-
REDACTED VERSION
Resubmitted: February 11, 2010
Illinois Partnership Zone: Supporting Partner Narrative Proposal
and Cost Proposal Redacted Illinois State Board of Education
Copyright © 2010 Learning Point Associates. All rights
reserved.
1120 East Diehl Road, Suite 200 Naperville, IL 60563-1486 Phone:
800-356-2735 Fax: 630-649-6700 www.learningpt.org
Chicago > Washington, D.C. > Naperville > New York
-
Illinois Partnership Zone Technical Proposal: Supporting
Partner
Illinois State Board of Education
November 2009 Authorized Officials Geographic Area / Region Gina
Burkhardt, CEO 1120 East Diehl Road, Suite 200 Naperville, IL
60563-1486 Phone: 630-649-6500 Fax: 630-649-6700
[email protected] __________________________________
Gina Burkhardt, CEO
1120 East Diehl Road, Suite 200 Naperville, IL 60563-1486
800-356-2735 630-649-6500 www.learningpt.org FEIN #37-1161423
Copyright © 2009 Learning Point Associates. All rights
reserved.
4140_11/09
-
Contents Page
Cover Page Executive Summary
.........................................................................................................................1
Service Area and Capacity Limitations
...........................................................................................3
Work Plan
........................................................................................................................................4
1. Needs Assessment
................................................................................................................6
2. Community Involvement and Engagement
.......................................................................16
3. Human Capital Services Plan
.............................................................................................17
4. Building Capacity for Sustained Improvement
..................................................................25
5. Outcomes-Based Measurement Plan
.................................................................................26
6. Fiscal Status Reporting
......................................................................................................31
Demonstrated Record of Effectiveness
..........................................................................................32
Fiscal and Management Capabilities
............................................................................................
39 Additional Information
..................................................................................................................50
Exceptions to the RFSP
...........................................................................................................50
Contracts With
ISBE................................................................................................................50
References
......................................................................................................................................51
Appendixes
Appendix A. Biographies and Resumes
Appendix B. Contracts With ISBE (REDACTED)
Appendix C. Fiscal and Management Capabilities (REDACTED)
Cost Proposal
-
Executive Summary Learning Point Associates proposes to offer
services and programs designed to assist Illinois’ lowest
performing school districts with school improvement efforts. As a
Supporting Partner for up to six Illinois districts, we anticipate
implementing Illinois Partnership Zone strategies and supporting
the work of Lead Partners in selected schools. Critical to the
turnaround or transformation of low-performing districts into
high-performing learning systems to occur, a robust human capital
strategy at the district level must be coupled with high-quality
interventions at the school level. There must be as systemic and
systematic process of comprehensive support for low-performing
schools and districts to attract, develop, and retain top talent.
Learning Point Associates—in close collaboration with its partner,
Pivot Learning Partners—will implement a set of strong human
capital and capacity-building interventions for our partner
districts to increase the effectiveness of their teacher,
principal, and organizational leader workforce. Our theory of
action for this work centers on districts engaging in a systemic
review of their current human capital management
strategies—aggressively identifying strengths and weaknesses—to
refine their educator quality policies and practices. The goal of
this effort is a targeted reallocation of resources in support of
higher levels of student achievement. Districts will abandon the
piecemeal, fragmented efforts that are inefficient and wasteful to
focus on and attend to the whole spectrum of educator quality
policies and practices. A district will have a comprehensive and
strategic way to substantially and sustainably improve the quality
of teaching and learning. The proposal consists of six sections.
The first section addresses how Learning Point Associates and Pivot
Learning Partners propose to provide human capital and
capacity-building needs assessments in districts that have schools
included in the Illinois Partnership Zone. The needs- assessment
phase will systemically gauge the capacity of district leadership
to strategically design human capital strategies that, in
collaboration with the Lead Partner, will become the basis for an
action plan for a high-performing learning system. In the remaining
sections of the proposal, Learning Point Associates and Pivot
Learning Partners offer a menu of design and implementation
services, which together provide schools and districts in the
Partnership Zone with a comprehensive approach to human capital
development, management, and capacity building. Learning Point
Associates and its partner have demonstrable experience and
specialized expertise to work in the following areas:
• Reforming District Recruiting, Hiring, and Retention Policies
and Practices for School Leaders (including principals and
teachers)
• Establishing an Alternative Incentive and Compensation
System
• Creating an Intensive Induction and Mentoring Program
• Establishing a Meaningful Performance Evaluation System
• Training and Coaching for Capacity Building for District Data
Use, School Board Member Training, or Implementation of Partnership
Zone Activities
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—1
-
We understand that districts and Lead Partners will use the
results from the needs-assessment phase to select some or all of
the specific strategies included in our menu of services. Learning
Point Associates and Pivot Learning Partners stand ready to assist
with implementation of each strategy selected. However, we feel
strongly that the contribution of the Lead Partner and Supporting
Partners is to guide the district toward a systemic solution that
is successful in the short term at building capacity and aligning
human capital management functions, but more important, results in
long-term, sustainable improvements in teaching and learning.
Learning Point Associates and its partner are able to work with
districts in each of the 10 regions. However, our combined capacity
is limited to intervention implementation in no more than six
districts in the first year of implementation. We think that a
network of districts in the same region would best serve the needs
of Partnership Zone schools in developing local relationships,
engaging district support and establishing a collaborative approach
to school transformation. Learning Point Associates has a long
history of working with a broad range of districts, including
chronically low-performing school districts, inside and outside of
Illinois to design, implement, evaluate, and monitor improvement
and transformation efforts, especially in the area of managing
educator talent. Learning Point Associates is a nonprofit
educational organization with more than 25 years of direct
experience working with and for educators and policymakers to
transform education systems and student learning. Based on a long
track record of collaborating with partners and managing a
diversified portfolio of work ranging from direct consulting
assignments to major federal contracts, we have the demonstrated
capacity to work with Illinois school districts for multiple years
to transform education in the Illinois Partnership Zone schools and
districts.
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—2
-
Service Area and Capacity Limitations Learning Point Associates
and its subcontractor, Pivot Learning Partners, are able to work
with schools and districts in each of the 10 Illinois system of
support regions. Our combined capacity is limited to intervention
implementation in no more than six districts in the first year of
implementation. We believe that a network of districts in the same
region would best serve the needs of Partnership Zone schools in
developing local partnerships, engaging district support, and
establishing a collaborative approach to school transformation with
other schools. This local or regional network approach also would
allow for economies of scale in terms of professional development
for school boards, district leadership, and teachers. Priority will
be given to districts seeking to develop a network approach to
district transformation. In order to implement some of the
strategic professional development initiatives, some autonomy in
structuring teacher planning time, schedules, and assignments may
need to be granted by the district and local teacher contract.
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—3
-
Work Plan Introduction A focused use of federal funds from the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act through Race to the Top
and/or 1003(g) school improvement funds gives high-need,
chronically low-performing Illinois schools the opportunity to
engage in heavy-touch interventions as they strive for
transformation. These critical, long-term interventions pave the
way for robust developments and eventual overhaul of the status
quo. To begin and sustain this robust school and district
transformation, leaders in education must concentrate on
interventions at the school level coupled with the strategic
management by the district. Learning Point Associates, in
collaboration with Pivot Learning Partners, believes that the
surest path to long-term comprehensive school improvement and
increased student achievement is building a system’s capacity to
help itself. This goal can be achieved through conducting
comprehensive needs assessments, the consistent application of
human capital strategies based upon evidence from scientific
research and rigorous practice, evaluation and continuous
improvement of the implementation of those strategies, and ongoing
technical assistance and monitoring support. The theory of action
in this proposal centers on districts engaging in a systemic review
of their current human capital management strategies—aggressively
identifying strengths and weaknesses—to refine their educator
quality policies and practices that ultimately lead to a targeted
reallocation of resources in support of higher levels of student
achievement. In collaboration with Learning Point Associates and
Pivot Learning Partners, districts will attend to the whole
spectrum of educator quality policies and practices in a
comprehensive and strategic way in order to substantially and
sustainably improve the quality of teaching and learning.
Effectiveness and Equity at the School Level. High-quality
instruction at the school level is the key to strong student
learning, but chronically low-performing schools tend to have
relatively few effective teachers. Teachers in such schools are
often inadequately prepared for classroom teaching (Ediger, 2004)
and are frequently “lower-skilled” (Mintrop & Trujillo, 2005,
p. 18) or “the least talented” (Murnane, 2007, p. 164). Chronically
low-performing schools generally have a difficult time attracting
teachers with strong qualifications, especially in core subject
areas, and often are unable to keep teachers for more than a few
years (National Partnership for Teaching in At-Risk Schools, 2005).
Intertwined with the issue of unqualified and ineffective teachers
is the problem of inadequate leadership. Ineffective leadership is
the second most consistent feature on the list of internal factors
affecting low-performing schools (Nicolaidou & Ainscow, 2005).
Leaders often lack the right set of skills—in particular, strength
in managing and developing teachers (Mazzeo & Berman, 2003).
According to Borman et al. (2000), success and failure depend on
the leadership and culture of a school. These are substantial
issues to confront; moreover, they contribute to and are confounded
by teacher turnover. Schools with high teacher turnover are plagued
by low levels of capacity as the constant churn of teachers
diminishes ownership in the school, consistency of policies and
practices, effective instruction, and overall morale (Mintrop &
MacLellan, 2002; Ziebarth, 2004).
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—4
-
Strategic Capacity at the District Level. Districts must be able
to secure and maintain a sufficient number of highly effective
teachers and principals (their human capital) to ensure that their
education systems can successfully deliver higher levels of student
achievement. To guarantee highly effective teachers for all
students, districts must create and put into practice a
comprehensive vision and strategy for managing the human capital
within the system and all aspects of the educator’s career
continuum. Learning Point Associates and Pivot Learning Partners
have years of practical experience and theoretical expertise in
working with high-need schools and districts to address human
capital issues—specifically teacher and leader quality. Research
has increasingly demonstrated that school districts can play a
vital role in improving teaching and learning. Studies by Stanford
University’s Center for Research on the Context of Teaching (CRC)
show that districts can make a difference; others have found a
statistically significant relationship between district leadership
and academic performance (Waters & Marzano, 2006). School
reform efforts are not likely to be sustained without an actively
supportive district office (McLaughlin & Talbert, 2002; 2003).
The research and experience of Pivot Learning Partners (formerly
Springboard Schools) through its three-year California Best
Practices Study indictes that high-performing, high-poverty schools
in California tend to be located in particular districts and not in
others (Oberman, 2005). Pivot Learning Partners has worked with
low-performing districts since 2001 to build the capacity of
district leaders to put in place and sustain the structures,
systems, and practices proven to improve student achievement, close
the achievement gaps, and transform districts into high-performing,
efficient organizations providing an excellent and equitable
education for all students. Putting the Pieces Together. The
combination of addressing human capital management—or, in more
education-friendly terms, managing educator talent—and building
district leadership capacity garners its power from the ability to
understand and apply strategies for district transformation. When
it comes to managing the talent in the school system, district
leaders can no longer afford to maintain the status quo. Compared
to other sectors, education lags behind in its efforts to
strategically attract and retain top talent. Where other industries
refer to a “war for talent” (MacMillan, 2008), the education field
is far more subdued in its campaign for more high-quality teachers
and its actions to meet this goal. A joint study by the IBM
Institute for Business Value and the Human Capital Institute found
that, while attention to human capital practices varied
substantially across industries, the education field was found to
be the least likely to engage in “enlightened talent management
practices” [emphasis added] (Ringo, Schweyer, DeMarco, Jones, &
Lesser, 2008, p. 9). This lack of prioritization of educator talent
management is especially unfortunate given that research
consistently finds teachers to be the most important school-level
factor that affects student achievement. In the same way that the
health of the human body requires the complete set of
interconnected, interdependent DNA, the health of the education
system requires that the complete spectrum of educator quality
policy components—including preparation, recruitment, hiring,
induction, professional development, compensation and incentives,
working conditions, and performance management—be connected and
addressed in a systemic, holistic manner. However, faced with so
many critical components to managing educator talent, districts
often instead take a piecemeal approach and try to improve the
system by addressing only one or two
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—5
-
components. Addressing only induction or only compensation does
not create the appropriate combination of components needed to make
genuine, lasting improvements to educator quality. With the support
of their states, districts need to attend to the whole spectrum of
educator quality policies and practices in a comprehensive and
strategic way if they are to substantially and sustainably improve
the quality of teaching and learning. District leaders who
genuinely support school transformation and are determined to
impact, improve, and advance educator quality policies and
practices must invest heavily in and take deliberate action in the
systemic management of teachers and school leaders. To address
these critical issues, Learning Point Associates and its partner,
Pivot Learning Partners, propose through the following work plan to
provide human capital and capacity-building needs assessments, as
well as specifically address strategies for human capital
development in districts that have schools included in the Illinois
Partnership Zone. The work plan encompasses the following elements:
(1) needs assessment, (2) community involvement and engagement, (3)
services plan, (4) building capacity for sustained improvement, (5)
outcomes-based measurement plan, and (6) fiscal status reporting.
1. Needs Assessment In order systemically gauge the capacity of
district leadership and the ability to strategically design human
capital strategies, Learning Point Associates and Pivot Learning
propose two separate but aligned needs assessments: one for
district leadership capacity building and another for managing and
developing human capital. The results of both needs assessments
converge and become the basis for one action plan, which also
involves the Lead Partner. Framework and Needs Assessment for
Managing and Developing Human Capital With so many issues related
to educator talent management—from preservice training to
professional development and compensation—and with district, state,
and, to a growing extent, federal involvement in teacher policies,
policymakers often have adopted a piecemeal approach to dealing
with this system-level issue. In response, Learning Point
Associates has developed a suite of Managing Educator TalentSM
(MET) solutions called METworksSM to maximize educator
effectiveness and ensure that every student has access to highly
effective, well-supported teachers and leaders who stay in the
system. Managing Educator Talent: A Research-Based Framework for
District and State Policymakers (Behrstock, Meyer, Wraight, &
Bhatt, 2009)—also called the METworks Framework—is one of these
solutions. The METworks Framework enables policymakers to
critically examine their human resource management policies,
consider pertinent components where current practice might not be
best practice, and create plans to address these gaps effectively.
In addition, it ensures that states are not disconnected from the
local stewardship of managing educator talent within the education
system. The METworks Framework is intended to facilitate a more
proactive and strategic approach to securing the teachers and
school leaders needed to create a world-class, 21st century
education system. In doing so, this resource provides guidance for
states and districts to structure their
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—6
-
policies and practice using objective, research-based evidence.
The framework is unique in its comprehensiveness, its basis in
research, and its inclusion of strategies and a rationale for each
component and subcomponent included. Based on an extensive review
of the literature on educator quality, the framework is organized
around eight components (preparation, recruitment, hiring,
induction, professional development, compensation and incentives,
working conditions, and performance management), as illustrated in
Figure 1. These eight components span the career continuum of
educators—teachers and school leaders alike.
Figure 1. The Components of Educator Talent Management
Figure 2 illustrates the educator career continuum. For
teachers, the career continuum begins with entry: the decision to
join the profession. The first step teachers take is to go through
preparation program, be it traditional or alternative, during which
they gain essential preliminary knowledge and skills to be
effective in the classroom. After gaining certification, teachers
are then recruited to schools and districts. At the hiring stage,
there are tremendous implications for the equitable distribution of
teachers across districts, schools, and classrooms as decisions
about teacher placement are made. During their first several years
on the job, teachers often engage in an induction program.
Throughout their career, teachers’ ongoing professional
development, compensation, and working conditions affect their
decisions to stay in the profession or in a particular school or
district. Through performance management, decisions about career
advancement are made—including tenure or dismissal and, further
along the career continuum, whether to embark on an administrator
or teacher leader career track or to remain in the classroom.
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—7
-
Figure 2. The Educator Career Continuum
Each of the eight illustrated components of educator talent
management is necessary, though insufficient on its own for
authentic improvement to educator recruitment and retention. Each
component also must be understood in relation to the others. It is
the interconnections of these components that make up the career
continuum and must be considered systemically, rather than as one
component at a time in lock-step order. These interconnections,
which are reflected in the METworks Framework, are represented in
Figure 3.
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—8
-
Figure 3. Educator Talent Management Intercomponent Connections
For example, preparation should transition seamlessly to a
comprehensive induction program, which ought to be aligned with
ongoing professional development throughout an educator’s career.
The research indicates that professional development must be
directly responsive to the performance management system, such that
educators’ evaluations lead to genuine growth and improvements in
effectiveness. The same performance management standards that are
used by principals to evaluate teacher performance should be
applied at the time of hiring to aid selection decisions; these
standards also should be made known during the recruitment phase so
that candidates who do not think they will be able to meet those
standards can self-select out of the district (Milanowski, Prince,
& Koppich, 2007). At the same time, compensation and other
incentives also are most effective if linked in some manner to an
educator’s development as a professional. Recognizing the
connections among the eight key components serves several purposes.
Most important, this recognition increases the effectiveness of
policy implementation by creating coherence and consistency in the
goals of each and in the strategies developed to achieve them. In
addition, taking into account these interconnections creates
efficiencies. Financial and other resources can be leveraged to
avoid overlap in effort and to divide costs among reforms working
toward common purposes. The METworks Framework is the driving force
and foundation supporting the Learning Point Associates METworks
District Assessment. In addition, the METworks District Assessment
allows Learning Point Associates to collect district data and
compare how district current policies and practices align with the
METworks Framework as well as collaboratively pinpoint where
educator talent policies and practices are working in concert to
make a constructive difference and where current practices are
ineffective and must be strengthened.
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—9
-
Past experience in other districts has proven that the most
profitable beginning step in conducting an assessment is the
convening of a kickoff meeting with district stakeholders. Such a
step brings teaching staff, district decision makers, and
school-level administrators together for an in-person presentation
with the Learning Point Associates METworks District Assessment
team to review the scope and requirements of the METworks District
Assessment. Furthermore, it provides an opportunity to
collaboratively determine how best to handle many of the logistics
involved in gathering and disseminating data throughout the
process—including setting dates for a number of events to occur
during the needs-assessment phase. Learning Point Associates
requires that the district assemble a team of eight to 12 people to
be key participants in the entire project, with others brought in
as needed. This team should include the district superintendent
and/or assistant superintendents, representatives from the school
board, and key leadership from human resources, school(s) in the
Illinois Partnership Zone and the teacher union. During the data
collection period of the needs assessment, Learning Point
Associates staff collect and analyze the data needed to assess the
status of the district in comparison with the METworks Framework.
We employ a multivariate approach to data collection, collecting
both quantitative and qualitative data from a variety of sources to
allow for triangulation across data sets in identifying priority
human capital strategy focus areas for the district. Data sources
can include a combination of the following:
• Teacher and school administrator demographic data
• Online surveys for teachers and administrators
• District leadership interviews
• School administrator interviews
• Key document review
• Teacher focus groups (with teachers grouped according to their
tenure in the district) To best meet the needs of the districts and
their schools in the Illinois Partnership Zone, we offer three
levels of service for the human capital needs assessment, as
outlined in Table 1
Table 1. Levels of Service for the Human Capital Needs
Assessment
METworks District Assessment Levels of Service
Components
Level I
• Kick-off meeting • Data sources and reports:
Teacher and school administrator demographic data Online surveys
for teachers and administrators District leadership interviews
School administrator interviews
• Co-Interpretation Meeting • Action planning
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—10
-
METworks District Assessment Components Levels of Service
Level II
• Kick-off meeting • Data sources and reports:
Teacher and school administrator demographic data Online surveys
for teachers and administrators District leadership interviews
School administrator interviews Key document review
• Co-Interpretation Meeting • Action planning
Level III
• Kick off meeting • Data sources and reports:
Teacher and school administrator demographic data Online surveys
for teachers and administrators District leadership interviews
School administrator interviews* Key document review Teacher focus
groups
• Co-interpretation meeting • Action planning
*Depending on the number of schools in the Illinois Partnership
Zone within one school district, interviews can be conducted with
school administrators who lead schools in the Partnership Zone and
interviews with school administrators who lead schools not in the
Partnership Zone for qualitative data comparison and analysis
Learning Point Associates staff will administer the online survey
via distance and will work with a designated district administrator
to collect the essential documents for review, as well as any
demographic data. The document review and demographic data analysis
are conducted off-site from the school district. The interviews and
focus groups are conducted in-person at the school district. As a
result of the data collection, Learning Point Associates produces
one data report for each source of data collected in the needs
assessment. These data reports are used by Learning Point
Associates facilitators to lead a group of 25–35 district
stakeholders (a METworks Team), as well as representatives from the
Lead Partner organization, through a detailed and structured
two-day process to interpret the data collected, then develop and
prioritize key findings. Co-interpretation participants begin by
developing an in-depth understanding of each data set and then
combine and subsume findings from various reports into key findings
across reports. The group then uses a rating process to prioritize
key findings, as well as compare the current district practices for
the key areas of managing educator talent to the research-based
strategies and practices in the METworks Framework. From this
process, which requires considerable thought and discussion, a list
of critical key findings emerges.
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—11
-
Framework and Needs Assessment for District Leadership Capacity
Building Guided by research, the Pivot Learning Partners model for
district change is a systemwide effort that builds both the
organizational and leadership capacity of districts to institute
and implement the structures, processes, and programs necessary to
make good teaching the norm in every classroom and to raise the
achievement of all students. This model focuses on multiple levels
of the education system to create strong school systems in which
the work of educators at every level—from the boardroom to the
classroom—is focused on the common goal of increasing student
learning by engaging in a systematic and sustainable improvement
process. To foster continuous improvement systems, Pivot Learning
Partners conducts research that informs core service offerings for
district change and also conducts professional development and
coaching. In order for school districts to provide an excellent and
equitable education for all students, both districts (as
organizations) and the individuals who staff them must be equipped
with the knowledge, skills, and tools necessary to use the
strategies and put in place the systems and processes necessary to
improve entire schools and school systems. That is why the Pivot
Learning Partners framework for district leadership capacity
building focuses on all levels of the system. Pivot Learning
Partners holds that districts and schools can achieve
transformative results for students by doing the following:
• Maintaining an unwavering focus on equity and excellence.
• Collaborating as professional learning communities.
• Using data to measure progress toward achieving vision,
mission, and core strategies.
• Drawing on and utilizing best practices in decision
making.
• Building the systems, structures, and processes that
institutionalize the ongoing use of sound educational practices
throughout the organization.
The Pivot Learning Partners Theory of Action also is reflected
in its District Needs Assessment process, which begins with
reviewing multiple sources of data, on both student learning and
adult practice. Pivot Learning Partners employs a diagnostic and
collaborative approach to needs assessment, helping districts to
identify areas of need as well as areas of strength, and using
these focal areas to develop a comprehensive action plan—which may
take the form of a local education agency (LEA) plan, instructional
action plan, district strategic plan, or school site plan. Data
review always includes a review of extant data about student
outcomes as well as adult work products, such as existing strategic
plans, prior needs assessments, or outside consultant reports.
Where possible and appropriate, Pivot Learning Partners supplements
these data sources through the use of an online Best Practices
Survey, which enables the collection of data from large numbers of
teachers and administrators in a cost-effective and confidential
manner. This survey reflects the Pivot Learning Partners Best
Practices Framework, which synthesizes and groups together the core
instructional areas of high-performing, high-poverty schools and
districts and indicates how the various levels of the education
system—from the classroom to the school to the district office—work
together to support improved performance. The framework’s core
areas are as follows:
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—12
-
• Aligned and Rigorous Curriculum and Measurable Goals
• Instructional Practices
• Continuous Improvement and Monitoring Performance
• Professional Development
• Recognition, Interventions, and Support These core areas serve
as guiding question areas in the assessment process. For instance,
under Aligned and Rigorous Curriculum and Measurable Goals, Pivot
Learning Partners will seek to learn whether the district has—and
whether teachers and administrators at all levels agree they
have—specific and measurable goals in place for improving student
achievement. Under Professional Development, Pivot Learning
Partners will seek to gauge not only the level of professional
development currently being provided for teachers and
administrators but also its alignment with student achievement
priorities and its plans to ensure that all staff are highly
qualified. The traditional focus group and interview approach can
be used to supplement the survey and review of district documents,
and helps to reveal facts about the district’s culture and climate.
Often in education, the phrase “best practices” is used to apply to
teachers, not others. However, administrators and other adults
working in the system also have professional practice. This means
that they, too, need to understand best practices and work to align
their own practice and that of their organization with best
practices. Figure 4 depicts the elements in which best practices
exist at the district level.
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—13
-
Figure 4. Best Practices at the District Level
The Pivot Learning Partners District Needs Assessment is a
multiphased process that always begins with informal discussions to
build both trust and transparency into the relationship-building
process and to garner initial agreements on roles,
responsibilities, and expected outcomes. A District Needs
Assessment typically consists of several key steps, as outlined in
Figure 5. Once the District Needs Assessment is completed, Pivot
Learning Partners then works with a cross-functional district team
to develop a plan that outlines a strategy as well as tactics,
roles, and responsibilities for the improvement of teaching and
learning. If no such plan exists—or if it exists on a shelf but is
not a working, living document—the District Needs Assessment
informs and helps to create a real improvement plan as well as a
plan for a comprehensive suite of interlocking professional
development and coaching on implementation that is customized to
the unique needs and goals of the district. The support of Pivot
Learning Partners is ongoing and multidimensional. It includes the
regular review of data and consistent check-in meetings to track
progress toward goals, to ensure that the district is on track or
to make refinements and adjustments along the way. The action plan
involves the Lead Partner and also takes into account the results
of the needs assessment for managing and developing human
capital.
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—14
-
Figure 5. Overview of the Pivot Learning Partners District Needs
Assessment
As a result, Learning Point Associates works with the METworks
Team, Pivot Learning Partners, and the Lead Partner for the
Illinois Partnership Zone to translate key findings into an action
plan that can drive changes and improvements in the critical
component areas of human capital management. This action plan
concentrates on the priority areas but also attends to the need for
interconnectedness of a systemic approach, as supported by the
METworks Framework, and supports implementation of specific human
capital strategies, indicating how capacity at the district
leadership level will be built to address and manage these
strategies.
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—15
-
2. Community Involvement and Engagement The work of Learning
Point Associates at the national, state, and district levels has
helped schools build stronger and more vibrant partnerships with
community organizations. For all services proposed, Learning Point
Associates and Pivot Learning Partners will work hand-in-hand with
district leadership to employ the best methods for engaging
parents, the business community, community organizations, state and
local officials, and other stakeholders into the services
implemented. Whether part of data collection activities during the
needs assessment, serving as part of the action planning team, or
attending trainings, community stakeholders will be involved
through each phase of the work. Learning Point Associates has a
track record of working closely with community members in many
different facets of education reform work. At the state level, our
work with the Illinois State Board of Education implementing the
21st Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC) at the state level
has focused on raising awareness of funds, building stronger and
more sustainable partnerships, and involving key stakeholders to
bring a rich breadth of community partners and stakeholders to help
leverage resources already available in school communities and to
build a stronger coalition of support for schools. We have worked
closely on this effort at the local level with Chicago Public
Schools as they have developed their Community Schools Initiative
(CSI) over the past nine years. The CSI model is based on creating
holistic support for students and their families in close
partnership with schools—offering health services, expanded
learning and afterschool opportunities, and providing a Resource
Coordinator to help manage and strengthen the variety of
partnerships with schools. Learning Point Associates has been the
lead professional development provider for the CSI, providing
training and technical assistance on building stronger partnership
coalitions to provide a greater variety of activities for students
and their families, establishing and nurturing stakeholder and
partner oversight communities, and creating stronger community
support for school improvement efforts. In working with the state
of Utah to provide assistance in the communication and outreach to
key stakeholders around compensation reform, Learning Point
Associates worked with the Utah State Board of Education
Differentiated Pay Work Group to serve as a neutral source for
gathering stakeholder opinions and develop an outreach and
communication plan for the state. In addition to conducting focus
groups for conduct four key stakeholder groups: teachers,
principals, parents, and community members, Learning Point
Associates worked with the work group to establish a series of Town
Hall meetings across the state. These meetings were held for
various key education stakeholders in Utah, such as the district
administrators and the teachers union, and will generate statewide
communication about the proposed framework.
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—16
-
3. Human Capital Strategies Services Plan Capacity building is
critical in the successful implementation of any strategy to
improve the management and development of human capital.
High-capacity school districts must possess the following
characteristics:
• Ability to assess the district and school needs through
comprehensive data collection and analysis in order to inform
decisions
• Ability to develop solutions for those needs through the
engagement of stakeholders and systematic coordination
• Ability to build systems of support for improvement through
proven tools, approaches, and strategies
• Ability to improve its tools and systems through a continuous
improvement approach Based on the results of the needs assessments
and the resulting action plan, the following services describe
solutions for those needs through systemic coordination, as well as
proven tools and approaches. Services to Support Human Capital
Strategies Services to support human capital strategies include the
following: (A) reforming district recruiting, hiring, and retention
policies and practices for school leaders; (B) establishing an
alternative incentive and compensation system; (C) creating an
intensive induction and mentoring program; (D) establishing a
meaningful performance evaluation system; and (E) training and
capacity building for district data use, school board member
training, or implementation of Partnership Zone activities. A.
Reforming District Recruiting, Hiring, and Retention Policies and
Practices for School Leaders Given the overwhelming evidence that
effective school leadership is a key level for reforming other
critical human capital resource strategies, identifying, placing
and supporting principals who can implement district reform
strategies is often a challenge (National Comprehensive Center for
Teacher Quality, 2008). In response to this challenge, Learning
Point Associates has designed the Quality School Leadership
Identification (QSL-ID) process for assisting school district
leadership to recruit and select high-quality school principals.
QSL-ID can support districts in prioritizing interview and hiring
decisions for Illinois Partnership Zone schools. QSL-ID is a
standards-driven and research-based hiring procedure intended to
supplement or supplant current district procedures for hiring
school principals This approach aids district personnel in
selecting highly qualified new principals who are also a good match
for school culture and leadership needs. QSL-ID addresses the
following processes:
• Preparation of school principal hiring materials
• Development of a school principal recruitment strategy
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—17
-
• Establishment and training of a local hiring committee
• Screening applicants
• Facilitating candidate interviews and other data-gathering
activities
• Final candidate selection
• Planning for school leadership succession QSL-ID consists of
the following components:
• Facilitator’s Guide. The facilitator’s guide offers a
step-by-step process for hiring a new school principal. The hiring
process is research-based in that it draws extensively from
business and education research literature on effective executive
and administrator hiring practices.
• Candidate Evaluation Rubrics. The candidate evaluation rubrics
provide a systematic approach to collecting and weighing
information about each candidate, a bank of interview questions,
and a screening checklist. Construct and content validation
procedures were conducted to ensure candidate evaluations reflect
the 2008 ISLLC principal professional standards (Council of Chief
State School Officers, 2008) and best practices for instructional
leadership.
• Hiring Tools. An interview question bank, teacher observation
task, data analysis task, and other hiring tools were developed to
gather evidence about candidate qualifications to lead
organizations and instruction. The interview question bank was
developed through a review of executive and school administrator
screening protocols and an expert panel review.
QSL-ID tools are user tested and reliable. QSL-ID content and
processes have been user tested by eight superintendents, five
human resource directors, and 15 other hiring committee members
from urban, suburban, and rural school districts. User testing was
used to determine whether QSL-ID meets standard time, financial,
and legal constraints experienced by districts of different sizes.
User-testing also provided designers with data on the reliability
of QSL-ID tools in a simulated hiring situation. Depending on
district needs, Learning Point Associates provides two options for
services focused on school leadership hiring: (1) train district
personal to revamp hiring procedures to reflect QSL-ID, or (2) send
trained personnel to facilitate the entire school principal hiring
process.
• Level I Training. Level I training is a full-day training for
individual school district superintendents, human resources
directors, and others responsible for administering school
principal hiring processes, or for regional consortia of school
district personnel. The training orients and prepares district
personnel to (1) lead school principal hiring committees, and (2)
use the QSL-ID hiring process and tools to select and match
principal candidates to schools. Hands-on training includes
simulations of QSL-ID principal selection processes with applied
use of the tools so that participants are able to use this
research-based process and its supported tools. All participants
receive copies of
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—18
-
the QSL-ID facilitator's guide, rubrics, and other tools for
local use, as well as recommendations for customization of the
process to fit their district’s needs and size. After the training,
Learning Point Associates staff are available to respond to
participant questions about QSL-ID, and participants are encouraged
to join an online forum supporting QSL-ID use.
• Level II Facilitation. The Level II facilitation is intended
for individual school districts. Learning Point Associates staff
serve as the external facilitator for the entire QSL-ID process;
lead the district hiring committee; and assist school district
superintendents, human resource directors, and/or others to
supplant or supplement existing school principal hiring processes
with QSL-ID. Following a four step process across multiple
committee meetings and within a timeframe customized to the
district’s needs and size, Learning Point Associates supports a
hiring process tailored to the unique conditions of each district
and school. Working hand-in-hand with district leadership, Learning
Point Associates staff provide process management, objective
oversight, and build the capacity of district administrators by
giving them the tools and skills to use the research-based QSL-ID
process in the present and in the future. All participants receive
the entire set of QSL-ID materials and are invited to join an
online forum supporting better principal hiring and the use of
QSL-ID.
B. Establishing an Alternative Incentive and Compensation System
Learning Point Associates has concentrated and broad experience and
expertise in the area of establishing incentive and compensation
systems. Based on the emerging research about pay-for-performance,
differentiated compensation systems, and alternative compensation,
Learning Point Associates staff have worked with states and school
districts to design, implement, and evaluate alternative
compensation programs as well as aspects of education systems that
impact or are impacted by pay reform, such as teacher evaluation.
Specifically, the organization has expertise and experience in the
following areas of alternative compensation systems:
• Designing Comprehensive Compensation Systems. Districts and
states interested in developing or revising an alternative
compensation system should consider several important planning,
design, and implementation steps. Learning Point Associates has
worked with states and districts to design alternative compensation
systems and accomplish these important stages of the process in a
customized way. This area of expertise includes the important steps
of identifying sources of funding and budgeting for a high-quality,
effective, and sustainable program; communicating with
stakeholders; linking to teacher evaluation; and conducting a data
management review.
• Creating Stakeholder Engagement Through Strategic
Communication Approaches. Research consistently shows that
communicating with and engaging stakeholders at every stage of the
process concerning designing and implementing an alternative
compensation program is vital for success. Learning Point
Associates is able to support districts and states in the following
ways:
Conduct surveys, focus groups, or interviews to gauge
stakeholder perspectives about alternative compensation or to help
share information about an emerging program and garner stakeholder
feedback and input.
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—19
-
Develop communication plans and materials for continually
talking about an alternative compensation system with a range of
stakeholders, including parents and the media.
Plan informational meetings, including agendas, speakers,
materials, and small-group discussion topics.
• Connecting to Teacher Evaluation. This area of expertise
includes the essential work of revising teacher evaluation systems
to support alternative compensation programs. Learning Point
Associates also is prepared to work with and train school leaders
to prepare them to support and implement teacher evaluation systems
tied to alternative compensation.
• Reviewing Data Management Systems. Most districts and states
embarking on an alternative compensation system do not have data
systems equipped to collect, analyze, or report information that
supports a performance-based compensation system. Learning Point
Associates can help school districts review their current data
systems to determine the extent to which they have the capacity to
sustain an alternative compensation program and then improve these
systems based on areas of need.
These areas of expertise provide clients with a road map for
designing and implementing alternative compensation programs in a
systemic way. Clients may be interested in working with Learning
Point Associates on a comprehensive compensation system design or
on specific components of that design. Learning Point Associates is
one of the partners in the federally funded Center for Educator
Compensation Reform, which provides direct technical assistance to
the 32 Teacher Incentive Fund grantees at the state and district
level. Each grantee has proposed outcomes related to improvements
in educator recruitment, retention, and student learning. Learning
Point Associates has further supported the development of teacher
evaluation guidelines in Ohio and contributed to the design of
alternative compensation initiatives being piloted in districts in
Iowa and Utah. Shortly after Learning Point Associates staff worked
in Utah regarding communication with stakeholder engagement, Utah
enacted legislation to implement a pilot of alternative
compensation with a select group of elementary schools across the
state. C. Creating an Intensive Induction and Mentoring Program
Learning Point Associates can support a district in establishing a
new or reforming a current induction and mentoring program through
two primary avenues: design/redesign with district leadership, and
professional development services to mentors and administrators. In
addition, Learning Point Associates can provide additional
expertise to support the evaluation of an induction and mentoring
program. Design/Redesign of an Induction and Mentoring Program.
Learning Point Associates (2009) has developed the Continuum of
High Quality Mentoring and Induction Practices for districts to
assess all of the components of their induction and mentoring
program for teachers as either Emerging, Developing, Sustaining, or
Integrating. This tool is based on the Illinois Standards of
Quality and Effectiveness for Beginning Teacher Induction Programs
(Illinois State Board of
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—20
-
Education, 2008) as well as other research titled High Quality
Induction and Mentoring Practices conducted by the New Teacher
Center (2007) and an SRI publication titled Teacher Induction in
Illinois and Ohio (Humphrey, Weschler, Bosetti, Park, &
Tiffany-Morales, 2008). Used in the design phase, this tool
supports a representative district team in identifying the current
state of practices that allow the additional planning and design
needed to implement a high-quality mentoring and induction program.
This tool is intended to help initiate and support collaboration
among administrators, beginning teachers, mentors, and other key
participants to assess the components of an induction program and
develop clearly articulated goals and steps needed to produce a
comprehensive program of support for teachers and administrators.
Learning Point Associates then works collaboratively with a
district team to determine the best strategies and policies for
closing the gap between current and best practices. Professional
Development. Based on previous experiences in working with
districts to establish or reform an induction and mentoring
program, Learning Point Associates staff know that additional
professional development for mentors and administrators is often
needed to support and sustain changes to the program. Learning
Point Associates offers professional development to mentors and
administrators on the following topics:
• “Conducting Classroom Observation for Sustained Beginning
Teacher Growth”
• “Examining Student Work as Job-Embedded Professional
Development”
• “Building Professional Learning Communities through Lesson
Study”
• “Supporting and Developing Generation Y Teachers”
• “Creating Culturally Proficient Classrooms and Schools”
Evaluation Support. A critical component to effective induction and
mentoring programs is the ability to evaluate the program for its
impact on teachers (both mentor teachers and beginning teachers),
administrators, and ultimately on students. Learning Point
Associates can support the evaluation of an induction program
through additional data collection activities such as surveys,
interviews, and focus groups. These data are analyzed and
triangulated for an accurate picture of the impact of the induction
program. Learning Point Associates has worked with the following
Illinois school districts to improve and enhance their induction
and mentoring programs: Geneseo Unit District 228, Plainfield
Community School District 202, Oswego Community School District
308, and Yorkville School District 115. In each of these school
districts, Learning Point Associates has used the Continuum of
High-Quality Mentoring and Induction Practices as a beginning place
for program design and development as well as for a foundational
structure for the program evaluation. As a result, Learning Point
Associates supported these districts to completely and
comprehensively revamp their induction and mentoring programs. For
example, both the Plainfield and Oswego school districts moved from
a one-on-one mentoring system to a more inclusive system that
includes full-release mentors, tiered support for first-year
teachers and second-year teachers, and sustained trainings for
school administrators. Impact can be seen in the following
data:
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—21
-
• In the Plainfield School District, 64 percent of first-year
teachers in a one-on-one mentor
relationship agree/strongly agree that they are more effective
teachers because of their participation; 84 percent of first-year
teachers with a full release mentor agree/strongly agree that they
are more effective teachers because of their participation.
D. Establishing a Meaningful Performance Evaluation System As a
supporting partner to Illinois Partnership Zone schools and
districts, Learning Point Associates would work closely with the
participating school districts and schools to establish a
high-quality performance management system for teachers, which
includes both formative and summative components to identify
effective teachers, enhance or improve effective instruction, and
consider where ineffective teaching may be hindering student
improvement. Through work for the National Comprehensive Center for
Teacher Quality (TQ Center), staff at Learning Point Associates
have been engaged for the past four years in efforts related to
defining and measuring teacher effectiveness (for research
syntheses of this work, see Goe & Croft, 2009; Little, Goe,
& Bell, 2009). Learning Point Associates staff would use this
experience and expertise as part of the support for participating
districts looking to improve or revise this important component of
the teachers’ career continuum and the overall approach to managing
educator talent. The Learning Point Associates approach would be to
work with the participating districts to establish a high-quality
performance management system in two primary phases: design and
implementation. Design Phase. The first phase would focus on
designing the performance management system, from taking stock of
the teacher evaluation processes that are already in place to
revising or enhancing those components to realize a rigorous,
transparent, and comprehensive system that works for all involved,
including students. Learning Point Associates believes that this
first phase is an important part of building capacity for and
gaining buy-in from those who will be involved in implementing and
sustaining such a transition. Teaching contexts differ greatly
across subjects, grades, intentional groupings of students in
schools, and subgroups of students, and between schools with
different student populations and local circumstance. In that case,
in concert with the participating districts, Learning Point
Associates would like to consider teacher effectiveness in light of
these different contexts, and then incorporate measures that take
into account differences in subject matter, teacher activities,
student background, personal characteristics, and school culture
and organization (Campbell, Kyriakides, Muijs, & Robinson,
2003). Learning Point Associates has experience working with the
state of Ohio on such a design phase (see “Example of Relevant
Work” below). While not an exhaustive list, the first phase would
include the following steps:
• Create a committee to involve teachers and other stakeholders
in the design process (Goe & Croft, 2009).
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—22
-
• Come to consensus on what teacher effectiveness means for the
district as well as the purpose of teacher evaluation—i.e. for
instructional improvement, salary considerations, tenure decisions
(Coggshall, 2007).
• Take into account various teaching contexts and how the
evaluation system will accommodate them (Goe & Croft,
2009).
• Review teacher evaluation and performance management system
models and best practices from other districts and states (Mathers
& Oliva, 2008).
• Consider various evaluation methods, including those related
to student achievement or student work, and indicate how these
methods may align with the emerging system and/or how they might be
used in the participating schools and districts (Little, Bell,
& Goe, 2009).
Implementation Phase. The second phase would seek to roll-out a
detailed plan for implementation that would focus on outreach and
communication related to the revised performance management system
as well as the necessary training required to ensure that policy
and research transitions well to practice and that the design
components agreed-upon by the district are implemented with
integrity in the schools. Learning Point Associates engaged with
the state of Ohio to create an evaluation model for the state
beginning with creating guidelines for its evaluation system (see
Rowland, 2009). In addition, Learning Point Associates is now
working with Ohio to develop a: state evaluation framework, which
is the guidance for all district-level evaluation; supporting
research materials; and a gap analysis tool. The gap analysis is
designed to help districts move from their current evaluation
system to the enhanced model established by the state evaluation
framework. E. Training and Coaching for Capacity Building for
District Data Use, School Board Member Training, or Implementation
of Partnership Zone Activities Pivot Learning Partners brings
together the three strands of research, professional development,
and coaching in its model for districtwide change, the District
Partner program. Recognizing the unique needs and circumstances of
every district, Pivot Learning Partners provides a menu of services
that stretch from the classroom to the district office rather than
a “one-size-fits-all” approach, enabling districts to co-create a
customized package of support focused on all four of the following
building blocks that together constitute the Pivot Learning
Partners Theory of Action: an interlocking support model. Pivot
Learning Partners helps districts build capacity in several or all
of the four components of its Theory of Action:
• The Cycle of Inquiry process engages educators in a continuous
improvement process of data-based decision-making that centers on
results. In the process, educators use data (both on student
achievement and teacher and administrator practice) to pose
questions, identify gaps in achievement and instructional practice,
and create plans to address these issues and ensure equitable
outcomes for all students.
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—23
-
• Best Practices center on discovering and implementing
research-based tools, materials, and approaches at every level of
the system to scale up the approaches that lie behind the strong
results in high-performing, high-need schools—at multiple levels of
the system. At the district level, work on best practices includes
work on resource alignment, curriculum management, data and
accountability systems, governance and community engagement, and
human capital management.
• Professional Learning Communities create the structure and
culture to review data, identify and implement best practices, and
carry out the hard work of improvement. Pivot Learning Partners
teaches leaders how to implement and lead these communities in
their schools and districts as a key part of creating a
collaborative and supportive environment that supports inquiry,
sets common goals, and helps educators both learn from and
challenge one another.
• Leadership Systems are what link the components of the Theory
of Action together and cultivate a shared vision and strategy to
improve student achievement while maintaining a laser-like focus on
equity. These skills are necessary for superintendents, principals,
and other leaders to implement and sustain the systems, processes,
and practices focused on continuous improvement and raising student
achievement.
Depending on the particular needs of the district, Pivot
Learning Partners professional development can target educators
working at every level of the system, from the board room to the
classroom, in three core capacity-building services:
• Leadership development training
• Coaching
• Building internal systems to monitor progress Examples of
Pivot Learning Partners leadership development training include
governance training; building leadership of superintendents,
principals, and district office staff; and helping all staff
increase capacity to serve a particular subgroup of students, such
as English learners. All of this professional development draws on
the extensive research-based suite of professional development
materials created by Pivot Learning Partners, but it is highly
customized to best meet the needs of the district and the group of
staff participating. As a follow-up to professional development,
Pivot Learning Partners provides coaching—often the missing piece
of improvement efforts—that helps educators implement and sustain
the practices and strategies they have learned, providing hands-on
support in dealing with real-life situations in their schools and
districts. The Pivot Learning Partners coaching model is a
synthesis of several well-known coaching models; it is distinct
from other models through the “coaching continuum” across which
Pivot Learning Partners coaches move fluently and have the ability
to play multiple roles with educators, ranging from thought partner
to consultant. All Pivot Learning Partners coaches are themselves
former educators—superintendents, district administrators,
principals, and teacher leaders, and many also have experience in
providing professional development support to teachers and
administrators. Pivot Learning Partners provides a team of coaches
under the guidance of a highly qualified Project Lead in its
District Partner program. As a final step, Pivot Learning Partners
shows districts how to build internal
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—24
-
systems to monitor progress, foster internal accountability and
adjust the work on an ongoing basis to maintain continuous
improvement systems aligned with increased student achievement. An
internal analysis conducted in 2008 demonstrated that the Pivot
Learning Partners District Partners that received both leadership
and training made greater improvements than districts that received
only coaching. While respecting the needs and unique circumstances
of every district, Pivot Learning Partners advocates for the
full-service model whenever possible to effect the most dramatic
change. In California, districts that engage with Pivot Learning
Partners make more gains than those that do not. Despite the
challenges of educating a diverse, at-risk student population,
these districts continue to improve more rapidly than others across
the state, even though they serve a higher population of students
living in poverty (55 percent), students of color (60 percent), and
students learning English (28 percent). These partner districts
range from small, rural districts like Corcoran Joint Unified with
approximately 3,000 students, to Fresno Unified School District,
the fourth largest in the state with nearly 80,000 students. 4.
Building Capacity for Sustained Improvement Learning Point
Associates believes that the surest path to long-term comprehensive
school improvement and increased student achievement is building a
system’s capacity to help itself. This goal can be achieved through
conducting comprehensive needs assessments, the consistent
application of human capital strategies based upon evidence from
scientific research and rigorous practice, evaluation and
continuous improvement of the implementation of those strategies,
and ongoing technical assistance and monitoring support. We will
focus considerable attention on building the capacity of district
teams to:
• Use needs assessment data to drive action planning and
decision making.
• Plan for implementation of human capital strategies that are
well-aligned with research-based practices.
• Lead the continuous school improvement process.
• Engage community stakeholders in the process of continuous
improvement and increase awareness of accountability.
• Comply with all Illinois Partnership Zone activities. Over the
course of five years of working with districts as part of the
Illinois Partnership Zone, we propose to structure the activities
in the work plan to ensure that the services can be managed by the
school district to sustain the improvements and resulting growth.
Our experience indicates that in order to make continuous progress
over time, a district must closely monitor its performance against
the indicators set out in the action plan, as well as against the
research-based practices in the METworks Framework and/or Best
Practices Framework. Table 2 indicates the tasks by project
year.
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—25
-
Table 2. Tasks by Project Year
Year Needs Assessment and Planning
Implementation of Human Capital Strategy Services
Evaluation of Services and Improvement Cycle
Monitoring Support and Technical Assistance
Community Engagement
Year 1 X X Year 2 X X X Year 3 X X X X Year 4 X X X X Year 5 X X
X As indicated in Table 2, the needs assessment and initial
planning will take place in Year 1. In Year 2, the implementation
of selected services for human capital strategies commences along
with additional action planning. Beginning in Year 3, districts
will engage in additional data collection activities to assess the
ongoing implementation. This information will be used by the action
planning team to refine efforts using a continuous improvement
cycle and will guide decisions about program adjustments and
improvements to increase the likelihood of positive impact. As
district teams begin to lead the key activities for implementation
of human capital strategies, Learning Point Associates moves into a
role of providing only monitoring support and technical assistance
in Years 4 and 5. Monitoring support and technical assistance often
takes the form of quarterly or semiannual meetings or check-in
reports, whereby, over time, Learning Point Associates builds the
district’s capacity to self-monitor progress and make changes to
the plans and indicators as required for stronger implementation.
Throughout all five years, Learning Point Associates and the school
district ensure community engagement through various strategies
(see Section 2. Community Involvement and Support). 5.
Outcomes-Based Measurement Plan To ensure the successful creation
and implementation of a comprehensive vision and strategy for
district capacity-building across the three key areas of resource
alignment, curriculum management, and establishment of data
collection and accountability systems, an outcomes-based
measurement plan will be adopted. This plan will roll out over the
course of five years, with an initial assessment after two years
and a final assessment after five years. Intermediate Outcomes
(After Two Years) To initially assess progress and determine
necessary adjustments to ensure that the final outcome is
successful, we will assess intermediate outcomes after 2 years (1
year of planning, 1 year of implementation). At the intermediate
stage, district capacity objectives will be assessed using a
combination of surveys, review of work products, and other extant
information. If it is found that the specified outcomes have not
been met, the Supporting Partner will consult with stakeholders
before developing a plan to address any barriers that may have
arisen. In the event that
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—26
-
intermediate outcomes have not been met after 2 years, a second
intermediate assessment will be conducted after 3 years. Resource
Alignment Objectives
• Objective 1: The development of a more comprehensive and
strategic picture of how resources should be allocated to meet
district goals.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Attendance
of 25–35 district stakeholders at a goal-setting and resource
allocation session; post-event survey of stakeholders attending
this session indicating that at least 85 percent of participants
believed this objective was met.
• Objective 2: Enhanced knowledge about issues and priorities
for reallocation of
resources.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes:
Cross-district leadership team will have completed an initial
analysis of current patterns of resource allocation.
• Objective 3: Concrete district action taken to improve the
alignment of resource
allocation with goals.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: A section of
the District Action Plan about reallocating resources that
addresses issues (e.g., allocation of resources across schools and
to high-need student populations, and efficacy of district
investments in professional development) with at least three areas
of reallocation specified and initial action steps under way.
Data and Accountability Objectives
• Objective 1: The development of a more comprehensive and
strategic picture of what data should be collected and how data
should be used to support improved teaching and learning.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Attendance
of 25–35 district stakeholders at a 2-day Best Practices
professional development and data systems review session;
post-event survey of stakeholders attending session indicating that
at least 85 percent of participants believed this objective was
met.
• Objective 2: Enhanced knowledge about issues and priorities
for improved data
collection and use.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Completion
of a district data system map (including data from finance, human
resources, student information system, assessment, and special
programs) and identification of at least three high-leverage areas
of action to collect new data, improve data quality, link existing
data sources for purposes of analysis, improve data analysis or
reporting, and/or provide data to additional users.
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—27
-
• Objective 3: Concrete district action taken to improve data
and accountability. Measurable Indicators of Progress Against
Outcomes: A district action plan for improved data use in three
high-leverage areas (e.g., providing teachers with formative data
to improve instruction; measuring the impact of interventions for
students not at grade level; using data to place students in
appropriate levels of English language development) with at least
three specific action areas specified and initial action steps
under way.
Curriculum Management Objectives
• Objective 1: The development of a more comprehensive and
strategic picture of tools that high-performing, high-poverty
districts use for curriculum management.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Attendance
of 25–35 district stakeholders at a two-day Best Practices
professional development and curriculum management systems review
session; post-event survey of stakeholders attending session
indicating that at least 85 percent of participants believed this
objective was met.
• Objective 2: Enhanced knowledge about issues and priorities
for improved curriculum
management.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Completion
of the Pivot Learning Partners Best Practices Survey section that
concerns curriculum and curriculum management issues by a
cross-section of teachers and administrators; the review of the
resulting data by a cross-district team of stakeholders including
teachers and the identification of 3–5 issues for action.
• Objective 3: Concrete district action taken to improve
curriculum management.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Completion
of District Instructional Action Plan section that specifies 3–5
specific actions to improve curriculum management in the district
in at least three high-leverage areas (e.g., aligning of curriculum
with standards; establishing processes for monitoring quality of
instruction and fidelity of curriculum use; creating teacher
professional learning communities; providing new and/or struggling
teachers with coaching support) with at least three action areas
specified and initial action steps underway.
Final Outcomes (After Five Years): Human Capital Objectives The
final outcomes will be assessed after five years to confirm that
the final outcome is successful. Measurable indicators of progress
against outcomes will address district capacity-building objectives
and building capacity for sustained improvement. The final human
capital objectives include each of the intermediate human capital
objectives as well as objectives related to improved teacher
recruitment, retention, morale, and effectiveness. The building
capacity for sustained improvement objectives relate to changed
thinking and approaches to improving human capital within the
district.
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—28
-
• Objective 1: The development of a more comprehensive and
strategic way of thinking
about human capital/educator talent management among key
stakeholders.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Informal
interview of a random sample of five of the key stakeholders after
five years, indicating that at least four of the five stakeholders
believe this objective was met.
• Objective 2: Enhanced knowledge about district-specific human
capital/educator talent
management issues among key stakeholders.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Informal
interview of a random sample of five of the key stakeholders after
five years, indicating that at least four of the five stakeholders
believe this objective was met.
• Objective 3: Concrete district action(s) taken to improve
human capital/educator talent
management.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: The
adherence to the district strategic action plan; the full
implementation of at least three policy changes that were
identified as priority areas.
• Objective 4: Improvements in teacher retention.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Extant data
indicating that preretirement teacher attrition declined by a
district-determined amount. (Note: This reduction in attrition may
be a goal for some subject areas only.)
• Objective 5: Improvements in teacher morale.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: The online
teacher survey (in condensed form) will be administered after five
years to assess whether teachers’ views of the district have
changed for the better. Success will be determined in advance by
the district but may include, for example, 30 percent of teachers
perceiving workplace conditions to have improved; a 10 percent
increase in the number of years that teachers intend to remain in
the district; and other such indicators of morale.
• Objective 6: Improvements in teacher recruitment.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Extant data
indicating that recruitment has improved by a district-determined
amount. This may include improvements in the number of applications
per position, the qualifications and experience levels of
applicants, or the number of positions not staffed by the start of
the academic year. (Note: This improvement in recruitment may be a
goal for some subject areas only.)
• Objective 7: Improvements in teacher effectiveness/student
performance.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: While the
effect of human capital/educator talent management reforms may take
many years to show an effect on
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—29
-
student performance, extant test score and student discipline
data will be reviewed after five years to determine
improvements.
Final Outcomes (After Five Years): District Capacity-Building
Objectives The final outcomes will be assessed after five years to
confirm that the final outcome is successful. Measurable indicators
of progress against outcomes will address district capacity
objectives, human capital objectives, and building capacity for
sustained improvement. The final district capacity objectives
include each of the intermediate human capital objectives as well
as objectives related to improved teacher recruitment, retention,
morale, and effectiveness. The district capacity objectives include
an array of improvements in districts’ resource alignment, data and
accountability, and curriculum management systems. The building
capacity for sustained improvement objectives relate to changed
thinking and approaches to improving human capital within the
district.
• Objective 1: The development of a more comprehensive and
strategic way of thinking about resource alignment, data and
accountability, and curriculum management among key
stakeholders.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Informal
interview of a random sample of five of the key stakeholders after
five years indicating that at least four of the five stakeholders
believe this objective was met.
• Objective 2: Enhanced knowledge about district-specific
resource alignment, data and
accountability, and curriculum management issues among key
stakeholders.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Informal
interview of a random sample of five of the key stakeholders after
five years indicating that at least four of the five stakeholders
believe this objective was met.
• Objective 3: Concrete district action(s) taken to improve
resource alignment, data and
accountability, and curriculum management in the district.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Adherence to
the District Action Plan; full implementation of at least three
policy changes that were identified as priority areas; partial
implementation of at least three additional changes.
• Objective 4: Additional resources allocated to low-performing
schools.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Extant data
indicating that additional resources allocated to low-performing
schools by a district-determined amount (This goal may be for
specified schools or districtwide.)
• Objective 5: Improvements in data quality and use.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: The district
data system map will be updated to identify improvements in
district data capacity; the Pivot Learning Partners
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—30
-
online Best Practices survey will be readministered after five
years to assess whether teachers’ views of the usefulness of
district data, and their reports of their own data use, have
changed for the better.
• Objective 6: Improvements in curriculum management.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: The Pivot
Learning Partners online Best Practices survey will be
re-administered to a cross-section of teachers and extant data
reviewed to assess the consistency and quality of curriculum
implementation across the district or in target schools. (Note:
this improvement may be a goal for some subject areas only.)
• Objective 7: Improvements in teacher effectiveness/student
performance.
Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: While the
effect of improving district capacity may take many years to show
an effect on student performance, extant test score and student
discipline data will be reviewed after five years to determine
improvements.
6. Fiscal Status Reporting Learning Point Associates will
provide quarterly year-to-date and contract-to-date expenditure
reports that are tied back to the budget by line item submitted
under the proposal. Learning Point Associates will provide any
additional fiscal reports deemed necessary by ISBE or school
districts as specific contracts are negotiated and finalized.
Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone:
Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—31
-
Demonstrated Record of Effectiveness Demonstrated Record of
Effectiveness for District Capacity Building Pivot Learning
Partners has a long history of improving teaching and learning in
underperforming schools. Pivot Learning Partners was founded in
1995 as the Bay Area School Reform Collaborative (BASRC) and was
part of the national Annenberg Challenge—an ambitious effort by
Ambassador Walter Annenberg to transform schools in major urban
areas. The intensive, five-year external evaluation of BASRC by
Stanford University’s Center for Research on the Context of
Teaching (CRC) found that the BASRC schools improved more rapidly
than a matched sample and that those schools implementing BASRC’s
data-based decision-making program, the Cycle of Inquiry, made the
most progress. BASRC also took on the challenge of building a
program that would be replicable, scalable, and sustainable—
expanding into the Central Valley and the Los Angeles basin in 2004
and 2005, and changed its name to Springboard Schools to better
reflect its wider presence in California. In July 2009, Springboard
Schools became Pivot Learning Partners but remained committed to
its 15-year history of advancing its mission of working with
educators to raise student achievement and close the achievement
gaps. The Pivot Learning Partners core District Partner Program
consists of long-term partnerships with districts around the state
of California. It is in this network of nearly 50 school districts
serving some 750,000 students across California that Pivot Learning
Partners brings together its core operating principles of research,
professional development, and coaching to create a customized
package of support for district-level and districtwide change. The
commitment of Pivot Learning Partners to working in districts that
serve students in need is reflected in the demographics of its
District Partners. Despite the challenges of educating a diverse,
at-risk student population, these District Partners continue to
improve more rapidly than others across the state, even though they
s