsshouldrespectandvaluestudentsmultipleintelligencesandtalentsandprovide opportunities or all students to excel and experience success.

Standardsshouldtapcuriosityandimaginationinthetraditionalacademiccore,aesthetic,and skill areas in a way that lack o prociency in any one area does not discouragestudents rom recognizing and pursuing their special talents and learning in other areas.

Newlearningstandardsshouldreectrealitiesofthenewdigitalera,wherestudentsarenot just consumers o knowledge, but creators o knowledge.

Contentstandardsshouldserveasframeworksthatassistteachersandstudentsincreatinglearning experiences that motivate student success.

Standardsshouldbeexibleenoughtoprovideforexpansionandextensionbylocaldistricts and their communities.

Guidanceshouldbegiventoteachersdailyworksotheycanmakethecontentstandardsclear and compelling to their students or each unit o ocus.

Standardsshouldbeframedsotheydonotsacricetheprofoundlearningdesiredforeasyand low-cost state assessment and accountability measures.

Whencompetent,caringteachersprovideproperlydesignedlearningexperiencesininspiring social environments, all students will engage and can meet or exceed a reasonablevariance to the standards.

Standardsshouldresultinallstudentsbeingcommittedandequippedtobecompetentlietime learners, well-prepared or urther ormal education and to pursue multiplecareers.


21/36

15

Article III: Assessments or Learning


Appropriate and varied types o assessments are essential or inorming students about their

level o success in ways that arm and stimulate their eorts and or inorming their teachers so

that more customized learning experiences may be provided in a timely way. Well-conceived and

well-designed assessments should also be used to reveal to parents, the school, the district, and

society at large the extent to which the desired learning is occurring and what schools are doing to

continuously improve.

Supporting Premises

We hold that:

Assessmentsmustbeframedinasystemdevelopmentapproachtomeettheinformationneeds o all users o assessment results. The system must be balanced and refect at leastthree basic levels o assessment: the classroom level, with particular attention to the impact

oftheassessmentonthelearner;theprogramlevel,whichallowsevaluationofprogrameffectiveness;andtheinstitutionallevel,whichappropriatelyinformspolicymakers.

Assessmentsusedbyteachersarethemostcriticalforimprovinginstructionandstudentlearning, and to be eective must refect certain characteristics, be interpreted properly incontext, and reported clearly. Conducting good assessments is a part o the art and scienceo good teaching that results rom teacher experiences and ormal teacher proessionaldevelopment opportunities.

Assessmentshouldbeusedprimarilyforobtainingstudentfeedbackandinformingthestudent and the teacher about the level o student conceptual understanding or skilldevelopment so that the teacher has accurate inormation to consider or designing

additional or dierent learning experiences. Assessmentshouldbecontinuousandcomprehensiveusingmultipletools,rubrics,and

processes, and incorporate teacher judgments about student work and perormance as wellas the judgment o others, when needed.

Assessmentshouldnotbelimitedtonorevenrelysubstantiallyonstandardizedteststhatare primarily multiple-choice paper/pencil or on similar online instruments that can bemachine-scored.

Standardizedtestsshouldbeusedprimarilytoidentifyhard-to-learn/difcult-to-teachconcepts to dierentiate learning experiences and ocus attention on the more systemiccurricular issues involving student perormance. Assessments that rely exclusively

on quantiable inormation remove rom the teacher and school inormed judgmentprerogatives that are necessary to be timely and productive and deny the human aspect othe daily interactions teachers have with students and each other.

Assessmentshouldreectandencouragevirtuallearningandincorporatewaysofrecognizing its value and counting it as credit in meeting graduation requirements.


22/36

16

Reportsaboutstudentperformances,generatedasaresultofassessment,shouldinformstudents, parents, the school, and the greater community about how well students aredoing.

Samplingtechniquesinvolvingallstudentgroupsshouldbeemployedperiodicallytoevaluate programs and overall student progress. On occasion, community members or

other teachers who have particular expertise may observe student perormances andparticipate in protocols gauging the quality o student work products or examinations.

Thevoiceofstudentsshouldberespected,andtheirfeedbackshouldbesolicitedregardingtheir learning and their response to the tasks they are assigned.

Thevoiceofteachersshouldberespected,particularlywhattheyhavetosayaboutstudentperormance, curriculum development, and program evaluations.

Thevoiceofparentsshouldberespected,andtheyshouldbeinvolvedinfeedbackprocesses regarding the response o their children to tasks assigned as well as parentaldesire to do work at home that extends the learning.

Assessmentsforlearning,whentheyarevariedandcomprehensive,canalsofurnishimportant inormation in context as one actor among many in personnel appraisalsystems, in ascertaining the perormance levels o campuses and departments, and inmeasuring the impact o accountability systems on inspiring continuous improvement.


23/36

17

Article IV: Accountability or Learning


Comprehensive accountability systems are essential to achieving minimal personal and

organizational perormance only. They are necessary or weeding out the incompetent and

reconstituting unproductive schools, but such systems serve to create compliance and mediocrity

at best. Excellence and sustained exceptional perormance come rom a commitment to shared

values and a clear vision that encourages collaboration and teamwork. Creating organizations that

oster commitment requires superior moral leadership and a responsible use o authority.

We hold that:

Accountabilitysystemsshouldbecarefullydesignedonatheoreticalbasethathonorswhat teachers and students actually do, that empowers and builds integrity, trust, andcommitment to the values that dene the school.

Assessmentresultsandotherexamplesofworkproductsandperformancesofstudents

should be used as the primary inormation source or understanding where students areand what they need. These can also be used or reporting to parents and the public.

Accountabilitysystemsthatdrawonassessmentinformationexternaltotheclass,school,or district are important or internal condence in large systems and external condence inalldistricts.Descriptionsofthecontextsinwhichassessmentsaregivenshouldbeaparto reports. All parties should have some say in what measures are used and the weightsassigned to dierent measures.

Districtsshouldbeallowedtodesigntheirowninternalsystemsofassessmentforlearningand accountability, as long as they meet certain specied state standards.

Thoseforwhomtheaccountabilitymechanismsaretoapplymusthavecondenceand

trust that they are air and unbiased.

Samplingtechniques(thefullrangeofexaminations,evaluationofstudentworkproducts,and perormances as well as teacher tests and standardized tests) should be used in lieu otesting every child every year.

Processesshouldbeclearlydenedsotheycanbecontrolled,measured,andimproved.

Endresultsarenottheonlyresultsthatmatter,forsomeresultsaresetasgoalsthat,ifachieved rst, would enhance the end result.

Aneffectiveaccountabilitysystemhasmultiplemeasuresinplacethatprovideforcontinuingemployment,promotion,development,probationortermination;andrespects

the perspective that most people want to do a good job and want others to do a good job,as well.

Standardizedtests(includingcriterion-referencedtests)cannotmeasurewithprecisionproound learning.

Muchforwhichschoolsneedtobeaccountablewillrequiresubjectivemeasures,andthedecision about what and how to measure is admittedly one o the most subjective.


24/36

18

Accountabilitysystemsareguidedbythefactthattoattachanymatterhighlyvaluedby students, teachers, school leaders, or schools/districts to any single measure such asa standardized test, corrupts the test and the integrity o what it measures as well as theaccountability it was intended to provide.

Labelsforschoolsandparticularlythosethatusethelowestperformingunitasthe

basis or a punitive label should be avoided. There is a distinction between identiyingperormance gaps and labeling. Identication o perormance gaps enables schools tomove orward in designing dierent instructional strategies or approaches to help studentsachieve the learning desired.

Completetransparencyisarequisiteforhowalldataiscollected,analyzed,andreported,including the subjective, sometimes political, manner in which state prociency standardsare set on state tests, i such tests are to be used.

Amulti-yearcycleforperiodicdistrictandcampusperformancereviewsshouldbeestablished, using highly trained visiting teams to analyze a predetermined set o studentperormance inormation.

Assinglemeasurements,standardizednorm-referencedtests,criterion-referencedstatetests, aptitude tests, end-o-course exams, other oral and written examinations, studentperormances/projects/portolios, regular teacher assessments, and grades each give apieceofthepicture;andusedincombination,canprovideamoreholisticview.However,i a high-stakes standardized test is given a preponderance o weight, it will become theassessment that really counts, others notwithstanding.

Standardizedteststowhichhighstakesareattachedcanbecomesubstitutesforthelearning standards themselves and result in teaching to the test rather than teaching orattainment o the standard.

Consequences(sanctions)shouldbeassociatedwithaperformanceassessmentonly ithe assessment uses a combination o measures including sample examinations and otherstudent perormances to ascertain the degree to which the learning level is outside thevariance allowed.

Alternativeassessmentsincombinationsasindicatedinotherpremisesinthissectionshould be considered.


25/36

19

Article V: Organizational Transormation


The digital revolution and its accompanying social transormations and expectations dictate

a transormation o schools rom their current bureaucratic orm and structure that refects

the nineteenth and early twentieth century actory ater which they were modeled, to schools

that unction as learning organizations. We believe that a learning organization can create the

conditions and capacities most conducive or leaders, teachers, and students to perorm at high

levels and meet the expectations o new learning standards.

Supporting Premises

We hold that:

Excellenceemanatesfromasharedcommitmenttovaluesandstandards,highlevelsofengagement, and strong leadership at levels unctioning within an accountability systemthat inspires.

Theteachersmostimportantroleistobeadesignerofengagingexperiencesforstudents,supporting students in their work by incorporating more traditional roles as planner,presenter, instructor, and perormer.

Theoverallqualityofthepresentteachingforceisexcellent,andmostteachersarecapableand willing to take on their new designer role i their sense o moral purpose or enteringteaching is honored, and i they are provided relevant developmental opportunities and aclimate and conditions that support them.

Toattempttoincentivizeteacherswithmaterialrewardsforimprovingtestscoresisaninsult to teachers and iners that improvements in learning can be measured with precision.Such pay schemes should not be mandated by the state but let to the discretion o localdistricts.

Thecostlylossofsomanyteachersfromtheprofessionintherstthreetoveyearsofemployment is likely more a unction o the social systems and conditions that dominatemost schools than a lack o material rewards.

Districtswillhaveincreasingdifcultyinattractingexperiencedteacherstoteachinpoverty-stricken schools, and the overall teacher retention rate will decline even urtheri ederal and state bureaucratic controls continue excessive ocus on high stakesstandardized tests.

Leadershipdevelopmentatalllevels(teachers,included)mustbecomeaprimarymeansofbuilding needed capacities to unction in required new roles.

Studentsareinchargeofdeterminingwheretheirattention,effort,andcommitmentgo,andtheiraccesstoinformationgivesthemevenmorepower;hence,theymustbetreatedaccordingly.

Thevariationinstudentlearningisasmuchafunctionofstudenteffortasitisofability,meaning that we must incorporate into the tasks we design and assign to students thosequalities that will increase engagement.


26/36

20

Profoundlearning(owningtheknowledge)asopposedtosuperciallearning(short-termmemory) comes more rom engagement and commitment than rom various orms ocompliance, coercion, sanctions, or rewards.

Theuseoftootightlymonitoredcurriculumandascriptedapproachtoteachingtoensurecoverage o the material or the test instead o broad understandings o connected content

is a detriment to proound learning. Thedistrictisresponsibleforcreatingtheconditionsinwhichstudentcommitmentand

engagement become central and or attracting principals and teachers who can learn to useappropriate rameworks, protocols, processes, assessments, and resources in dierent waysin a collaborative setting.

Operatingandsocialsystemsexistinallorganizationsincludingschools.Transformingthese systems is the only way to transorm schools into the type o organization needed.


27/36

21

Article VI: A More Balanced and ReinvigoratedState/Local Partnership


A more balanced, reinvigorated state/local partnership can generate the public involvement andcommunity support needed to meet the demands o new learning standards essential to the success

o the 21stcentury learner. The present state-dominated partnership is inherently incapable o

creating the type o schools that can provide the learning experiences most needed by students

in our schools today. New levels o trust and reciprocal arrangements, including a return o

signicant authority and responsibility to local communities, are the only hope.

We hold that:

Thestatesinterestingreatschoolsandcommunitiescanbestbeassuredbyapartnershipthat may speciy the basic standards or graduation and general accountability measuresbut does not detail how standards are to be achieved nor the assessments needed to inorm

and guide instruction.

Thedramaticincreaseinnumberofstudents,diversity,andpovertylevelsdemandthatthestate/local partnership be shaped to respond to these needs with innovations not bound bybureaucratic rules o the present.

Schoolsreecttheproblemsofthesocietyfromwhichtheirstudentscome;therefore,itisessential that community/school partnerships be developed and supported that coordinatesocial services to students and amilies.

Educatingouryouthisastateresponsibilitybutalocalfunction.Attemptstoruntheschools rom Austin and Washington will result in a urther decline in the local sense oownership and responsibility at the very time when local involvement is most needed.

Thepubliceducationnancemechanismsmustbeadequate,equitable,andprovideforlocal meaningul discretion and fexibility in the allocation o resources to support goalsandpriorities.Digitallearningopportunitieswillrequireinnovativerevenuegenerationand accounting possibilities not yet invented.

Astrongersenseofcommunityownershipwouldprevailifconversationsbyschoolboardmembers and other community leaders ocused on substantive issues over which they hadcontrol rather than on state and ederal compliance matters.

Regionaleducationservicecentersareavitalresourceanddevelopingtheircapacitiesto provide technical assistance in collaborative ways can accelerate the transormationjourney o schools and school districts, particularly in development o assessment tools or

learning and training or school personnel.


28/36

22

Legislative Initiatives Required

These principles and premises and the resulting vision involve major transormations throughout

all aspects o public elementary and secondary education. The initial changes in laws and rules

should include the ollowing:

Transorm the current litany o overly detailed curriculum specifcations to rameworksthat identiy at the state level the most important topics or the new learning standards ina way that leaves room or local communities to make decisions about the details.

Transorm the current assessment system that is cumbersome and ocused on a serieso snapshots or accountability to a system o multiple types o assessment that satisesvarious state and district needs but has a primary ocus on inorming instruction anddesign o work or students. Invest in piloting assessment alternatives to standardizedtesting.

Transorm the Texas Education Code rom a litany o overly prescriptive regulationsand a myriad o practices imposed on the schools that restrict local prerogatives, distract

attention, and use resources, particularly misuse o time, to a streamlined compendium omajor policies that support the new learning standards and ocus schools on their mainpurpose.

Transorm the accountability system rom one based primarily on standardized test scoreswith counterproductive high-stakes that result in mediocrity at best, to a system thatenables excellence through inspirational standards, comprehensive review processes thatensure accuracy in reporting levels o learning, outstanding moral leadership, and a cultureo commitment.

Transorm the Texas Education Agency rom an organization that is totally ocused oncompliance and enorcement to one that carries out its compliance unction as secondaryto providing leadership and technical assistance to school districts liberating them toinnovate and ocus on children and ensure they are accountable to their amilies andcommunities.

Transorm the state governance structure rom a system that locates inordinate powerin the governor, providing little or no insulation o schools rom political expediency,to a system that has clear lines o authority and accountability and provides or generaloversight o the agency. Clariy the role o the state board o education and its authorityrelated to the core business o schools.


29/36

23

Appendix A

The Story Behind the Visioning Institute

Wheres the vision?

This story begins with conversations among school superintendents and other school leaders.

Such discussions are oten dominated by compliance issues such as how to implement the latest

mandate rom Austin or Washington. At other times, the exchanges relate to school nance,

politics, changing demographics, challenges o technology and its impact on students and society,

the test-ocused craze, dysunctional school boards, and the negative impacts o the present

accountability mechanisms on students and teachers. On occasion, we lament how we allow

ourselves to be co-opted into supporting policies that we know are counterproductive and take

away local options, and how we permit ourselves to be discouraged rom being more assertive in

representing our local communities in support o meaningul improvements.

But when the discussion turns to thoughts about the uture or Texas public education, no clear

picture emerges to rame the conversation. We sense the present direction is wrong but whatdirection would we propose? Most o us have some understandings o the uture we want in our

districts, but even those descriptions are ramed by the present state accountability labels, as i

reaching Exemplary Status denes it. Can we begin a new and dierent kind o dialogue about

the uture? Should we challenge the underlying assumptions on which so many bureaucratic

practices are based? In the absence o a clear picture o the preerred uture, should we as public

school leaders dene and express our own vision to get the ball rolling?

What are we or?

The second part o the story has its origin in the state educational policymaking environment

and associated debates. Politicians, state business leaders, and their policy advisors have been the

principal architects o the present systemnot school superintendents, not principals, not teachers,

and not parents. What we hear most oten rom these external decision makers is that they know

what school superintendents are against, but dont know what they are or.

I they are asking us to describe what we are or in a broad based and coherent way, then we

tend to come up short in spite o our issue-specic legislative programs, with the exception o the

principles we avored in the school nance issue. Otherwise, we oten gave inadequate answers.

What evolved rom these interactions was the assertion that we could answer the or question

only i we were clear about our relevant belies, principles, and premises and the vision they

would generate. One thing we know or sure is that we object strongly to the present debilitating

conditions or students and teachers generated by the alse assumptions that underlie many

current policies. Thereore, we eel duty-bound to discover and express the answers to the orquestion, not in a piece-meal ashion but in a comprehensive and undamental manner, and in a

way that makes sense o the digital revolution now impacting every aspect o our world and our

lives.

Where did we start?

The catalyst or bringing these ideas orward was Keith Sockwell, retired superintendent o

NorthwestISD,and,atthetime,withSHWGroupLLP,anarchitecturalrminPlano.Inhis


30/36

24

visits with a number o superintendents around the state during the spring and summer o 2006,

these questions kept coming up again and again. The what are we or and the no vision bug

bit him hard. So he asked SHW Group i they would underwrite such a quest with no strings

attached. The only stipulations SHW Group made, through its Chie Executive Ocer Gary

Keep, were to take the long-term view, think creatively, ollow through, and ask the participating

superintendents school districts to support the eort by paying their travel costs and a minimalee, and, more importantly, supporting their commitment and the time to make it happen.

We anticipated that the eort would require at least a yearlong pledge, and that it would be

proessionally developmental or participants. Secondly, it became clear that ollow through could

involve signicant resistance rom the backers and beneactors o the present state-controlled

system. However, our condence in the democratic process was such that i parents and other

local community members were empowered, they would rise in support o the new vision i it

were clear, refected their values, and appealed to their interests and needs and dreams o success

or their children.

What were the next steps?

SockwellcontactedJohnHorn,retiredsuperintendent,MesquiteISD,andnowaSeniorAssociate

with the Schlechty Center or Leadership in School Reorm. He has worked with several Texas

school districts and has been acilitating planning and goal setting sessions or leaders o the Texas

Association o School Administrators (TASA). He was also the primary acilitator some years back

when eleven educational leadership organizations came together to develop the core principles

around a school nance system that would provide adequacy and equity and meet constitutional

requirements.

Along with Frank Kelly, director o educational acilities planning, SHW Group, Sockwell

andHornmetwithJohnnyVeselka,ExecutiveDirectorofTASA,whosawtheneedforsucha

visioning eort, eagerly agreed, and with the TASA Executive Committees unanimous support,

obtained approval o the Texas Leadership Center to be the scal agent. TASA would providecoordination and other sta support. SHW Group agreed to pay or acilitation, materials, cost

o resource speakers, and publication o the initial drat product that would be used to oster

intentional conversations around the agenda promoted by the proposed principles and premises.

The Visioning Institute then became a reality. The Institute contracted with the Schlecthy Center

to help design and acilitate the work sessions. A small nucleus o superintendents rom the

largergroupwasinvitedtoformwhatbecameknownastheDesignTeam.TheymetwithLennie

HayfromtheSchlechtyCenterandJohnHorntodevelopclarityabouttheobjective,mapouta

15-month timeline, select topics or discussion germane to the objective, identiy experts in those

elds, and design each session as a developmental experience or participants that would ree

them up to think creatively, elicit insights rom their own experience, and to develop a sense ocollegialityandmoralcommitmenttothegoalandtoeachother.HornworkedwiththeDesign

Team between sessions to adapt and meet the needs o the participants so their contributions

could be maximized.

How were other participants selected?

The superintendents invited to participate were those with whom Sockwell had been visiting, and

who,forthemostpart,wereSHWGroupclients.TheTexasLeadershipCenterBoardofDirectors


31/36

25

andTASAofcerswerealsoinvited.HornandHayadvisedtheDesignTeamthatamaximumof

35 participants would be the most conducive to having the type o disciplined conversations and

dialogue needed to reach the stated goal.

When the 35 participants were identied, it became clear that the group included an appropriate

sample o superintendents representing various types o districts, serving over 1.2 million students.

TheDesignTeammembersbelievedthatiftheinitialproposalwereaworkinprogressoraninitial drat, that any who desired could help to shape its continuing evolution, that i it were

inspiring and captured the spirit o what any similarly constituted group o superintendents would

also produce, then it would be welcomed and well received.

The original participants were sensitive to not make presumptions about speaking or all. We

viewed our work rom the perspective o how we would react i we had not been part o the

original group. Our conclusion was that i it were kept as a work in progress until anyone who

desired could weigh in with suggestions and changes, then it would be judged on its quality and

relevance.

It was agreed that an extensive written record o the discussion and video recordings would

be made to ensure that, at the end, the thoughts and contributions o all had been capturedand honored in the resulting product. However, to ensure completely candid discussions and

protection rom those who might misunderstand such ree and open dialogue, it was agreed that

no video or quotes o individuals would be made public without their consent.

Now that the initial work in progress document has been oered, the SHW Group has agreed

to support urther dissemination and public inormation strategies to give our colleagues the

opportunities described above and to put eet and legs to the more ully developed ideas and

policy initiatives that emerge. They will also support eorts to extend conversations in local

communities, with other organizations, and with state leaders in hopes that many o them will

embrace the statements o vision, principles, and premises required to create the uture envisioned.


32/36

26

Appendix B

Meetings, Topics, and Participants

The Visioning Institute had its rst meeting with participants on September 6-7, 2006, and met

or seven sessions during 2007 with an additional work session in November and the most recentmeetinginJanuary2008.TheDesignTeamcontinuestomeetandadditionalsessionsarelikelyto

orchestrate the next steps.

Our Purpose as Framed in the InvitationLetter to Prospective Participants

The Public Education Visioning Institute is a unique opportunity or thirty visionary, progressive

superintendents to learn rom one another by challenging conventional thinking to improve their

leadership capacities and their school systems.

Participants will engage in stimulating dialogue with each other and leading thinkers to explore

ways they can create more meaningul educational opportunities or their students. The rst in a

series o eight workshops will ocus the group on examining the culture and structure needed in

schools to meet the needs o learners in a more global environment o new expectations.

Development o relevant core values rom which new visions and purposes or public education

can emerge is a goal. The remaining workshops have been designed to explore moral and

intellectual leadership, the nature o the utures learner and the new social contexts in which

they will live, more appropriate assessment systems, and more equitably designed accountability

mechanisms.

Participants will explore innovative ways o using resources such as people, time, space, technology

and unding to realize a new vision or public education in the year 2020.


33/36

27

The Schedule/Topics/Resource Speakers

Session 1: Purpose, Core Values, VisionPhil Schlechty

September 6-7, 2006

Session 2: Learners and the Design o a Productive Social Context (I)Marc Prensky

November 8-9, 2006

Session 3: Learners and the Design o a Productive Social Context (II)Judy Johnson/Lauren

Resnick

January10-11,2007

Session 4: Results or Public EducationDoug Reeves

March 7-8, 2007

Session 5: Rethinking Resources or Public Education (I)Milton ChenApril 25-26, 2007

Session 6: Rethinking Resources or Public Education (II)Ian Jukes/Ted McCain

June22-23,2007

Session 7: Moral and Intellectual Leadership or ChangeMichael Fullan

September 27-28, 2007

Session 8: What Could Public Education Look Like in 2020?Phil Schlechty

January16-17,2008


34/36

28

Participating Superintendents

Superintendent District

DavidAnthony Cypress-FairbanksISD

CathyBryce HighlandParkISD

GeneBurton RockwallISD

DeborahCron WeatherfordISD

ThomasCrowe McKinneyISD

RalphDraper SpringISD

RobertDuron SanAntonioISD

JohnFolks NorthsideISD

AltonFrailey KatyISD

GregGibson CrowleyISD

AnnetteGrifn Carrollton-FarmersBranchISD

JimHawkins KilleenISD

MichaelHinojosa DallasISD

RickHoward ComancheISD

MarkJackson BurlesonISD

MelodyJohnson FortWorthISD

DuncanKlussmann SpringBranchISD

RichardMcReavy WallerISD

LeonardMerrell(Retired) KatyISD

RichardA.Middleton NorthEastISD

VernonNewsom ManseldISD

DawsonOrr WichitaFallsISD

DouglasW.Otto PlanoISDThomasRandle LamarCISD

RickReedy FriscoISD

JerryRoy LewisvilleISD

KarenG.Rue NorthwestISD

RodSchroder AmarilloISD

GregSmith ClearCreekISD

BarbaraSultis GooseCreekCISD

JeffTurner CoppellISD

StephenWaddell BirdvilleISD

RyderWarren MarbleFallsISDNolaWellman EanesISD

LelandWilliams DickinsonISD


35/36

29


36/36

creating a new vision for public education in texas (from tasa)

Documents