westat’s evaluation of the sig program: findings from the leadership study
DESCRIPTION
Westat’s Evaluation of the SIG Program: Findings from the Leadership Study. Alison Langham, Westat [email protected] Presentation to the SIGnetwork SPDG Directors’ Session April 16, 2010 Project Funded by: Office of Special Education Programs U.S. Department of Education. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Westat’s Evaluation of the SIG Program:Findings from the Leadership Study
Alison Langham, Westat [email protected]
Presentation to the SIGnetwork SPDG Directors’ SessionApril 16, 2010
Project Funded by:Office of Special Education Programs
U.S. Department of Education
Presentation Outline
Overview of the SIG Program Overview of Westat’s Evaluation of the SIG
Program Brief explanation of the Leadership Study Results from the Leadership Study Summary and implications
Background on the State Improvement (SIG) Program
IDEA ‘97 Joint effort of the feds and states to improve
results for children with disabilities Money to states on a competitive basis Professional development, information
dissemination, TA…SYSTEMIC CHANGE
Background on the SIG Program Evaluation
Commissioned by OSEP in 2000 Five-year cooperative agreement, that continued for six years Formative Focused on the overall SIG Program, not individual states—but
individual SIG projects were the unit of analysis Not intended to provide technical assistance to projects Instead, intended to describe what states were doing to inform
OSEP, and the states themselves
Background on the SIG Program Evaluation
Premises of the SIG Program that guided our evaluationo Systems change is necessary to effect significant statewide
improvementso Improving systems requires comprehensive planning that
involves multiple individuals, agencies, and institutionso SEAs need to play a leadership role in engaging partners
and bringing about the systems changes
Multiple evaluation activitieso Logic Modelso Cross-state comparisonso Systemic Evaluation Inquiry Modelo Model of Theory of Systemic Changeo Outcomes Studyo Administrative Leadership Study
Background on the SIG Program Evaluation
Administrative Leadership Study: Framework
SIG Project Administrative
Leadership
Influence Authority Accountability
Administrative Leadership Study: Methodology
Nine states Iterative data collection and analysis Telephone interviews and document reviews Qualitative coding
Administrative Leadership Study: Results
Influence– Persuasion– Guidance
Authority– Use of position or title– Control of funds
Accountability– Setting expectations– Establishing standards of performance
Administrative Leadership Study: Results
Influence StrategiesStrategy A: Implementing professional
development (PD) as a systemic tool for changeStrategy B: Communicating a vision of changeStrategy C: Creating local buy-inStrategy D: Integrating PD efforts with general
education reformStrategy E: Using collaborative working
partnerships that promote joint learning
Administrative Leadership Study: Results
Administrative Leadership Strategies
Influence TOTAL
Cohort State A B C D E
FY1999 a 4
FY1999 b 2
FY1999 c 4
FY1999 d 4
FY1999 e 5
FY1999 f 3
FY2000 g 5
FY2000 h 4
FY2001 i 4
TOTAL 6 6 6 7 9
Administrative Leadership Study: Results
Authority StrategiesStrategy F: Asserting delegated authority
Strategy G: Setting direction
Strategy H: Justifying actions by evoking a higher authority
Strategy I: Providing support for partners and subgrantees who buy-in
Administrative Leadership Study: Results
Cohort State
Administrative Leadership Strategies
Authority
TOTALF G H I
FY1999 a 3
FY1999 b 2
FY1999 c 1
FY1999 d 4
FY1999 e 4
FY1999 f 2
FY2000 g 2
FY2000 h 3
FY2001 i 4
TOTAL 8 8 4 5
Administrative Leadership Study: Results
Accountability StrategiesStrategy J: Standardizing the evaluation
methodology
Strategy K: Prioritizing the tasks associated with accountability
Strategy L: Using accountability data to justify changes in project
Administrative Leadership Study: Results
Cohort State
Administrative Leadership Strategies
Accountability TOTAL
J K L
FY1999 a 3
FY1999 b 3
FY1999 c 0
FY1999 d 2
FY1999 e 2
FY1999 f 1
FY2000 g 2
FY2000 h 1
FY2001 i 3
TOTAL 6 6 5
Administrative Leadership Study: Summary and Implications
Administrative Leadership Study Findings: Every SIG director used multiple leadership
strategies SIG directors used influence strategies most
and accountability strategies least Awareness of self, Project/Program, current
events and culture influenced which strategies SIG directors used
Administrative Leadership Study: Summary and Implications
State culture
Current events
Project and Program
SelfLevels of Awareness
Administrative Leadership Study: Summary and Implications
Most important SIG Evaluation finding: strong leadership coincided with strong SIG project outcomes
Implication: leadership will matter in SPDG projects, too