The Bold and Bureaucrat: The Top Ten State Education Agency Levers for School Turnaround

8/14/2019 The Bold and Bureaucrat: The Top Ten State Education Agency Levers for School Turnaround

1/15

The Bold and the Bureaucrat

The Top Ten

State Education Agency

Levers for School Turnaround

Authors | Larry Stanton and Alison Segal

October 2013


2/15

The Bold and the Bureaucrat 1

Acknowledgements

This report is funded in part by the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation and the Joyce Foundation.

We would like to thank the Federal Education Group and EducationCounsel for partnering with Mass Insight Education

on the State Development Network. We would also like to thank the 2013 State Development Network, including thestate education agencies of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania,

Rhode Island, and Virginia.

The State Development Network (SDN) is a multistate, performance-based network of forward-thinking state education

agencies that are committed to turning around low-performing schools by increasing state-level capacity and

transforming the policy framework.

Please contact us at [email protected] if your state is interested in joining the SDN.

October 2013


3/15


The Bold and the Bureaucrat:

Top Ten State Education Agency Levers for School Turnaround

Executive Summary

Mass Insight Education identified the top ten bold actions that SEAs can take to maximize the chances that theirturnaround efforts will be successful. The foundation of these levers is a strong, coherent theory of action for

school turnaround/improvement.

The power levers range from funding, to conditions for turnaround, to monitoring progress. This publication includes a discussion protocol for identifying the levers available in your state, and to create an

action item list moving forward.

RationaleSchool turnaround is not for the timid; success requires bold actions at the school, district and state levels. Light-

touch programmatic initiatives wont turnaround schools that have underperformed for years. Successful turnaround

requires powerful, coherent, well-resourced and well-executed strategies that change the way that students interact

with their teachers and the curriculum. These strategies should align to a strong and coherent theory of action for

change.

Based on our turnaround work with SEAs, districts and schools, weve identified 10 bold actions that SEAs can take to

maximize the chances that turnaround efforts will be successful. These levers were selected based on diagnostic

reviews of SEA turnaround work, Mass Insights work to support turnaround in school districts, and the feasibility of

successfully pulling these levers. The levers fall under five main categories: planning, funding, staffing, monitoring, and

taking action. At the end of this toolkit, we have supplied a discussion protocol and worksheet to encourage thoughtful

discussion at the state and district levels around the options available to support bold decisions and encourage schoolimprovement.

Introducing the Top 10 LeversUsing a competitive process for awarding SIG and other

funds to support turnaround.

Establishing specific turnaround goals and metrics at the

SEA level and regularly reporting to the public on

progress.

Tying all turnaround grant awards/contracts to specific

performance targets.

Requiring that district and teachers union agree to an

MOU addressing key turnaround conditions prior to full

release of funds.

Basing the amount of grant funding on quality and nature

of plan, school size and documented need.

Allowing the districts the authority to select turnaround

school staff.

SEA encourages flexible use of all available funds in

turnaround schools.

SEA turnaround monitoring process allows for quick

identification of failure and taking action.

Requiring from each turnaround school a single, coherent,

robust turnaround plan based on an analysis of need.

SEA has the power to take over or close schools that fail to

improve.


4/15


Exploring the Top 10 LeversIn our experience, no SEA currently uses all ten levers. However, we believe that after reviewing the levers and

completing the discussion protocol, every SEA will discover they have the ability to use more turnaround levers than

they originally thought possible.

For each lever, we describe why it is important to turnaround, then describe the practices we see across states, followedby an exemplar. The exemplars are intended to be general enough so that any state might be able to use them. We als

discuss the importance or rationale for including each lever.

Throughout the remainder of this publication, we also highlight a series of real-world examples for some of the levers.

1. Using a competitive process for awarding SIG and other funds to support turnaround.Importance/Rationale What We See Exemplar

Considering a districts ability to

implement and fulfill plans makes

that investment more likely to pay

off. It also gives SEAs the leverageto require stronger, well thought out

implementation plans.

States award grants to nearly allthe districts that apply.

At the same time they areawarding grants to nearly all thedistricts that apply, SEA staff

report that they have little

confidence in the ability of the

districts that were awarded

grants to execute their

turnaround plans.

SEA provides a request forproposals to eligible districts

and evaluates proposals based

on a rubric that includes:o district's ability to

create conditions for

turnaround;

o the districts capacity toexecute its plan; and

o the ambition of thedistricts goals for

turnaround.

2. Tying all turnaround grant awards/contracts to specific performance targets.Importance/Rationale What We See Exemplar

School plans should be based on

specificand realisticperformance

targets. These targets should be

measurable, including both leading

and lagging indicators and

outcomes. Armed with clear

performance targets, districts and

schools can better understand the

work that lies ahead, and the SEA

can make decisions to renew

funding based on progress toward

the goals.

General confusion among bothdistrict and SEA staff regarding

expectations for turnaround

school success.

Common performance targets(i.e. escape from Priority status)

across all SIG schools are

unrelated to the schools

starting point or turnaround

strategy.

SEAs renew funding for schoolsthat neither implement their

plans with fidelity nor meet

performance targets.

Every contract includes specificperformance targets that

include leading and lagging

performance indicators and

measures of fidelity of

implementation.

SEA collects data on theperformance measures and

regularly engages district staff

regarding progress on both

implementation and leading

indicators.


5/15


3. Basing the amount of grant funding on quality and nature of plan, school size and documented need.Importance/Rationale What We See Exemplar

Along with awarding grants through

a competitive process, basing the

amount of the grant on the quality

and nature of the proposed plan, thesize of the school, and documented

school need allows SEAs to be more

intentional in funding school

improvement. In a state using this

lever, a school with 99% free- and

reduced-lunch students and a

proven strong leadership team will

receive more money than a school

that is 25% free- and reduced-lunch

whose plan does not include strong

actionable steps to improveoutcomes for students.

SEA staff report that they do nothave the authority to determine

the size of the schools grant

award. The same amount of funding is

provided to all turnaround

schools in some states

regardless of enrollment, need

or the specific improvement

strategy.

District and school leaders areunclear about criteria for grant

awards or amounts.

SEAs School Turnaround Office(STO) differentiates funding

awards based on the strength

of LEAs applications, theexpense of the strategy.

4. Encouraging flexible use of all available funds in turnaround schools.Importance/Rationale What We See Exemplar

As many schools begin to consider

what will happen once their three

years of SIG funding end, SEAs

should require schools and districts

to examine their use of Title I funds

and encourage shifts to support

critical turnaround activities.

District turnaround activities arelimited to those that can be

funded with SIG dollars.

Little attention is paid to howturnaround activities can be

sustained after SIG funds run

out. Schools and districts act as

though federal Title grant

supported activities are

permanent and fixed regardless

of their impact on school

performance.

SEA Turnaround Offices arereluctant to push other SEA

departments, e.g., federal

programs, to encourage close

examination of the impact of

Title funds.

The SEA requires districts toconsider all options for funding

school turnaround, including

repurposing federal Title I and II

funds by adapting the SDN

guidance describing the

flexibility available in the

Schoolwide Program Model, as

explained in the July 2013

publication by the Federal

Education Group and Mass

Insight Education,The Money

You Dont Know You Havefor

School Turnaround. This

document clarifies the

spending rules that apply to

supporting schoolwide

improvement programs with

Title I dollars, allowing states,districts, and schools to rethink

the way they use Title I

funding.1

1See our previous SDN publication,The Money You Dont Know You Have for School Turnaround (2013).
http://www.massinsight.org/stg/research/additionalresearch/conditions-funding/http://www.massinsight.org/stg/research/additionalresearch/conditions-funding/http://www.massinsight.org/stg/research/additionalresearch/conditions-funding/http://www.massinsight.org/stg/research/additionalresearch/conditions-funding/http://www.massinsight.org/stg/research/additionalresearch/conditions-funding/http://www.massinsight.org/stg/research/additionalresearch/conditions-funding/http://www.massinsight.org/stg/research/additionalresearch/conditions-funding/http://www.massinsight.org/stg/research/additionalresearch/conditions-funding/http://www.massinsight.org/stg/research/additionalresearch/conditions-funding/http://www.massinsight.org/stg/research/additionalresearch/conditions-funding/http://www.massinsight.org/stg/research/additionalresearch/conditions-funding/http://www.massinsight.org/stg/research/additionalresearch/conditions-funding/


6/15


5. Requiring from each turnaround school a single, coherent, robust turnaround planbased on an analysis of need.

Importance/Rationale What We See Exemplar

Requiring a single consolidated

school improvement plan to clarify

priorities and integrate activities willreduce confusion and encourage

coherence. School improvement

plans should be based on an analysis

of need and root causes of

problems. Too often, the

turnaround plan is an amalgam of

disconnected plans to fund

programs unrelated to analysis of

why the school is failing.

School improvement plans focuson compliance rather than a

comprehensive analysis of theschool's performance on what

the district or SEA has

determined will really make a

difference.

SEA support for the schooldiagnostic and planning function

is separate from turnaround

resulting in a lack of alignment.

Improvement plans identifymore priorities than the school

could possibly address given theavailable time and resources.

The SEA either provides orrequires a diagnostic process

that engages the schoolscommunity in identifying the

root causes of the schools low

performance, which leads to a

single, coherent school

improvement plan and

supporting budget.

The plan encourages focus on alimited number of priorities

that address the identified root

causes of low performance, and

identifies a limited number ofperformance outcomes and

leading indicators of progress.

6. Establishing specific turnaround goals and metrics at the SEA level and regularlyreporting to the public on progress.2


Setting goals and reporting to the

public helps accomplish several

objectives at once: first, it can be

used to build political will and

support for the difficult decisions to

be made by school and district

leaders; second, it keeps the public

informed and issues transparency;

and third, it gives education within

the state a common goal to aim for

and sets standards for turnaround.

Meeting AYP is the measure ofschool success.

Lack of clarity about the goalsand expectations for turnaround

statewide. Little media attention or public

discourse about turnaround.

Lack of accountability to thepublic for turnaround success or

failure.

Establishing goals and metrics:o SEA is publicly

committed to moving

schools from the

bottom 5 percent to

the top 25 percent.

Reporting:o SEA publicly reports on

progress of turnaround

schools.

2See our previous publication, Setting the Bar for School Turnaround: How Ambitious Public Goals Can Drive School Turnaround

(2013).

Real World Examples

Establishing goals and metrics: Tennessees Achievement School District publicly committed to moving schools

from the bottom 5 percent to the top 25 percent, both stating the metric publicly and posting it boldly on the front

page of the ASDs website.

Reporting: Advance Illinois, in collaboration with the Illinois State Board of Education and Mass Insight Education,

produced a 2012 report on the progress of Illinois turnaround schools. The report was made available to the

public and was designed in an easy-to-understand manner.


7/15


7. Requiring that district and teachers union agree to an MOU addressing key turnaround conditionsprior to full release of funds.


Changing conditions for students at

an underperforming school will

often rely on changing people andprograms. This includes giving the

district the ability to extend the

school day or school year, or to

change the staff at a school.

Oftentimes, these changes require a

Memorandum of Understanding

(MOU) with the local union. SEAs

can provide districts with leverage to

negotiate improved conditions for

learning by using its authority to

make grants, including Title I,contingent on changes in specific

conditions.

The overwhelming majority ofturnaround schools use the

transformation model thatincludes few substantial changes

in learning conditions or

personnel to avoid changes to

collective bargaining

agreements.

Collective bargainingagreements prevent the district

from considering using the

turnaround model and

removing/replacing a substantial

number of school staff. SEAs fail to use its power to

make extra funding contingent

on changes in conditions.

SEA strategy requires LEAs toaddress autonomy for school

leaders in their applications. The SEA withholds RTT funding

until districts reach agreement

with their local teachers union

on a new evaluation system.

8. Providing districts with the power to select turnaround school staff.Importance/Rationale What We See Exemplar

Although a change in staff is no

guarantee of turnaround success, it

does provide the school leader with

an opportunity to assemble a teamthat is committed to turning around

the school. In most districts, it is

impossible to get union agreement

that all staff need to reapply for

their jobs in turnaround schools.

Districts submit proposals thatdescribe ambitious changes to

the way that schools are staffed,

but fail to reach agreement withunions for the CBA modifications

necessary to execute the

change.

Principals dont have the powerto select their faculty/staff.

State legislation allows LEA tore-staff turnaround schools;

teachers who are not hired by

other schools lose theirpositions after a predetermined

time in a candidate pool

Real World Examples

Requiring an MOU: The New York State Department of Education required districts to come to an agreement with

their local unions regarding the newly implemented teacher evaluation system as a condition for receiving Race to

the Top funds.

Authority to select turnaround staff: Illinois legislation allowed Chicago Public Schools to re-staff turnaround

schools.


8/15


9. SEA turnaround monitoring is designed to quickly identify failure so that actions can be taken.Importance/Rationale What We See Exemplar

SEAs and districts cant wait for

years to determine whether

turnaround will be successful.

Instead, it needs to closely monitorprogress and intervene when the

turnaround is off course. In some

cases, this may mean requiring

changes in key personnel, strategy,

or partners. In the most extreme

cases, it may require a complete

restart of the turnaround effort.

SEA monitoring process focuseson compliance rather than

performance so that schools

failure to improve is notrecognized for years.

SEA renews SIG grant even withpoor performance.

SEA staff recognize that thatsome SIG schools are not making

progress, but don't believe that

they can do anything about it.

The SEA maintains a dashboardof leading indicators on

turnaround schools and

intervenes when there isevidence of either a failure to

implement the school

improvement plan or lack of

progress on leading indicators.

10.SEA has the power to take over or close schools that fail to improve.Importance/Rationale What We See Exemplar

Takeover or closing is the lever thatmany schools and districts dont

believe their SEAs will ever use. This

belief that the SEA lacks either the

authority or the will to close or

takeover persistently failing schools

makes it possible for school and

district leaders, teachers and even

parents to take a this too will pass

attitude toward turnaround. When

an SEA closes or takes over a school

for persistent failure, it sends apowerful signal to other schools that

failing to address the needs of

students can also have serious

consequences for adults.

SEAs have the power to closeschools for poor performance

under existing legislation but

have never utilized the power.

SEAs have limited the use oftheir authority to close schools

to cases of financial distress.

The SEA's failure to close lowperforming schools creates a

perception in other schools and

districts that there are no

consequences of failure foradults.

The SEA closes or restartsschools that fail to improve

after three years.

The SEA shifts responsibility forturnaround schools from the

local district to a state

managed district or charter

school authorizer.

Real World Examples

Quickly identifying failure:The Connecticut State Department of Educations Commissioners Network targets bold

turnaround in a subset of the States lowest-performing schools. On a quarterly basis, Network schools come

together for NetStat sessions to review progress relative to a set of universal leading and lagging indicators. School

teams work collaboratively to analyze data, celebrate success, diagnose challenges, and establish action plans to

target improvements.

Taking over or closing schools: Both Tennessee (Achievement School District) and Louisiana (Recovery School

District) created state-run networks of schools when said schools face severe underperformance. While some

states may not have the authority to take over schools, such as New Jersey, they instead take over entire districts

in the face of repeated failure to improve.


9/15


Using the Top 10 LeversTo use this tool, the team should discuss and answer the following questions for each lever.

Once your team completes the questions, fill out the accompanying worksheet to document

your final decisions and next steps for each lever. At the SEA level, this discussion should

include the Turnaround or School Improvement staff and the Accountability and BudgetOffices. The last page of this toolkit supplies you with a summary of the ten levers.

Top 10 SEA Levers for School Turnaround Discussion Protocol

1. Does the SEA have this power?2. Does the SEA use the power? How? How often?3. If the SEA does not have the power, how would it be used? What is/could be the source

of this power (law, regulation, policy)?

4. If the SEA does not have the power, why not? What does it do instead?5. If the SEA does not have the power, can it get the power? How? If the SEA does not wish

to seek this power, why not?

6. If the SEA has used this power, how much leverage (low, medium, high) did it provide? Ifthe SEA doesnt have this power, how much leverage might it provide if it had it?

Top Ten SEA Power Levers for School Turnaround

Power Lever

SEA Has the

Power

SEA Does Not

Have the

PowerWhats Next?

Uses

Does

not

use

Wants

Does

not

want

EXAMPLE:

1. Using acompetitive

process for

awarding SIG

and other funds

to support

turnaround.

X

Example:

SEA awards equal funds to all schools that apply.

In order to encourage stronger plans, we will

institute a new system for 2014-2015 funding,

requiring an interview in addition to the proposal

We will base grant amounts on the strength of

the plans and the schools capacity to follow

through with their plans. We will meet with

other departments across the SEA that work

closely with these schools to receive feedback as

we build the new competitive process.


10/15


Top Ten SEA Power Levers for School Turnaround

Power LeverSEA Has the

Power

SEA Does Not

Have the

Power

Whats Next?

1. Using a competitiveprocess for awarding

SIG and other funds

to support

turnaround.

2. Tying all turnaroundgrant

awards/contracts to

specific performance

targets.


11/15


3. Basing the amount ofgrant funding on

quality and nature of

plan, school size and

documented need.

4. Encouraging flexibleuse of all available

funds in turnaround

schools.


12/15


5. Requiring from eachturnaround school a

single, coherent,

robust turnaround

plan based on an

analysis of need.

6. Establishing specificturnaround goals and

metrics at the SEA

level and regularly

reporting to the

public on progress.


13/15


7. Requiring thatdistrict and teachers

union agree to an

MOU addressing key

turnaround

conditions prior to

full release of funds.

8. Providing districtswith the power to

select turnaround

school staff.


14/15


9. SEA turnaroundmonitoring is

designed to quickly

identify failure so

that actions can be

taken.

10.SEA has the power totake over or close

schools that fail to

improve.


15/15


Mass Insight Education is a nonprofit organization, founded in 1997, that has been a state and national leader in strengthening

public school systems. U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan called its 2007 study the bible of school turnaround, and Mass Insigh

Educations national work has been recognized for its research, advocacy, and state and district initiatives to transform the countrys

lowest-performing schools and rethink traditional district structures. Within Massachusetts, a Mass Insight Education program

remains the states largest for academic high school math and science interventions aimed at underserved students. Since its

incorporation in 2008, this program has seen increased enrollment in math, English, and science AP courses; and more students

starting and graduating from college. Currently, Mass Insight Education is leveraging both its initiative and programmatic strategies

to promote college preparedness and career success.

Mass Insight Education

18 Tremont Street Suite 1010

Boston, Massachusetts 02108

(617) 778-1500 www.massinsight.org

blog:www.turnaroundzone.org

email:[email protected]
http://www.turnaroundzone.org/http://www.turnaroundzone.org/http://www.turnaroundzone.org/mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.turnaroundzone.org/

The Bold and Bureaucrat: The Top Ten State Education Agency Levers for School Turnaround

Documents