1. Frontiers of K-12 Reform Options for Idaho Paul Hill January 2013

2. States all Face Similar Challenges Performance – Too few HS graduates – Among graduates, too few well-prepared A system that is closed to innovation – Funding tied up in categoricals, fixed costs – Teacher entry artificially constrained – Excessive regulation – Can’t fully exploit technology Commitments in excess of funding

3. Some States are Trying New Ideas Pupil based funding >>> Marguerite Roza Use of chartering to promote innovation – E.g. Hybrid schools Value-added data on teachers and schools – Rewards and sanctions attached to value added Enabling Portfolio districts Rebuilding the SEA as a performance manager – Statewide “Recovery Districts” – District takeovers

4. Centralization, Performance Management Don’t Fit Together Centralization – Control teacher evaluation with data at state or district level – Mandate new curriculum and methods, uses of tech. Performance Management, Decentralization – Measure school value added – Give schools real dollars based on enrollment Schools make spending tradeoffs – Allow universal family choice – Manage the supply of schools for continuous improvement Enable local portfolio districts that close failed schools, charter new ones Empower the SEA to take over, charter out failing schools

5. Some States Pursue Contradictory or Incomplete Strategies Contradictory: – Centralized teacher pay and school performance accountability – Controls on school staffing, time use and encouraging imaginative use of technology Incomplete: – School Performance accountability without school control of funds –or – without value added data – Family choice of schools without student based funding – Portfolio district strategies without chartering – State takeovers without SEA capacity

6. Choosing Between Centralization and Performance Management Favorable ConditionsUnfavorable Conditions CentralizationBest approach is known. All localities similar Confidence that mandates will be implemented. Best approach is not known; innovation, experimentation needed. Big local differences Danger of “work to rule” compliance. Performance managementFew if any schools now prepare kids fully. Many promising ideas are now sidelined. Greater opportunity could attract good people. Use of funds is driven by rules, not evidence Most schools are fine, only a few need work. Schools are wide open to innovation. Teaching, principal force is the best we could hope to get. Funds are now used in most efficient way.

7. Other States are Learning Centralization and “rule by mandate” doesn’t work (politically or practically) Performance management can come in stages – School value added – Pupil based funding – Intra- and inter-district school choice – Particular districts encouraged to experiment with hybrid charters – State gains power to charter out low performing schools – All districts required to close failed schools, charter new

8. Whither Idaho? There is more to learn from other states, depending on where Idaho wants to go.

9. Whither Idaho? There is more to learn from other states, depending on where Idaho wants to go.

10. Whither Idaho? There is more to learn from other states, depending on where Idaho wants to go.

11. Whither Idaho? There is more to learn from other states, depending on where Idaho wants to go.