Organizing Schools for Improvement: Lessons from Chicago Guest presenter: Elaine Allensworth, Senior Director and Chief Research Officer, at the Consortium on Chicago School Research, University of Chicago

Coalition for Community Schools Vision: The Coalition for Community Schools believes that strong communities require strong schools and strong schools require strong communities.  We envision a future in which schools are centers of thriving communities where everyone belongs, works together, and succeeds. Mission: The Coalition advances opportunities for the success of children, families and communities by promoting the development of more, and more effective, community schools.  

Coalition Partners With over 150 local, state, and national partners, the Coalition is comprised of organizations representing: Nonprofit organizations: e.g. United Ways, YMCA’s Youth development Health, mental health and social services K-12 and higher education Local government Community development organizations Local community school initiatives…more Our partners recognize the community school advantage in achieving their own goals.

2011 Professional Development Opportunity For more information email ccs@iel.org and visit: www.communityschools.org

Stay in touch with the Coalition! Sign up for our Newsletter: http://tiny.cc/wedng Become a Facebook fan: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Washington-DC/Coalition-for-Community-Schools/142001244279 Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/coalcomschools

Organizing Schools for Improvement: Lessons from Chicago Webinar for the Coalition for Community Schools Elaine Allensworth Based on work with co-authors Anthony S. Bryk, Penny Bender Sebring, Stuart Luppescu and John Easton

A Tale of Two Chicago Schools: Hancock and Alexander Similar in many ways as Chicago decentralized authority to local school councils in the early 1990s Located in same area of the city, less than 2 miles apart 100% African American enrollment and 100% low income Both among 100 poorest-performing schools in reading and math in 1989 One moves dramatically forward over the next seven years (Hancock) but the other does not (Alexander)

Hancock and Alexander were not unique

How did Hancock beat the odds? Why did Alexander fail to do so?

A systematic, empirical attack on this question internal workings external conditions What distinguishes schools that improve from those that do not?

A Framework of Essential Supports

A Concept of Essentiality The “baking a cake” metaphor John Kotsakis, CTU: What would a cake be if we forgot the eggs or the baking powder?

Indicators of School Improvement How much are children learning during the period in which they are enrolled at that school? Are these learning gains improving over time? Is attendance improving over time? Schools divided into groups, based on improvement in each area (attendance, math tests, English tests): Stagnant (25%) Typical - small improvements (50%) Improving – substantially (25%)

Likelihood of Improvement, Given Weak or Strong Supports Percentage of Schools that Improved Substantially

Attendance Improvement Safety and order – a basic need Advanced by “interesting instruction” –active student learning in an aligned curriculum (new challenges) Among schools with weak instruction and poor safety: 0% showed substantial improvement in attendance 53-67% had stagnant attendance (depending on the indicator of instruction) A safe and orderly climate with interesting instruction. Work we’ve done later has shown that parent-teacher relationships are really key for safety & order, teacher professional capacity needed for interesting instruction.

Improvement in learning gains depended on adults working cooperatively, focused on instruction and school climate In schools with a poor learning climate and… Weak collaboration among teachers OR Weak collaboration between parents and teachers: 0% substantially improved math or reading scores 39-59% were stagnant Learning climate is EITHER safety OR PEER INTERACTIONS, BEHAVIOR

Improvement in learning gains depended on adults working cooperatively, focused on instruction and school climate In schools with a well-aligned curriculum and a strong professional community among teachers 48-57% substantially improved math/reading scores 4-9% were stagnant (Depending on subject) Teacher backgrounds much less important than collaborative work Only mattered in schools without strong professional community or quality professional development Teachers working together around instruction – that is what is key

School Leadership as a Catalyst for Change Strategic orientation Nurturing multiple leaders, collaboration Focus on instructional improvement By itself, leadership is the strongest predictor of improvement. But only matters if other elements are strong – must be focused on developing the five essential supports.

Trust is a key enabler of school improvement Same thing with safety, teacher cooperative work Projected effects of base level of relational trust on improvements in parent involvement

Revisiting Hancock Elementary New principal invested heavily in developing the teaching staff Monthly breakfasts to discuss practice Collective focus on literacy instruction, then math instruction School-based workshops, common planning periods Social services support team – coordinating services from agencies throughout the community Efforts to connect with parents and bring them in as partners

Revisiting Hancock Elementary By the midpoint of this study, Hancock had become very strong across most essential supports… Leadership: 99th percentile Parent involvement: 73rd percentile Teacher Professional community: 90th percentile Interactive instruction: 90th percentile But the school still struggled with safety and order (10th percentile), despite substantial effort and noticeable improvements.

Hancock was exceptional, but not alone Improving schools were located in neighborhoods across the city

Stagnating schools were concentrated in the poorest neighborhoods

Supports were less likely to develop in schools in communities with weak social capital Bonding social capital -the degree to which community members work together on community issues, belong to local organizations and religious institutions Crime in the school neighborhood and students’ neighborhoods Percent of students in the school living under extraordinarily difficult circumstances histories of abuse or neglect or in out-of-family care

Percentage of schools with very strong essential supports in 1994 Supports were less likely to develop in schools in communities with weak social capital Percentage of schools with very strong essential supports in 1994

But the essential supports were even more important for school improvement in schools in communities with weak social capital Disadvantaged communities – schools needed robust essential support practices to improve student learning. Better off communities – some schools improve with even average internal essential supports. No schools improve with weak internal supports, despite their location. If external social resources are weak, internal social resources need to be strong

Subsequent work has shown the importance of parent involvement in both elementary and high schools in the years after decentralization

Teacher stability Teachers’ perceptions of parent support was one of the strongest predictors of staying in their school As important as…. Teacher-principal trust Collective responsibility among teachers in the school More important than…. Professional development Teacher-teacher trust and socialization of new teachers Perception of principal as an instructional leader Only the learning climate was more important for teacher stability than parent involvement, and only at high schools Even in high schools From The Schools Teachers Leave (2009)

The climate of safety Social-organizational features of schools explain differences in safety Variation in school safety explained by: Student Safety Teacher Safety Poverty and Crime alone 48% 40% …plus social resources in the community 57% 43% …plus teacher collaboration 65% 67% …plus teacher relationships with students and parents 74% 75%

Other work has shown there are no “magic bullet” solutions Drastic efforts (firing staff, replacing principal, closing and re-opening) have had mixed results in Chicago Depend on attention to organizational structure Accountability Sanctions (for students & schools) worked only for schools with strong organizational structures Requiring more rigorous curriculum not effective Learning climate and professional capacity not sufficient to support new curricula (college prep for all, IDS) Narrow interventions are tools for organizational improvement, not ends in themselves

Concluding remarks

Five Essential Supports for School Improvement School improvement requires systemic work on multiple fronts Five Essential Supports for School Improvement School Leadership as Driver for Change Robust Parent-Community Ties Strong Professional Capacity Student-Centered Learning Climate Instructional Guidance Narrow interventions are limited Tools for improvement, not ends in themselves Leadership requires work on multiple levels The development of social capacity is critical Decentralization worked—even though it did not focus on instruction, it did not require replacing ineffective teachers with effective ones, it did not include accountability sanctions. It worked because it encouraged teachers, community members, parents and school leaders to work together to improve schools. It is noteworthy that communities with more social capital showed the highest improvements.

About the book Email: organizingschools@ccsr.uchicago.edu Website: ccsr.uchicago.edu/osfi About CCSR Website: ccsr.uchicago.edu

Stay in touch with the Coalition! Visit our homepage: www.communityschools.org Sign up for our Newsletter: http://tiny.cc/wedng Become a Facebook fan: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Washington-DC/Coalition-for-Community-Schools/142001244279 Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/coalcomschools