Tough Decisions Julie Kowal

Overview 11/20/2018 Public Impact

School Turnarounds & Closures Dramatic interventions in chronically low-performing schools play a critical role in a state’s overall strategy for improvement Current School Performance Distribution Future School Performance Distribution 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Staff Dismissals in the Turnaround Context 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Research Overview Cross-Sector Lessons Findings and examples from research outside education about the practices that underlie successful staff dismissals in the turnaround context Implications for Leaders in Turnaround Schools Research-backed approaches to targeted staff dismissals for successful turnaround leaders in low-performing schools Policy Review Overview of the restrictions and freedoms that currently govern staffing decisions for education leaders in districts and states across the country Implications for State Leaders Recommendations to reform policies that limit principals’ ability to successfully manage their staff in the interest of students 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Findings Targeted Dismissals Policy Context More common than wholesale staff replacement Relieves the organization of employees who cannot support the turnaround, while keeping valuable skills and experience among other staff Many dismissals are actually voluntary departures Targeted Dismissals In most states, school and district leaders have very limited ability to dismiss or transfer tenured and senior teachers Some states have special provisions for low-performing schools Policy Context 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Key Actions for School Leaders Communicate a vision, including non-negotiable goals and strategies Voluntary exits among staff who are unwilling/unable to meet new goals Gather a variety of data about staff members' skills and performance Hold frequent & transparent problem-solving sessions Voluntary exits among staff who are uncomfortable with increased transparency Implement an intense schedule of targeted meetings/ evaluations Formal employment determinations Involuntary exits 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Policy Review Federal, state and local policies often severely limit principals’ ability to dismiss a low-performing teacher. But in some cases – such as chronically low-performing or restructuring schools – special policies may allow greater flexibility over staff placement and dismissal. 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Policy Review: Examples One study estimates it can take 10 to 15 percent of a principal’s time over several months just to bring one dismissal case to a hearing. 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Implications for State Leaders Negotiate Expedited Dismissal Processes 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Implications for State Leaders Enable Greater Staffing Flexibility 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Implications for State Leaders Prioritize Recruitment, Hiring & Placement 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Implications for State Leaders Assemble Support Teams 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Closing Failing Schools 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Research Overview School district profiles: Lessons from the Field Chicago (60 schools between 2001 and 2008, impacting 18,000 students) Denver (13 schools in 2007, impacting 3,000 students) Hartford (4 schools in 2007, impacting 1,800 students) Pittsburgh (22 schools in 2006, impacting 6,000 students) Implications for State & District Leaders Recommendations based on lessons learned from previous experience to make the closure process as smooth, positive and integrated as possible. School district profiles: Denver: In 2007, DPS announced plan to close 8 schools and redesign 5 others by changing grade configurations or school program. Decision driven by declining enrollment and poor student performance. Pittsburgh In 2006, district closed ¼ of the district’s schools (22) in response to declining enrollment and low student performance. Opened 8 new Accelerated Learning Academies (K-8 schools where principals have autonomy to hire and fire teachers). Hartford In 2007, closed 4 schools for underperformance. Replaced with 7 new school “designs” – four designs in one high school building, one design in each elementary building (e.g., Core Knowledge, Latino studies, Nursing Academy). Chicago District began closing schools for performance reasons in 2002 and has closed more than 25 schools in 7 years since. Have leased some buildings to charter schools, closed some facilities altogether, and contracted with outside operators to manage schools turnarounds (staff replaced but students stay). 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Choosing School Closure Challenge of overcoming a culture of failure Failure of prior interventions Revenue and facilities considerations 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Implications for State Leaders Consider Closure in Context of Larger Reform 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Implications for State Leaders Let Data Guide Decision-Making at All Stages 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Implications for State Leaders Develop a Detailed Transition Plan 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Implications for State Leaders Follow a Strong Communications Plan 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Discussion 11/20/2018 Public Impact

Julie Kowal julie_kowal@publicimpact.com (919) 294-9798