1. Developing State Systems To Support School Improvement And Restructuring Lauren Morando Rhim Public Impact For Center on Innovation and Improvement

2. Center on Innovation and Improvement - Public Impact2 February 13, 2007 Session Overview Introduce State Systems to Support School Improvement and Restructuring Review Research Develop Strategic Approach

3. Center on Innovation and Improvement - Public Impact3 February 13, 2007 Statewide Systems of Support NCLB dictates that SEAs are required to 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. Center on Innovation and Improvement - Public Impact4 February 13, 2007 NCLB Statewide Systems of Support 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. Center on Innovation and Improvement - Public Impact5 February 13, 2007 Statewide Systems of Support 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. Center on Innovation and Improvement - Public Impact6 February 13, 2007 NCLB Defined School Support Teams School support teams provide struggling schools with “practical, applicable, and helpful assistance in order to increase the opportunity for all students to meet the State’s academic content and student academic achievement standards.” Teams should be knowledgeable about a variety of reform initiatives Support team members are: highly qualified principals and teachers, pupil services personnel, parents, college/university personnel, education lab personnel, outside consultants, and others selected by SEAs or LEAs with documented expertise and credibility

7. Center on Innovation and Improvement - Public Impact7 February 13, 2007 NCLB Defined School Support Teams: Responsibilities Review and analyze school operations and use data to develop plan for school improvement Collaborate with school and district staff and parents to design, implement, and monitor school improvement plan Monitor plan and request additional assistance from SEA and LEA as needed Provide feedback (twice a year) to LEA and SEA and identify outstanding teachers and principals One year working with school and then review progress and develop plan for “next-steps.”

8. Center on Innovation and Improvement - Public Impact8 February 13, 2007 Potential “Additional Approaches” to Providing Support Identify additional approaches/sources to provide statewide system of support Assess quality of potential providers Engage external providers in line with district requirements and specifically, levels of needs (e.g., universal needs, targeted needs, or intensive needs).

9. Center on Innovation and Improvement - Public Impact9 February 13, 2007 Additional Approaches to Providing Support Examples currently being utilized by SEAs:  Audio conferences  Regional In-Service Centers  School Improvement Specialists  Literacy and mathematics specialists  Week long diagnostic review of school operations  Partnerships with philanthropic organizations  School improvement resource centers  Peer mentors (Center on Innovation and Improvement: www.centerII.org/ssresearch.html)

10. Center on Innovation and Improvement - Public Impact10 February 13, 2007 Research: Current Status Limited research base SEAs traditionally charged with collecting data and developing policy have limited capacity to provide substantive assistance to districts/schools Growing state role requires human and fiscal resources that most SEA’s don’t have Demand for support/assistance is growing due to NCLB sanctions (Reville, 2005; The Education Alliance, 2005)

11. Center on Innovation and Improvement - Public Impact11 February 13, 2007 Research Findings Research in 16 states found:  Support varies notably depending on state capacity, district need, and state models for support  Common Types of Support and Technical Assistance Needs assessment and planning Data analysis Capacity building Resource allocation Progress monitoring  Examples of Systems of Support: Multi-level approaches that provide strategic support based on district need Regional networks of support Individualized support for districts School-level focused systems (AIR, July 2006)

12. Center on Innovation and Improvement - Public Impact12 February 13, 2007 Research Findings Due in part to practical reality that few schools or districts have reached corrective action stage, most states have developed systems that focus on school improvement rather than corrective action (AIR, July 2006) Some states “frontload” assistance in an effort to pre-empt need for improvement by providing TA to all districts (AIR, July 2006) Efforts should foster improved instruction, use of data, test practice, and supplemental tutoring (Center for Educational Policy, 2006)

13. Center on Innovation and Improvement - Public Impact13 February 13, 2007 Research Findings Efforts to improve schools that focus intense support on a small cohort of schools appear to be more successful than efforts that fewer resources to more schools (Mintrop & Trujillo, 2004; Reville 2004) Interventions that link planning and implementation to improving practice lead to success (O’Day & Bitter, 2003; Mintrop & Papzian, 2003; The Education Alliance, 2005)

14. Center on Innovation and Improvement - Public Impact14 February 13, 2007 Research Findings Effective reform initiatives generally embrace “multi-pronged” approaches given instability (i.e., teacher turnover, weak infrastructure) in most low-performing schools (The Education Alliance, 2005) Focus of efforts to help districts should be building their capacity to implement change that addresses unique context (The Education Alliance, 2005). Key characteristic of successful change is “reform press”: a willingness by central office staff to be very specific and practical in their directions for implementing reforms in schools, and to change the behavior of or dismiss staff members who ignore district mandates (Snipes, Doolittle, and Corrine 2002; The Brown Alliance, 2005, p. 32).

15. Center on Innovation and Improvement - Public Impact15 February 13, 2007 Develop Strategic Approach NCLB defines statewide systems of support but we propose that definition should be the floor not the ceiling of SEA’s role in improving schools Besides technical capacity, key role for SEA should be to establish “reform press” Efforts to improve schools should be driven by school and district needs rather than expediency given existing SEA structures/systems

16. Center on Innovation and Improvement - Public Impact16 February 13, 2007 Develop Strategic Approach 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) 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

17. Center on Innovation and Improvement - Public Impact17 February 13, 2007 State Systems of Support Discussion Questions: How does your SEA support district and school improvement? What lessons or best practices have you learned from developing systems of support? Given the size of your state, how do you monitor the quality or impact of your state supports? Have you encountered unique issues associated with supporting urban, suburban, or rural districts? What “givens” exist in your state that if changed, could facilitate change?

18. Center on Innovation and Improvement - Public Impact18 February 13, 2007 Additional questions: Lauren Morando Rhim Senior Consultant Public Impact Lauren_Rhim@publicimpact.com (301)655-1992