Districts that Work:

Lessons from the Field and Policy Implications

February 1, 2010

Ledyard McFadden

President

SchoolWorks

Dr. Wanda Bamberg

Superintendent

Aldine Independent School District

Who we are

The Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation is a national venture

philanthropy established by Eli Broad to advance entrepreneurship

for the public good in education, science and the arts. The Broad

Foundation’s education work is focused on dramatically improving

urban K-12 public education through better governance, management,

labor relations and competition. (www.broadfoundation.org)

SchoolWorks is an educational consulting company based in Beverly,

Massachusetts. Using a research-based rubric for school district

quality, SchoolWorks leads site visit researchers and practitioners to

analyze qualitative Broad Prize finalist district practices.

(www.schoolworks.org)

Who we are

The Aldine Independent School District, serving 62,000 students, was a Broad Prize finalist in 2004, 2005 and 2008 and the Winner in 2009, among other honors such as the Texas Awards Performance Excellence, 2006.

Why Aldine today? Two very good reasons:

1. From 1981 to 2008 went from approximately 16% Hispanic to 64% Hispanic

2. Demonstrates higher average proficiency rates by racial, ethnic and income subgroups than state counterparts in reading and mathematics

3

Session Objectives

1. Share a hypothesis to explain why

Broad Finalists Districts, like Aldine,

have made progress in closing

achievement gaps

2. Share policy recommendations based

on the hypothesis

Session Agenda1. Quick overview of the Broad Prize Process

2. Presentation of four aspects of leadership that – I hypothesize – are related to the success of Broad Prize Finalists in closing the achievement gap

3. Make policy recommendations for each aspect of leadership

4. Let Dr. Bamberg tell you the real deal

What is The Broad Prize?

The Broad Prize for Urban Education is an annual $2 million award

that honors large urban school districts demonstrating

the greatest overall student performance and improvement and

reduction in income and ethnic achievement gaps.

sculpture © Tom Otterness, 2002

How it works

Every year:

1. 100 largest urban American school districts are eligible

(list on www.broadprize.org)

2. Student achievement data are analyzed

3. Five finalists selected by Broad Prize Review Board (nationally

acclaimed statisticians, researchers and education leaders)

4. Qualitative site visits

5. Winner selected by Broad Prize Selection Jury

(three former U.S. Sec’s. of Ed., former Govs., university presidents,

union leaders, CEOs)

2009 Broad Prize Finalist School Districts

Quantitative data reviewed by Review Board and Selection Jury Graduation rates (NCES’ Common Core of Data):

– Average Freshman Graduation Rate (AFGR)– Urban Institute Graduation Rate (Cumulative Promotion Index)– Manhattan Institute Graduation Rate (Greene’s Graduation Indicator)

College Readiness data (AP, SAT and ACT) Adequate Yearly Progress results District demographic data (enrollment, income, language, special education, ethnicity) School-level variance analyses Analyses across proficiency levels (i.e., advanced, proficient, below basic) District performance and improvement rates on state reading and math tests,

compared with:– Prior performance – Expected performance for similar districts (based on poverty levels) in the state,

using a regression analysis Degree of achievement gap reduction between ethnic groups and between low-

income and non-low-income students, compared to the state

No formula is used.

2009 Broad Prize WinnerAldine Independent School District in Houston, 80% FRSL

Outperformed similar Texas districts in reading and math at all grade levels

Demonstrated higher average proficiency rates by racial, ethnic and

income subgroups than state counterparts in reading and math

Narrowed income and ethnic achievement gaps (e.g., 14 percentage point

reduction in gap between African-American students and state average for

White students in middle school math between 2005 and 2008)

Process for conducting qualitative reviewof district-wide policies and processes

Uniform 3-day site visit in each finalist district

Evidence collected according to SchoolWorks Quality Criteria

as developed for The Broad Prize (i.e., site visit framework)

– District documents reviewed

– Focus group interviews conducted with district stakeholders

– Limited classroom observations conducted

Developmental rubric provides a multi-dimensional perspective

on the degree to which district systems and practices are effective

and sustainable

How do these districts close the achievement gap?

The achievement gap is closed one student at a time. Focus on the individual child. Broad Finalists Districts thrive on beliefs, policies and practices that individualize education and emphasize success for all students.

• Belief and leadership

• Advanced systems of curriculum, instruction and assessment

• Teamwork and investment in people

12

To be clear…

Yes. Board Finalists examine how well groups of students do (English Language Learners, ethnic groups, socioeconomic groups, etc.)

Yes. Broad Finalists Districts consider culture, language and economic status as important information that informs programming

No. Broad Finalists Districts do not apply blanket approaches aimed to cover a whole group based on its identity

Yes. Broad Finalists build systems of curriculum, instruction and assessment that can meet the needs of each individual child

13

14

Curriculum, instruction and assessment

Broad Prize Finalist Districts typically have established a core structure– Alignment to state standards– Available materials– Systems to ensure fidelity of curriculum implementation

What’s exceptional– Continual review and refinement of curriculum and instruction

through knowledge capture

Vertical teamsto review analysis and make decisions

Living curriculumAnd instruction

Multiple assessments and

fine-grained analysis

Making it happen takes four kinds of leadershipLee Bolman & Terrence Deal

Symbolic: Myths, rituals, culture. “What does this decision mean?”

Structural: Goals, division of labor, coordination. “What is the rational decision?”

Human Resources: Organizational success and personal fulfillment are linked. “Will this decision reap something from our people or sow new capacity in them?”

Political: Organizations as coalitions. Conflict is a natural state. “Will this decision be a deal everyone can live with?”

Organizational frames as characters you might know. “To boldly go where no one has gone before.”

16

Structural: Spock

Symbolic: Bones

Political : Kirk

Human Resources: Scotty

Symbolic Framework

17

The Way

Culture as Identity Weave in the mission

Theory of action articulated from the top

Core Beliefs of the Gwinnett County Board of Education

• Our core business is teaching and learning.

• All children can learn at or above grade level.

• All children should reach their learning potential.

• The school effect is important and has a profound impact

on every child’s life.

• A quality instructional program requires a rigorous curriculum, effective

teaching, and ongoing assessment.

• All children should be taught in a safe and secure learning environment.

(From Gwinnett County PS website) www.gwinnett.k12.ga.us

18

What can you not see from the organizational structure?

Signatures of LBUSD Organizational Culture

• Collaboration between and among departments

• Shared challenges and shared success

• Stakeholder engagement (internal & external)

• Informality of lines of communication

• Customer service orientation

• Emphasis on support

Aldine: Producing the Nation’s Best

21

Policy Recommendations

1. Support, foster, provide school board development that creates a clear articulation of each district’s theory of action. This not a fluffy mission and vision exercise. It’s about articulating necessary inputs, expected outputs and clear strategies to get there.

2. Apply the “One Child Test” to potential law and policy aimed at closing the achievement gap. Create three individual student profiles. Hypothesize about how the proposed policy will affect each child. Is this a policy aimed at a stereotype? at an ambiguous group? Or is it crafted to serve the needs of real, individual students?

22

Structural Framework

23

Confidential – Not for distribution

The Plan will save us.Baldrige, scorecards, SMART goals, etc.

Let’s make our performance on the plan a public matter. Data systems, open access,

Formative approach

Let’s work the plan.Rolling it up from bottom to top; Quarterly review

Let’s organize people around

the plan.Teams, division

of labor

Organizing around the plan

Broad Prize Finalist Districts

typically have a clear vertical

structure in place

Of particular interest..

– Distributed leadership

– Thin at the regional level

– Invest at the school

District

Region

School

Classroom

Student

Coordination and division of labor

District

Region

School

Teacher

Student

Set goals, coordinate plan,

implement data collection,assess progress,

allocate resourcesCoordinate resource but don’t

have many themselves

Use resources in loose/tight world of

non-negotiable targets and autonomy to

implement

Heavily networked within each school and across the district

Client and “Outcome”

Example: Northside frozestaffing level at central office , avoided any regional structure and instead grew school staff.

Making performance public

Broad Prize Finalist districts typically share outcomes on a regular basis– Regular cycle of measurement and reporting– Evaluation linked to organizational goals

Of particular interest…– Very deep alignment of goals vertically through the system, heavily

influenced by Baldrige – Use of technology to track and communicate progress

Example: Results-based Evaluation System in

Gwinnett

Example: Aldine’s BaldrigePeer Review

Policy Recommendations

1. Promote, foster and provide school board and superintendent professional development and models of practice that create aligned accountability in district plans (Baldrige).

2. Promote, foster and provide models for superintendent and principal evaluation that create aligned accountability for both student achievement and other outcomes (balanced scorecard, multiple measures).

27

Human Resources Framework

28

Being part of a team

Here are the map and the keys. You can drive within the rules of the road.

The professional life

Grow your own

To reap or to sow?

29

Broad districts make strategic decisions that typically invest in people and yield greater productivity over the long term

Fulfillment through challenging goals and opportunities to self-actualize

Clear personal goals linked to organizational goalsAbility to innovate toward the goals

Satisfaction from being part of a networkGrade-level teams

Regions and/or K-12 feed patternsCross-functional teams solve difficult issues

From the cradle to the graveRecruitment channels through universities

Extensive professional and leadership developmentCareer path: “We grow our own leadership.”

For example…

Examples from Brownsville– All elementary-level teachers in the district are dual certified

in bilingual education to support immersion program– Feedback on Bloom’s taxonomy, questioning skills and

learner-centered instruction using rubrics called “innovation configurations”

– Strong partnerships with the University of Texas, Brownsville (UTB), which provides many new teachers to the district.

Example from Long Beach– Comprehensive, internally designed leadership development

program. With rigorous selection progress, extensive coursework and strategic internship placements, and a multi-year induction process

Policy Recommendations

1. Promote, foster and provide relationships between higher education institutions and districts that allow for meaningful teacher education, recruitment and training.

2. Promote, foster and provide models of district and school leadership develop programs that allow districts to “grow their own” leadership.

31

Political Framework

32

Steady at the helm

Stakeholder focus

The planning and decision making process is in part a political tool

Managing conflict for available resourcesGwinnett Educational Management System (GEMS) Oversight Committee

– Community-driven development of academic standards

– Addressed community concern about state standards

Northside– “When two or more are gathered in the name of the district,

I will be there,” Superintendent Folks

Aldine’ s Vertical Educational Advisory Committee – A group of about 200 representing every school meets six times

a year to hear reports on the district’s progress and to allow its representatives to voice concerns and ideas.

Long Beach– Intensive surveying of personnel and community

Steady Political Leadership“Is it a must have?”

Can any of these things be done without steady political leadership at the Board level?

34

Policy Recommendations

1. Promote, foster and provide models of how districts can gather effective community input and monitor community satisfaction.

2. Promote, foster and provide policies that recognize the complexity of School Board participation and require necessary professional development.

35

Strategic leadership in four frames

Structural: Goals, division of labor, coordination. “What is the rational decision?”

Human Resources: Organizational success and personal fulfillment are linked. “Will this decision reap something from our people or sow new capacity in them?”

Political: Organizations as coalitions. Conflict is a natural state. “Will this decision be a deal everyone can live with?”

Symbolic: Myths, rituals, culture. “What does this decision mean?”