2007 Institute for School Improvement and Education Options Statewide Systems of Support: The State of Research

September 25, 2007 Session Overview 1. Introduction to State Systems of Support 2. Commentary 3. Discussion 2 Chair: Herb Walberg, CII Panel: Lauren Morando Rhim, Public Impact, CII Bryan Hassel, Public Impact, CII Paul Reville, Rennie Center, Harvard, CII Brett Lane, Education Alliance, Brown, CII

A Conceptual Framework Lauren Morando Rhim and Bryan Hassel

September 25, 2007 NCLB and Statewide Systems of Support NCLB requires that SEAs provide technical assistance to schools identified as in need of improvement 1. Reserve and allocate Title 1, Part A funds (4% in 2007) for school improvement activities 2. Create and sustain a statewide system of support that provides technical assistance to schools (LEA and School Improvement: Non-Regulatory Guidance, Revised 7/21/06) 4

September 25, 2007 NCLB and Support Priorities Technical Assistance Priorities (i.e., triage approach) 1. LEAs in corrective action and schools for which LEA has not fulfilled responsibilities related to corrective action 2. LEAs identified as in need of improvement 3. Title I LEAs and schools that need support and assistance 5

September 25, 2007 NCLB Required Components Establishing NCLB-Prescribed Statewide System of Support – Create school support teams: Teams work in schools throughout the state and SEA must provide adequate support for teams to be effective – Designate and engage distinguished teachers and principals: Select successful professionals from existing Title I schools that have a track record of success – Develop additional TA approaches: Draw on external resources (e.g., colleges/universities, education service agencies, private providers of proven TA, and USDOE funded comprehensive centers and regional education laboratories) to assist districts 6

September 25, 2007 Framework of Successful System Incentives Capabilities (Capacity) Opportunities 7

September 25, 2007 State System of Support Incentives Capacity Opportunities

September 25, 2007 Providing Incentives for Change Public disclosure: standards, accountability and information about results Negative incentives: consequences of low school performance Positive incentives: contingent funding, autonomy, and recognition Market-oriented incentives: changing the “market” structure of public schooling 9

September 25, 2007 Building Capacity Building Systemic Capacity Building Local Capacity 10

September 25, 2007 Building Systemic Capacity Create and Disseminate Knowledge Enhance Supply of Personnel – Especially in low-performing districts and schools – Training for turnaround specialists Create and maintain strong data systems 11

September 25, 2007 Building Local Capacity Capacity Building Structures and Roles – State Education Agency – Intermediate Agencies – External Partner Organizations – Distinguished Educators – School Support Teams – Coordination Between and Among Statewide System of Support Structures 12

September 25, 2007 Building Local Capacity Differentiate Supports Metrics to determine local capacity and need in multiple components of district and school operations Differentiated Support to Local Districts and Schools – Differentiate by Point of Impact – Differentiate by Intensity and Duration of Services – Differentiate by Services Provided Delivery of State Systems of Support Services – Provide Services – Allocate Resources for Services 13

September 25, 2007 Providing Opportunities for Change Remove Obstacles for Existing Schools and Districts Create Space for New Schools 14

September 25, 2007 The Big Picture 1. NCLB defines statewide systems of support, but we propose that definition should be the floor not the ceiling of state’s role in improving schools. 2. State boards, legislatures, and governors can create incentives and opportunities. 3. State departments of education are primarily charged with building systemic and local capacity, but they can also create incentives and opportunities. 4. Besides technical capacity, a key role for SEA should be to establish “reform press;” a strong sense of urgency that change must occur. 15

September 25, 2007 The Big Picture 5. Strategic approach may require state-level policy changes and advocacy and a reconsideration of the “givens” (e.g., state laws and policies, and distribution of human capital). 6. Efforts to improve schools should be driven by school and district needs rather than expediency given existing structures/systems. 7. Critical goal is to implement systems that move beyond existing SEA/LEA improvement efforts and serve as a catalyst for meaningful change that alters the educational opportunities for children in low-performing schools. 16

September 25, 2007 Resources/Tools Handbook on Statewide Systems of Support, ed. Sam Redding & Herbert J. Walberg Strengthening the Statewide System of Support: A Manual for the Comprehensive Center and State Education Agency, ed. Sam Redding and Herbert J. Walberg

September 25, 2007 Additional Questions Lauren Morando Rhim Scientific Council, Center on Innovation & Improvement Senior Consultant, Public Impact (301)