School

1
School District ImprovementWashington States
Comprehensive Support System

• Consortium for School Improvement
• October 3 5, 2004
• Baltimore, MD
• Robert MacGregor
• Assistant Superintendent for School Improvement
• Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction
• State of Washington
• www.k12.wa.us

2
Dr. Terry BergesonSuperintendent of Public
InstructionDr. Mary Alice HeuschelDeputy
Superintendent for Teaching and LearningMr.
Marty DaybellDeputy Superintendent for Support
and Operations
3
Purpose of Presentation

• Overview of
• Continuous School Improvement
• The Specifics School Improvement Assistance
  program
• Outline Changes and Expansions of the program
• Cultural Competence
• District Improvement

4
Support for Improved Student Learning
General Assistance
Districts and Schools
Frequency, Duration and Intensity
5
School Improvement
... is the single most important business of the
school. It is the process schools use to ensure
that all students are achieving at high levels.
School Improvement Planning Process
Guide http//www.k12.wa.us/SchoolImprovement/Resou
rces/default.aspx
6
The Big Question
Why has this reform worked when others have
not?
7
What We Know

• The Nine Characteristics of Effective Schools
• Research-based Best Practices
• Second-Order Change
• The School Improving Planning Process
• Data Driven
• Professional Learning
• Community

8
Characteristics of Highly Effective Schools
1

• Clear and Shared Focus
• High Standards and Expectations for All Students
• Effective School Leadership
• High Levels of Collaboration and Communication
• Curriculum, Instruction and Assessments Aligned
  with State Standards
• Frequent Monitoring of Learning and Teaching
• Focused Professional Development
• Support Learning Environment
• High Level of Family and Community Involvement
• 9 Characteristics of high performing schools
  http//www.k12.wa.us/SchoolImprovement/Resources/S
  uccess.aspx

9
First and Second Order ChangeWA School Research
CenterFouts and Baker 2002
First Order Changes - Specific Classroom and
School-wide practices Changes in efficiency,
organization, specific practices, change without
difference
Second Order Changes - Philosophy, focus and
ownership Systemic change, fundamental ethos,
philosophy, beliefs driving practice,
restructuring (corporate culture)
10
First and Second Order Change
First Order Change
Second Order Change
Smaller classes Site based
councils Ninety minute teaching
blocks Schools within
schools Teaching teams with common
planning
Changing relationships and teaching
strategies Collaboration and
ownership Extended teaching and learning
opportunities New interactions and
relationships Coordinated focused
curriculum
11
School Improvement Planning (SIP)

• The SIP Process has been developed jointly by
  OSPI, ESDs, and school districts. It is one of
  several approaches to school improvement planning
  that districts may choose to use. The process is
  cyclical, continuous, and includes these 8 steps
  

12
SIP Process

• Assess Readiness to Benefit
• Collect, Sort, and Select Data
• Build and Analyze the School Portfolio
• Set and Prioritize Goals
• Research and Select Best Practices
• Craft Action Plans
• Monitor Implementation of the Plan
• Evaluate Impact on Student Achievement

13
Next SIP Planning Guide Edition

• January 2005
• Culturally Responsive Educational Practice
• Parent/Family Involvement

14
School Improvement PlanningIt is a Process
Nine Characteristics Of High Performing Schools

15
School Improvement Planning Process
Readiness
Readiness
Readiness
Readiness
Nine Characteristics Of High Performing Schools

Readiness
Readiness
Readiness
16
School Improvement Planning Process
Data
Data
Data
Data
Nine Characteristics Of High Performing Schools

Data
Data
Data
17
Collecting Data
Demographics
Context
Perceptions
Student Learning
18
School Improvement Assistance The Basics

• School-based required collaboration
• Voluntary, three-year program
• On site coach provided School Improvement
  Facilitator (SIF)
• Utilizes School Improvement Planning Process
  Guide
• State Dollars and Title I Dollars
• Funding for professional development
• Educational Audit (Year One)
• Performance Agreements between School, District,
  OSPI
• OSPI Working Collaboratively with AWSP

19
Differentiated Assistance Criteria

• Achievement ( cells not making AYP)
• Achievement (distance from goal)
• Improvement (reduction in of students not
  meeting standard from previous year all
  students-reading and math)
• Improvement (Learning Index existing formula)
• SES
• Opportunity Gap (regression quintile)
• Other Indicators (on time graduation rate
  unexcused absences)

20
Timelines
Year One Year Two Year
Three
Educational Audit School Improvement Plan
Performance Agreement Implement Performance
Agreement Evaluation of Implementation
Evaluation of Student Performance
Year 3
Year 1
Year 2
21
School Improvement Facilitators (SIFs)

• Experienced Educators
• Successful Leaders and Change Agents
• High Quality Communication Skills
• Flexible
• Work On Site a Minimum of 1.5 Days per Week
• Relationship with Principal is Vital

22
Educational Audits

• Based on the Nine Characteristics
• Gather Data from a Variety of Sources
• Interviews with Staff, Parents, Students
• Provide Information on the Schools
  
  Strengths and Weaknesses
• Summative ReportsPart of Data Portfolio
• Reports Shared with Public

23
Performance Agreement

• OSPI Commitments (example)
• Provide a (SIF) School Improvement Facilitator.
• Provide funds for SIP Team stipends, staff
  planning, staff development.
• Professional Staff Development for SIF and SIP
  Team.
• Recognize schools volunteering for participation
  in the school improvement assistance program.

24
Performance Agreement

• District Commitment (example)
• Designate a district-level administrator with
  decision-making authority.
• Recognize staff and students of the school for
  their efforts to improve student learning.
• Identify district and building based staff, with
  specific expertise in areas of school improvement
  curriculum instruction to serve as resources.

25
Performance Agreement

• School Commitment (example)
• Staff agrees to support the strategies outlined
  in the School Improvement Plan.
• Have regularly scheduled staff meetings devoted
  to school improvement updates.
• SIP leadership team shall monitor the
  implementation strategies identified in the plan.
• Celebrate the achievement of implementation
  strategies.
• Provide opportunities for parents and community
  stakeholders to review school improvement
  progress.

26
School Improvement Assistance (SIA) The Cohorts

• Cohort I 25 Schools 2001-2004
• Cohort II 13 Schools 2002-2005
• Cohort III 29 Schools 2003-2006

Beginning with Cohort IV, 25 schools will be
added each year.
27
CHANGES in the Program
First Cohort
Second Cohort
Third Cohort
G
Identification
Audit/Data
Timeline
Training/ Professional Development
28
OSPI SIA Cohort IWashington Assessment of
Student LearningAnalysis of Progress
Created to assist schools in school improvement
by The Center for Educational Effectiveness,
Inc., a 501 (c) (3) non-profit corporation
29
The Center for Educational Effectiveness, Inc.
a 501 (c) (3) non-profit corporation. The
Center for Educational Effectiveness (The Center)
is a non-profit service, consulting, and
research agency dedicated to the mission of
partnering with K-12 schools to improve student
performance by improving organizational
effectiveness. The Center brings together
experienced educators, educational researchers,
specialists in organizational transformation, and
experienced leaders in the business and
non-profit sector to assist school district
personnel in assessing, planning, and
implementing transformation within their
school(s). Our approach is based on the
principle of partnershipworking together we can
provide assistance to improve student performance
and learning. Contact Information Postal
Address 2249 152 Ave. NE Redmond WA 98052
Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
Web www.effectiveness.org NOTICE The Center
for Educational Effectiveness (CEE) makes
substantial effort to ensure the accurate
importation, data entry, and reporting of student
achievement results. However, CEE makes no
warranty of any kind with regard to this
material, including, but not limited to, the
implied warranties of merchantability and fitness
for a particular purpose. CEE shall not be
liable for errors contained herein or for
incidental or consequential damages in connection
with the furnishing, performance, or use of this
material.
30
2000 2003 SIA Cohort SummaryPercentage Yearly
Improvement (Linear Trend)
Reading Cohort-I State 4th 9.76
0.3 7th 4.47 4.05 10th 0.71
-0.26 Math Cohort-I State 4th 12.9
5.9 7th 2.9 4.7 10th 4.9
0.25
31
(No Transcript)
32
(No Transcript)
33
And Theres More Good News
34
And More
35
Partners

• AWSP (Assoc. of Wash. School Principals)
• ESDs (Educational Service Districts)
• WASA (Wash. Assoc. of School Administrators)
• PTA (Parent-Teacher Association)
• WEA (Wash. Educ. Association)
• Center for Educational Effectiveness

36
Collaboration Is Key
37
Another Big Question
What about the systems to support
continuous school improvement?
38
We have learned a great deal in recent years
about how to fundamentally change a schools
culture through a continuous improvement model.
In order to continue this work, and move from
pockets of success to widespread excellence over
time, we must address the system issues around
individual schools that operate and function
within a school district. Such systems work must
address the tension between the necessary
autonomy of an effective school and the
responsibilities of the district to ensure equity
among all its schools and implement systems of
accountability. Bottom up will have to meet top
down, and it is essential that our success with
school improvement drive our efforts to create
effective school systems.
39
Instructional Leadership

• Building an Aligned Educational System

40
The SSIRG notebook is designed to provide support
to districts at different stages of the strategic
planning process
41
Districts that are currently developing and
annually revisiting their plan using another
research-based model.
How the SSIRG notebook may be of value to
districts at different stages of the strategic
planning process.
Districts not meeting AYP in one or more cells
for 2 years.
Districts who wish to use this process to develop
a strategic plan to more closely align district
practices directly or indirectly support
classroom instruction.
Districts that have a comprehensive strategic
plan, but would like to review and revise their
plan to ensure that they meet AYP in 2006-07.
42
Fall Conference cover
43
(No Transcript)
44
(No Transcript)
45
(No Transcript)
46
Challenges

• Scaling up School Improvement Assistance
• Effective District Assistance
• Provide better guidance for focused, formative,
  classroom assessments that are aligned with state
  standards

47
O O O
O S P I
C L A S S R O O M
S C H O O L S
Student Outcomes
D I S T R I C T S
O O
O O O
48
Creating the conditions in which quality teaching
thrives

• As leaders, we must maintain a delicate balance.
  At the same time that we acknowledge the need to
  increase the quality of teaching, and indeed the
  accountability of teachers, we must also be
  conscious of the need to restore teachers
  purpose, passion and joy in their work.
•  
• Vicki Phillips, Superintendent,
• Lancaster School District