1. Building a Unified and Coherent Statewide System of Support
Sandy Vasu-Sarver, Executive Director, Center for Students, Families & Communities
Deborah Telfer, Executive Director, Center for School Improvement
2009 OESCA/OTESCA Fall Conference
September 15, 2009

2. OIP is the Enactment of the Leadership Development Framework
DLT Regional OIP Training
OIP is the Enactment of the
Leadership Development Framework 2 2

3. Why Leadership Team Structures?
Shift focus from a single individual to a team
Distribute key leadership functions
Align and focus work using few district goals
Ensure effective leadership at all levels of the system
Engage in the OIP for the long-term

4. Redefining Our Work Design everyone’s work primarily
in terms of improving the capacity
and performance of someone else

5. Three Critical Commitments (from Marzano & Associates, 2008)
Develop a system of individual student feedback at the district, school, and classroom levels
Ensure effective teaching in every classroom
Build background knowledge for all students (particularly those with educationally challenging backgrounds)

6. Scale & Sustainability
Michael Fullan asserts that the difficulty of sustaining change at the classroom level occurs if other levels of the system (school, district, regional agencies, and state) don’t change in ways that enhance coherence, alignment, connectedness, synergy, and capacity for continuous improvement (The New Meaning of Educational Change, 2007).

7. SSOS Improvement is everyone’s job All districts/schools can improve
State role – to ensure high quality consistent support to any district/school, regardless of status
Consistency in Design and Message – SLDT
Consistency in Delivery – Quad Leads/Structure
Consistency in Ongoing Support – SSTs and ESCs

8. Effective & Aligned Resource Management
District-wide
Districts have local discretion in identifying critical needs and are better positioned to do so through OIP
Regionally
Aggregated data on district identified needs allows for more intentional and targeted PD/TA by regional providers
Statewide
OIP provides common structure for identifying needs and promoting district focus
State responds to district and regional directed needs 8

10. The OIP: Ohio’s Strategy for Creating a Unified SSOS
Common process allows for consistent provision of high-quality training and support through unified regional infrastructure
Differentiated accountability provides additional leverage to support unified system 10

11. Ohio’s Approach: Key Features
The role/responsibility of the district is key to making and sustaining improvement
Data are organized to aid in identifying the most critical needs and customizing solutions to critical needs
High quality consistent training and support are provided through a unified regional infrastructure
Leadership is defined as a set of practices to be implemented across the system

12. Core Principles of OIP Use a collaborative, collegial process
Produce one coherent, focused plan
Rely on quality data and data interpretation
Expect changes in instructional practice and student performance

13. OIP Benefit Eliminate Fragmentation
Recognize evident connection of district to all buildings
Move AWAY FROM program ownership TO shared/collective ownership for improvement
DLT-BLT offers parallel process for aligning and focusing the work

14. OIP Promotes Shift in Practice
OLD PRACTICE
Plan developed in response to funding provided
Schools develop plans disconnected from each other and the district
Plans include too many goals/strategies with no coherence across district
NEW PRACTICE
Plan drives intentional/aligned resource management
District plan drives development of school improvement plans
Plans include a limited number of goals/strategies to address biggest problems

15. OIP Partnerships & Accomplishments
During the past year, over 500 SST and ESC OIP facilitators were trained during 21 training events
SSTs and ESCs facilitated the OIP in 283 districts and with 14 community school sponsors
These districts and community schools included over 1000 SI buildings

16. Addressing ALL Children
What does your “ALL” look like?

17. Old Thinking
Special
Education
Regular
Education

18. The School Community Serves Students with Disabilities
New Thinking
The School Community Serves
All Students
Students with Disabilities
School
Community

19. Did You Know?
Of the 294 Ohio school districts that were identified under Ohio’s Model of Differentiated Accountability as needing high, medium or low support, 56% of them did not meet AYP only for children with disabilities.

20. Results for Kids with Disabilities
IDEA requires states to measure and improve academic performance results for SWD annually
All states must measure districts’ performance on SPP/APR indicators

21. SPP Performance Indicators
Graduation/Dropout of SWD
Performance on statewide assessments
Discipline
Least Restrictive Environment
Disproportionality
Early childhood outcomes
Post school outcomes

22. Learning from Districts
Districts that have consistently shown high performance for children with disabilities have engaged in strategic practices to make this happen.

23. “Lessons Learned” Planning is critical All means All – Own the kids!
Principals took charge
Schedule for success
Keep data and monitor the course
Maximize teaming
Engage parents and the community

24. Performance Agreement
Identifies the work of the SST to improve results for ALL kids
Is connected to the SPP
Supports the development of the SSOS

25. ESC-SST Coordination