Key Components of aWell-Crafted Statewide

System of Support

New England Comprehensive CenterJanuary 24, 2007

S. Paul Reville

PRESENTATION

Introduction & Framing Background On State Capacity Issues Need for Developing Coherency Case Study in MA Key Components of a Model Statewide

System of Support Discussion

IMPERATIVES

Legal: NCLB and State Law Educational Moral

IMPERATIVES

Schools not making AYP: 26% Schools identified for improvement: 14% Schools in corrective action: 3%

Center on Education Policy, 2006

NCLB Data for 2005-2006:

IMPERATIVES

School support teams (over 72% ofstates)

Distinguished principals and teachers(over 61% of states)

Collaboration with regional technicalassistance centers, higher educationand private providers

U.S. Department of Education

NCLB Definition of “StatewideSystem of Sustained Supportand Improvement”

Background on StateCapacity Issues

FACTORS/CHALLENGES

Little research has been done onstate and district supports or interventionsin low-performing schools that couldinform new work.

State education agencies have nothistorically engaged in schoolimprovement at the building level andconsequently have relatively littleknowledge or skill in school improvement,even as they are being asked to lead theeffort.

Education Alliance at Brown University, “Leadership Capacitiesfor a Changing Environment” (2005)

FACTORS/CHALLENGES

Resources available to states anddistricts have not kept pace withthe increasing demands placedon them.

The law has increased and will likelycontinue to increase thenumber of low-performingschools and districts, as well as thespeed with which improvements mustbe made.

Education Alliance at Brown University, “Leadership Capacitiesfor a Changing Environment” (2005)

THEMES OF CURRENT WORK

Tackling Capacity Shifting Priorities Aligning Resources and Policies Centralizing Control Embracing Adaptive Change (i.e., tailored

to context) Seizing Opportunities Zeroing in on Instruction and Learning

Education Alliance at Brown University, “Leadership Capacitiesfor a Changing Environment” (2005)

IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS & ACTIVITIES

Needs Assessment and Analysis Plans and Planning Support for Plan Implementation School-based Coaching School-based Data Analysis Professional Development Additional Resources

Education Alliance at Brown University, “Leadership Capacitiesfor a Changing Environment” (2005)

TARGETED INTERVENTIONS

Providing assistance in interpreting andusing performance data in planning

Adding resources, such as assistanceteams, coaches or consultants, new staff,and professional development for bothteachers and administrators

Networking low-performingschools with more successful schools

Offering low-performing schools financialincentives to adopt particular wholeschool reforms and/or instructionalprograms

Education Alliance at Brown University, “Leadership Capacitiesfor a Changing Environment” (2005)

(Massell, 2000, esp. p. 5)

RANGE OF DISTRICT REPONSES TO STATE POLICY

Fragmented responses: littleleadership for change

Inconsistent responses:some policies are communicatedbut there is little interest in fullyimplementing them

Coordinated responses:deliberate efforts to implementchanges

Education Alliance at Brown University, “Leadership Capacitiesfor a Changing Environment” (2005)

(Massell citing Firestone and Fairman [1998])

DISTRICT CAPACITY ISSUES

Leadership focused on results andcommitted to instructional improvement

A focused strategy for improvinginstruction, sustained over years

The alignment of critical policiesto guide practice and to supportimprovement

The provision of resources to implementthe reforms

Clear expectations about classroompractice

Education Alliance at Brown University, “Leadership Capacitiesfor a Changing Environment” (2005)

(Corcoran and Lawrence [2003])

DISTRICT CAPACITY ISSUES

Support for teacher learning andadequate investments in professionaldevelopment

Development in central offices andschools of communities of practicethat share a common vision of goodpractice and beliefs about teaching andlearning

The use of data and evidence to drivedecisions and revise strategies

Education Alliance at Brown University, “Leadership Capacitiesfor a Changing Environment” (2005)

(Corcoran and Lawrence [2003])

CHOICES & CHALLENGES FOR SEA’S AND DISTRICTS

Allocating Limited Resources Intensity & Duration Degree of Centralization Shaping Roles & Structures

Education Alliance at Brown University, “Leadership Capacitiesfor a Changing Environment” (2005)

EDUCATION ALLIANCE RECOMMENDATIONS

Build Feedback Systems to CreateCoherence

Focus on Instruction and Learning Address Equity Issues Evaluate the Reform Strategies

Education Alliance at Brown University, “Leadership Capacitiesfor a Changing Environment” (2005)

The Need for DevelopingCoherence

© PUBLIC EDUCATION LEADERSHIP PROJECT at Harvard University

Continuous Improvement RequiresCoherent Strategy

• Coherent Strategy is a Set of Key Action StepsDesigned to Achieve Critical Goals

• Coherent Strategy is Logically Integrated

© PUBLIC EDUCATION LEADERSHIP PROJECT at Harvard University

Coherence Framework

© PUBLIC EDUCATION LEADERSHIP PROJECT at Harvard University

Instructional Core

Teacher

Student Content

Focus of District-wide Strategy and Key Action Steps

© PUBLIC EDUCATION LEADERSHIP PROJECT at Harvard University

Five Organizational Elements Critical to Success

• Capacity

• Stakeholders

• Culture

• Structure

• Systems

© PUBLIC EDUCATION LEADERSHIP PROJECT at Harvard University

Strategy RequiresA

Theory of Action

= Collective Belief About Causal Relationships Between Action & Desired Outcomes

e.g. If you improve instruction, you’ll improve outcomes.

© PUBLIC EDUCATION LEADERSHIP PROJECT at Harvard University

Theory is Preceded bya Mission

e.g. Our mission is that all students shallreach proficiency in English and math.

© PUBLIC EDUCATION LEADERSHIP PROJECT at Harvard University

Strategy is a Set ofActions in Service of a

Theory of Action

e.g. Providing capacity and support toinstructional core with the objective of raisingstudent performance.

© PUBLIC EDUCATION LEADERSHIP PROJECT at Harvard University

Strategy

• Guides Choices and Helps Make Decisions on Action andBudget

• Needs to be Well Communicated

• Makes a Clear Connection Between Mission & Objectives

• Provides Focus on What & Who is Important

• Illuminates Relationships

• Defines Measurement Parameters

• Acknowledges Environment

• Allows for Adaptation

© PUBLIC EDUCATION LEADERSHIP PROJECT at Harvard University

Key Action Steps

Definition: The high-level yet specific actions thedistrict must take in order to execute its strategyand accomplish its objectives.

Critical Questions:

• What specific actions should we take toimplement our strategy?

• Is the list of key action steps mutually exclusive,or are some key action steps on the listembedded in others?

© PUBLIC EDUCATION LEADERSHIP PROJECT at Harvard University

Stakeholders

Definition: The people and groups that have a “stake” inthe success of the district and the ability to influence itspolicies and practices.

Critical Questions:• Which stakeholders will be affected by the key action steps?

Which stakeholders can have an impact on theimplementation of the key action steps?

• Given the answers to the previous questions, how shouldwe manage our stakeholder relationships in a way that iscoherent with our key action steps and strategy?

• What relationship and/or contractual arrangement with ourbargaining units would be most beneficial to executing ourkey action steps? What would it take to achieve this?

• How might we best communicate our progress to ourstakeholders in a way that garners their support and theirwillingness to influence other stakeholders and theenvironment in ways that are coherent with other strategy?

© PUBLIC EDUCATION LEADERSHIP PROJECT at Harvard University

Culture

Definition: The predominant beliefs and norms thatdefine and drive behavior in the district.

Critical Questions:

•What beliefs underlie our theory of action and strategy?

•What beliefs currently exist in our stakeholder groupsand how do those influence their behaviors?

•What behaviors are needed from people throughout thedistrict to execute the key action steps?

•What norms should be established to support thenecessary behaviors?

•How can we engage people in behaviors that will shapetheir beliefs about the ability of all kids to achieve athigh levels?

© PUBLIC EDUCATION LEADERSHIP PROJECT at Harvard University

Structure

Definition: The organizational arrangements andrelationships that enable individuals to perform key actionsteps.

Critical Questions:• How do roles and responsibilities need to be defined to

support our key action steps?

• Which reporting relationships would be most beneficial forexecuting our key action steps and our strategy? How canthese relationships be made clear to everyone?

• How should decisions be made and by whom? Whatdecisions should happen centrally? At the school level? Inthe classroom?

• Are temporary structures such as task forces and steeringcommittees necessary to implement a key action step? If so,what is the ideal composition?

• What informal and formal communication networks areneeded to implement key action steps?

© PUBLIC EDUCATION LEADERSHIP PROJECT at Harvard University

Systems

Definition: The processes and procedures used tomanage the district.

Critical Questions:

• What systems are needed to support each keyaction step?

• Training and development

• Data access and use

• Resource allocation

• Organizational learning and continuous improvement

• Others

© PUBLIC EDUCATION LEADERSHIP PROJECT at Harvard University

Capacity

Definition: The resources required to implementkey action steps and execute strategy.

Critical Questions:

• What new skills and knowledge do districts need todevelop and which ones do they need to “unlearn”to implement the key action steps?

• What role will the district play in helping individualsdevelop the new knowledge and skills?

• What financial resources are necessary to supportthe key action steps?

• What non-financial resources are necessary?Information technology, physical infrastructure,time, other?

© PUBLIC EDUCATION LEADERSHIP PROJECT at Harvard University

Environment

External Factors

• Regulations & Statutes

• Contracts

• Funding

• Politics

A Case Study of Massachusetts

Rennie Center Research Report – April 2005

THE PUSH TO PROFICIENCY

PERSISTENCE OF ACHIEVEMENT GAPS

CHALLENGES FACED BY SCHOOLS & DISTRICTS

376 schools and 132 districts labeledfor inadequate MCAS progress for2+ consecutive years

0

100

200

300

400

Schools Districts

WHY DO THIS RESEARCH?

Continued achievement gaps

Logic of standards-basedaccountability

Limits of tight-loose model

Support: more than financial

55 interviews: supers, principals,DOE & policymakers

Other states

International

Literature & web review

Cost analysis

RESEARCH DESIGN

Key Question: What components areneeded in a state system to support lowperforming schools & districts?

Capacity buildingExpertise

Effectiveness - Scale

A state systemDepartment of Education

Partners

DEFINITIONS

What do we mean by:

SUPERINTENDENTS’ NEEDS

SUPERINTENDENTS’ NEEDS

Superintendents’ median estimate forincreased funding was an additional 11%

PUSH TOWARD PROFICIENCY

Key StrategiesCurriculum & professional development

Data and assessment

Leadership & strategic planning

Time on learning

OBSTACLES TO CAPACITY BUILDING

Challenges with the current statesystemCurrent state review & intervention capacity

Size of the DOE

Funding for the DOE

Salary scale for state education staff

STATE REVIEW &INTERVENTION CAPACITY

SIZE OF THE DOE

In 1980, DOE had 990 employees.Now, DOE employs 510 staff.

Boston Public Schools employs 548administrators to oversee directsupport to 6.5% of the state’sstudents.

MD, SC, WI & MA educate similarnumbers of students. But, MA has<25% DOE staff than these states.

DOE FUNDING

0.24%$9,336,084$3,903,291,0162004

0.27%$9,779,190$3,606,222,6582000

0.36%$8,150,673$2,580,098,0521997

0.44%$8,031,642$1,837,772,7901994

DOE %of Total

DOEAdministrationTotal BudgetYear

Massachusetts total education budget versus DOE budget

SALARY SCALE FOR STATEEDUCATION STAFF

PROGRAMS & INTERVENTIONSTRATEGIES

Professional development & curriculumIncreased state guidance on options andprovision of professional development

Data & assessmentSupport for formative assessmentsystems and value added analysis tools

Leadership & strategic planningUrban leadership training and creation ofstate-level incentives

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT &CURRICULUM

Increase state guidance oncurricular and professionaldevelopment options, beginningwith low performing schools.

Improve state capacity to provideprofessional development,particularly in math, and strategiesfor special education students andEnglish language learners inacademic content areas.

DATA & ASSESSMENT

Support formative assessmentsystems for a small number ofurban districts, beginning withthose that have the largestachievement gaps.

Develop a value-added analysissystem for Massachusetts.

LEADERSHIP & STRATEGICPLANNING

Sponsor urban leadership trainingfor aspiring and currentadministrators, as well as forpotential turnaround partners.

Create state-level incentives tostrengthen leadership at the locallevel.

STRENGTHENING THE STATEEDUCATION INFRASTRUCTURE

Service-oriented interventionprocess

Quality staffing at DOE

Regional approach

Research

Turnaround partners

Greater state capacity is urgentlyneeded to assist districts and schools

in fulfilling the promise ofeducation reform.

Key Components of aWell-crafted Statewide

System of Support

KEY COMPONENTS

Planning and Implementation Leadership Support Better Access to and Use of

Data Curriculum Support Instructional Support Professional Development Building District-level Capacity Other Considerations

KEY COMPONENTS

Planning and Implementation

Needs assessments (based on data) Improvement plans Support for implementation

(differentiated based on need)

Helping schools identify root causes anddevelop and implement action steps toeffectively address challenges:

WHAT SOME STATES ARE DOING

Planning and Implementation

Maryland and Georgia SampleSchool Improvement Plans andTemplates

Turnaround Partners – VirginiaSchool Turnaround SpecialistProgram.

DOE partners with university to provide“turnaround specialist” credentialingprogram

Supplies credentialed turnaroundspecialists to schools in need ofimprovement

Uses a digital forum for sharingresources and multi-media case studies

WHAT SOME STATES ARE DOING

Planning and Implementation

Differentiating the Needs of Schools

District Audit Tool (NV, WY, WV, SD) –helps states prioritize the degree andintensity of their support and technicalassistance to districts and schools inneed of improvement.

Chancellor’s District (NYC) – chronicallyunderperforming schools provided withadditional resources and supports

KEY COMPONENTS

Leadership Support

Leadership coaches Ongoing professional development Mentor principals Developing a pipeline of new leaders

Building instructional leadership focusedon results, developing “professionallearning communities” among all schoolstaff, and addressing the supply of newleaders

WHAT SOME STATES ARE DOING

Leadership Support

Arizona Leads3 – provides targetedprofessional development forprincipals and superintendentsfocused on student achievement

National Institute for SchoolLeadership (NISL) – trains principalsin the theory and practice ofstandards-based instructionalleadership

KEY COMPONENTS

Better Access to and Use of Data

Formative and benchmarkassessments tied to state standards

Professional development inclassroom-based analysis of studentdata for instructional improvement

Assessments based on growth

Providing data systems that producetimely and useable data and supportingschools in the use of data to drivedecisions and instructional strategies

WHAT SOME STATES ARE DOING

Better Access to and Use of Data Data utilization guides (CA, GA) New Mexico Consumer Guide to

Formative Assessments – reviews 7formative assessment programs

New York City and Grow Network –development of formativeassessments tied to state standards

Northwest Evaluation Association -Measures of Academic Progress(MAP), state-aligned computerizedadaptive tests that measure growth

Michigan Academic Coachesprogram – provides school datacoaches

KEY COMPONENTS

Curriculum Support

Curriculum selection committees Aligning curriculum to standards Curriculum mapping Recommending curriculum materials

and resources

Support for curriculum selection andmapping and content area professionaldevelopment.

WHAT SOME STATES ARE DOING

Curriculum Support

South Carolina Committee ofPractitioners – diverse committeethat meets quarterly to select andmonitor implementation of newcurriculum in corrective actiondistricts

Model curriculum maps (KY) Database of recommended

curriculum materials (CA)

KEY COMPONENTS

Instructional Support

Academic coaches Model lessons Demonstration sites

Support for improving teachers’ practiceand pedagogy

WHAT SOME STATES ARE DOING

Instructional Support

Georgia Academic Coachesprogram – selects state certifiedMaster Teachers to be coaches in allcontent areas

Alabama Reading Initiative –provides professional developmentto any Alabama school to 100%literacy among all students

California Secondary LiteracyDemonstration Sites – programdescriptions of model middle andhigh schools implementing school-wide literacy models.

KEY COMPONENTS

Professional Development

Provide guidance on professionaldevelopment providers

Support the development of“professional learning communities”

Encourage schools to make time forregular professional development

Supporting the development ofcommunities of practice and ongoing,embedded professional developmentfocused on student achievement.

WHAT SOME STATES ARE DOING

Professional Development

Florida Professional DevelopmentPartnerships Program - partners withinstitutes of higher education andregional providers

Regional Professional DevelopmentCenters (MO, CO, CA) – partner withregional centers to provideprofessional development to localteachers

KEY COMPONENTS

Building Capacity at the District Level

Building district leadership to supportschool- and classroom-levelimprovement.

Professional development focusedon student achievement forsuperintendents and other centraloffice leaders

Assistance in developing districtimprovement plans based onmeeting diverse needs of individualschools

Central office reviews

WHAT SOME STATES ARE DOING

Building Capacity at the District Level Kentucky Voluntary Partnership Assistance

– an intensive and voluntary assistancemodel designed to build district capacity forimproved student achievement

Tennessee Executive DevelopmentProgram – superintendents training inorganizational leadership as well ascurriculum and instruction

Connecticut Accountability for LearningInitiative - district support for the process ofcontinuous school improvement

Annenberg Institute Central Office Reviewfor Results and Equity - helps districtsdevelop overarching policies that allow forvariation in implementation according to thevarying needs of schools, their staff, andtheir students.

Policy interventions

Time on learning

Early childhood education

Teacher quality

Financial support

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

CONCLUSION

Urgency Constituency Building Capacity Building Reflective Practice Results

CHALLENGES

How would you modify this model tofit your context? What is missing?

Could/would you adopt this model inyour state?

What are some principle obstacles toachieving this vision?

What are some ways that statedepartments of education canadvocate for the resources neededto fulfill their responsibilities?

FOR DISCUSSION