1. Reinventing America’s Schools: Lessons from Indianapolis
David Osborne
Progressive Policy Institute
May 3, 2017 d

2. Industrial Era Public Systems
Centralized bureaucracies
Hierarchical management
Control through rules & regulations
Standardized services
Command-and-control methods
Public monopolies

3. Public Education Was No Exception
19th century: informal systems, with some public schools, some private, some combinations, and few rules
20th century:
Centrally run school districts; everyone an employee
Hierarchical decision-making; central office controls school budgets, hiring, etc.
Attend school you are assigned to; no choices
All schools teach roughly same thing in same grade; students march through based mostly on age
Control through rules; eg. teacher tenure
No one measures school or teacher performance
If schools perform poorly, there are no consequences (for the adults)

4. Then the World Changed…
… and a 21st century operating system began to emerge:
A network: schools independent of authorizers
Operating authority decentralized to the schools
Control through fewer rules, more accountability for results
Different schools for different kids
Parents have choice and dollars follow children, so parents have leverage
No monopoly: schools compete for students

5. Indianapolis is a Leader in Making This Transition
Mayoral charter authorizing:
The mayor authorizes 35 charters with 40 campuses—the only mayor in the country to do so
The mayor’s charter office is considered a high quality authorizer; it screens applicants carefully & closes failing schools
Indianapolis Public Schools is one of 11 districts in the city; charters educate about a third of public school students in IPS territory
With similar demographics and less money, charters outperform IPS schools

6. Mayor’s Charters Outperform IPS and Other Charters by 10-11 Percentage Points on the ISTEP—2013-14

7. Percentage of Schools Receiving A or B on State Ratings 2014 & 2016

8. Percentage of Students Graduating in 4 Years (2016)

9. Stanford’s Center for Research on Educational Outcomes (CREDO):
Compares charter students to demographically similar students in traditional public schools who had the same past test scores
2012 study: Charter students gain 2 months in reading and nearly 3 months in math, every year
Mayoral charter students gain 2 months in reading and 3.6 months in math
2015 study: by students’ fourth year in an Indianapolis charter, their annual gains are double this amount

10. Second Wave of Reform: The Mind Trust
Peterson and Harris founded it in 2006
Think of it as a nonprofit venture capital firm for the charter sector
Has focused on bringing entrepreneurial talent to Indianapolis
Brought in TFA, TNTP, Stand for Children
Has helped or is helping launch 26 schools
In 2011 issued a report that changed the discussion in Indianapolis

11. IPS Innovation Network Schools
Exempt from the same laws and regulations as charters
Operate outside IPS’s union contracts
5- to 7-year contracts with IPS, much like charters
If school fails to fulfill the terms of its contract, IPS can terminate it or refuse to renew it
Otherwise IPS cannot interfere with the school’s autonomy
Principal and teachers are not IPS employees; they work for the nonprofit 501(c)3 corporation
Nonprofit board hires and fires principal, sets budget and pay scale, and chooses school design
All operate in IPS buildings

12. Four Types of Innovation Network Schools
Brand new startups, some of which are also charter schools 
Existing charter schools that choose to become innovation schools
Failing schools the district restarts as innovation schools, often partnering with an outside operator
Existing IPS schools that convert to innovation status

13. Other Initiatives to Support a 21st Century System
“Autonomous schools” within IPS (launched )
Universal enrollment system ( )
Weighted student budgeting ( )
Common performance framework for all public schools
Equity Reports on schools ( )

14. This Kind of Model Has Already Worked
New Orleans: 93% in charters; for past decade has been fastest improving city in the country.
See How New Orleans Made Charter Schools Work, /features/how_new_orleans_made_charter_s php?pag e=all#
Washington D.C.: 46% in charters; on NAEP has been fastest improving state & big city on last two tests (2013 & 2015).
See A Tale of Two Systems: Education Reform in Washington, D.C., education-reform-in-washington-d-c/
Denver: 21% in charters & 20.5% in Innovation Schools; recent study said 2nd fastest improvement in nation of districts with more than 25,000,

15. Why Is the 21st Century Model So Effective?
Authority is decentralized: the people who run the schools make the key operational decisions
Schools are mission-driven, not rule-driven
Parents can choose between different school models
Schools are accountable to their customers (parents)
Schools face consequences: those that succeed grow and replicate; those that fail are closed
The authorizer focuses on steering more than rowing is politically free to close failing schools
Within a competitive marketplace, children have fairly equal opportunity and financial resources.

16. It’s Spreading 17 districts have more than 30% of students in charters
Recovery School Districts spreading
Memphis, TN
Camden, NJ
Hall County, GA
CRPE has 30 districts in its Portfolio District Network
Many districts are struggling to create “innovation” or “pilot” schools that work