AERA Symposium A Stakeholder Process for District-Wide Systemic Transformation Charles M. Reigeluth, Indiana University Roberto Joseph, Purdue University Kurt Richter, Indiana University Yun-Jo An, Indiana University

An Overview of the Systemic Transformation Project Charles M. Reigeluth Instructional Systems Technology Department Indiana University School of Education

The Project Research on the Systemic Transformation Process MSD Decatur Township in Indianapolis Guidance System for Transforming Education

The GSTE The Big Picture Core Ideas (values about the change process) Process (phases, continuous events, principles)

Core Ideas Importance of …. process vs. product mindset change stakeholder ownership leadership/political support participatory/developmental leadership a culture for change - collaboration, consensus, systems thinking, trust, disclosure, no blame idealized design focusing on redesigning the learning experiences first

I. Initiate an Effort II. Develop Starter Team III. Develop a District-Wide Framework IV. Create Ideal Designs V. Implement and Evolve the New System The Revised GSTE Process

I. Initiate an Effort 1.Facilitators assessed and enhanced their own readiness for the process and formed a Support Team at IU. (No change) 2.Facilitators explored working with four school districts and established a relationship with one. (No change) 3.Facilitators assessed and enhanced Decaturs readiness. (No change from 3.1) 4.Facilitators did not develop a contract for Phase II. (Old 3.2) The Revised GSTE Process

II. Develop Starter Team 5.Facilitators & superintendent formed the Starter Team (No change) 6.ST designed and held a retreat to develop Starter Team dynamic. (No change) 7.Developed Starter Team understanding of the systemic change process, systems design, dialogue, and small-group facilitation. (No change) (Continued) The Revised GSTE Process

II. Develop Starter Team (Cont.) 8.Used community forums to assess and enhance district and community capacity and culture for change. (Old 4, 10, 11) 9.Did not develop a contract with the Starter Team and School Board for a systemic change process and funding, scope out resource needs, and plan a proposal for external funding. (New) – Not needed 10.Starter Team partially developed a compact with all stakeholders to engage in a systemic change process; did not have a large public signing ceremony. (New) The Revised GSTE Process

III. Develop a District-Wide Framework 11.Starter Team expanded into Leadership Team. (Old 13) 12.Did not hold a retreat to develop the Leadership Team dynamic. (Old 13) 13.Facilitators are developing Leadership Team understanding of systems, design, mental models, systemic change process, dialogue, and small-group facilitation. (Address throughout Events ) (Old 13) 14.Leadership Team began to develop a district-wide frame-work with broad stakeholder participation (community forums). This entailed identifying changes in the communitys educational needs. (Old 11, 17, 18) (Continued) The Revised GSTE Process

III. Develop a District-Wide Framework (Cont.) 15.Leadership Team is finishing the district-wide framework with broad stakeholder participation (community forums). This entails developing core values or beliefs for an ideal school system. (Old 11, 17, 18) 16.Leadership Team identifies current and recent change efforts and decides what relation those should have with this effort. (Old 9) 17.Leadership Team develops a change process strategy, including district office capacity building, leadership development, and budget, and gets funding for Phase IV. (New) The Revised GSTE Process

IV. Create Ideal Designs 18.Leadership Team forms and capacitates school-based Design Teams and conducts workshops on the framework. (Old 19) 19.Design Teams create ideal designs for their schools and evaluation criteria with broad stakeholder input. (Old 20). 20.Leadership Team forms and capacitates a district-level Design Team. (New) 21.District Design Team creates a design for ideal district administrative and governance systems, and criteria for evaluating that design, with broad stakeholder involvement. (Old 24). The Revised GSTE Process

V. Implement and Evolve the New System 22.Design Teams create building-level processes for evolving as close as possible to their ideal designs. This includes identifying existing programs and resources, and identifying gaps where they must design their own. (Old 25) 23.Design Teams prepare for implementation with remodeling, equipment installation, resource procurement, teacher training, etc. (Old 26) 24.Everyone carries out implementation plans, formative evaluations, and revisions of the evolving designs and the implementation processes. (Old 26) 25.Periodically evolve the ideal designs (Old 26). The Revised GSTE Process

Research Studies Events 1-3: Joseph, R., & Reigeluth, C.M. (submitted). Formative Research on the Initial Stage of the Systemic Change Process in a Small Urban School System. Journal of Educational Change. Events 5-7: Joseph, R., & Reigeluth, C.M. (in final preparation). Formative Research on Building a Starter Team for Systemic Change in a School District. Event 8: Rokopou, C., Hwang, J., & Reigeluth, C.M. (in progress). Community Forums: Their Value and Alternative Ways for Effective Planning and Conducting. Event 9: Richter, K., & Reigeluth, C.M. (in preparation). Formative Research on Identifying Competing Change Efforts for Systemic Change in a School District.

Research Studies Event 11: Essex, C., & Reigeluth, C.M. (in progress). Formative Research on Expanding a Starter Team into a Leadership Team for Systemic Change in a School District. Events 13-15: Richter, K, & Reigeluth, C.M. (in progress). Formative Research on Integrating the Decision-Making Process and Learning Process in a Newly Formed Leadership Team for Systemic Change in a School District. Events 7 & 13: Pascoe, S.M., Sari, D., & Reigeluth, C.M. (in progress). Aspects and components of Mindset Change in the Systemic Transformation of a School District.

Research Studies Joseph, R. (in progress). Formative Research on Student involvement in a Systemic Change Process in a School District. An, Y.J., & Reigeluth, C.M. (in progress). An Electronic Performance Support System (EPSS) for Systemic Change Efforts. Pascoe, S.M., & Reigeluth, C.M. (in progress). Formative Research on a Support Team for a facilitator of Systemic Transformation of a School District.

Information about the Decatur Project: /decatur/index.html /decatur/index.html Charles M. Reigeluth

Presenters Roberto Joseph, Purdue University Formative Research on Student involvement in a Systemic Change Process in a School District. Kurt Richter, Indiana University Formative Research on Integrating the Decision-Making Process and Learning Process in a Newly Formed Leadership Team for Systemic Change in a School District. Yun-Jo An, Indiana University An Electronic Performance Support System (EPSS) for Systemic Change Efforts.