District Resource Strategy: Presentation for SSLF

0
Agenda
Time Topic
55 min Introductions and Setting the stage
What we heard from you, and how it shaped our goals and agenda
Why resource strategy matters
40 min System 2020
How we think about resource use and school system transformation
30 min Lunch
15 min Connecting to Oakland: Informing Equity
45 min Strategic Systems in Action
Denver, CO and Lawrence, MA Case Studies
20 min School Support
The role district leaders play in ensuring schools are set up for success
15 min Break
90 min Investing in Innovation and Evaluating Strategies
Impact modeling and Budget Hold ’Em for Districts: Making real-life tradeoffs to
drive success at the system level
20 min Closing Debrief

© Education Resource Strategies, Inc., 2013
District Resource Strategy
SSLF  February 14, 2018

Resources for SSLF available on the ERS website!
https://www.erstrategies.org/tap/school_systems_leaders_
fellowship_resources
2
Wednesday, February 14, 2018

The following CONTENT will be made available for
THIS AUDIENCE
following today’s session

Education Resource Strategies is a non-profit that
partners with system and school leaders to transform
how they use resources—people, time, and money
so that regardless of race, income, or ability,
every child is ready for tomorrow.
Our Mission

Who we are: ERS partners with districts across the country to transform
resource use so that every school succeeds for every student.
WEST COAST
California
Sacramento,
Oakland,
Los Angeles
Colorado
Denver
SOUTHWEST 15
Arizona
Arizona Community
Foundation
New Mexico
Santa Fe, Albuquerque
Oklahoma
Tulsa
Texas
El Paso, Austin, Aldine,
Spring Branch
MIDWEST
Minnesota
St. Paul
Illinois
Chicago
Indiana
Indianapolis
Ohio
Cleveland, Cincinnati
Michigan
Michigan State University
SOUTH
Tennessee
Memphis, Nashville, Knox County,
TN Dept. of Education
Georgia
Atlanta, GA Dept. of Education
Florida
Duval County, Lake County,
Palm Beach County
North Carolina
Charlotte-Mecklenburg
Louisiana
Avoyelles Parish, LA Dept. of Education
NORTHEAST
Massachusetts
Boston, Cambridge,
Holyoke
Rhode Island
Providence
Connecticut
Hartford, Waterbury,
New Haven, Connecticut
Council for Education
Reform
New York
Buffalo, Rochester,
Syracuse, New York
City, NY State Dept. of
Education
Pennsylvania
Philadelphia
New Jersey
Newark
Maryland
Baltimore,
Prince George’s County
Washington, D.C.
D.C. Public Schools
Current State Work
Past State Work
Current District Work
Past District Work

Wait, so does this mean…??
6

But first… here’s what we heard from you
8
Funding and budgeting best practice
What are the key decisions
successful states make behind how
funding is determined for districts?
What are effective approaches to
building school-based and district-
level budget models?
How do you make difficult
funding choices during times
when there are resource
constraints?

9
Interest in strategic school design and effective school support
How do you effectively align
resources to schools with the
most need – and support
them?
How do you structure professional
development that is both district wide
and school based?
What is the connection between
leadership and teaching?
How do we align the right types
of central office supports to
empower schools leaders?

10
Prioritization and decision-making
What do we do when the data doesn't
provide us with information necessary to
make smart funding decisions (i.e. 99%
of teachers rated effective or highly
effective)?
What do you do if the areas that
need the most improvement are
outside of your wheelhouse?
How do I help districts use their data
to evaluate their needs and then
strategically target their resources?
Where do you start, as superintendent or c-
level, if the vast majority of the resource check
was "sometimes"? Which resources are MOST
important for district transformation?
How do you effectively share
this information with senior
leaders to spark conversation
and action, not controversy?

11
How you see yourselves: Resource Check

How you see yourselves: Resource Check
12
1
2
4
6
7
4
2
3
1
The district empowers each school leader to organize resources
to support his or her chosen instructional model and student and
staff needs.
Portfolio: The district actively plans school sizes and
configurations, balancing student needs for effective programs
with available staff, facility, and funding resources.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Don't know
5
3
1
6
8
5
6
4
4
3
5
4
4
1
4
4
4
1
3
The district has a deliberate turnaround strategy for…
The district's central office promotes a supportive culture for
schools and differentiates support and resources based on the…
The district sets clear and meaningful targets for academic
performance growth for all schools.
The district integrates student, teacher, and resource data and…
The district actively manages central costs and service quality.
Never/ Strongly Disagree Sometimes/ Disagree Frequently/ Agree Always/ Strongly Agree Don't know
School
Design
School
Support

With that in mind, our goals for today are:
1. Establish a common set of principles about strategic resource
use that apply to all types of school systems
2. Identify ways that innovative schools are organizing people,
time and money most strategically
3. Assess the role district leaders play in supporting and
enabling school-level strategic resource use
4. Simulate the process of identifying and making real-life
resource tradeoffs at the system level
13

Norms
Ask questions throughout the day*
Draw on each other’s experiences
Maintain a healthy respect for the clock
* no, there are no dumb ones
14

15
Agenda
Time Topic
40 min System 2020
30 min Lunch
15 min Break

What is the current state of
education funding?
Setting the stage:

Until the great recession hit, real spending on education
had increased nearly every year since 1920
17
$0
$2,000
$4,000
$6,000
$8,000
$10,000
$12,000
$14,000
National Public K-12 Expenditures Per Pupil (1920-2014) ($M)
Current expenditures Per Pupil (Real) Current expenditures Per Pupil (Nominal)*
Source: National Center for Education Statistics: Digest of Education Statistics.
*Nominal expenditures expressed in constant 2016 dollars.

Spending varies widely across districts...
18Source: ERS database
$7,800 $8,300
$9,200
$10,200 $10,800
$13,000
$14,100 $14,400
$16,800
$21,100
Aldine,
TX
Charlotte Knox
County,
TN
Fulton
County,
GA
Denver Prince
George's
County,
MD
Baltimore Cleveland D.C. Newark
Per-Pupil Spending on Education
~3x

Systemic Budget Gaps
cost structure rises regardless of revenue
19
• Longevity based teaching salaries
grow at ~2-4% annually
• Benefits growing at ~10+%
annually
• SPED spending continues to grow
• Pre-set COLA increases
• Tax revenue falling
• Enrollment declining
• Drop in Federal Funds

What do districts spend their money on?

School Spending Quiz:
Central administration
consumes a significant portion
of district funding
True or False?

False: Most urban districts spend less on
central overhead than commonly perceived
22
District Governance, Management of the support
services provide to Schools
Example: Superintendent, Board, Strategy, Dir. of
Math, Dir. of Transportation
Leadership &
Management
“Central
Overhead”
All FTEs, services, and materials allocated
directly to schools in the district expenditures
Example: SBB Allocations, Non-SBB Resources
All FTEs, services, and materials not reported on
the school budget, but support schools on a
regular and predictable basis
Example: Athletics, Prep Kitchens, PSNs
School-
attributed
All FTEs, services, and materials that provide
support to schools in ways that leverage scale
across schools
Example: Transportation, Maintenance
Shared
Services
“School-
Attributed”
This is what ERS uses to
compare spending across
schools.
District X
7%
13%
8%
72%

Instruction is the primary
business and consumes what
% of the budget?
1. 50-60%
2. 60-70%
3. 75%+

Typically 50-60% of most districts’ budgets is spent
on instruction in schools
24
56% 56% 58% 53% 55% 58% 59%
52% 57%
6% 5%
6%
6% 6%
6% 5%
6%
6%
20% 19%
20%
23% 21%
20% 18%
22% 16%
7% 9% 5% 6% 6% 6% 8% 8% 8%
8% 7% 8% 8% 8% 7% 7% 8% 8%
4% 5% 3% 4% 4% 3% 3% 4% 5%
District
Average
Palm Beach Duval CoutyLake County Aldine Charlotte Fulton PGC Denver
Breakdown of Total Operating Spending: % by Use
Business
Services
Leadership
Pupil Services
& Enrichment
O&M
ISPD
Instruction
Source: SDPBC FY15 Expenditures, ERS analysis, ERS Benchmark Database
Adj. $pp $9.4 $9.8 $8.5 $7.4 $7.9 $9.7 $10.4 $11.6
Year 2014-2015 2009-2010 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2010-2011 2012-2013 2009-2010
PreK-12
Enrollment
166 (K) 121 (K) 36 (K) 66 (K) 137 (K) 88 (K) 126 (K) 77 (K)

School level spending goes mostly
to people and consumes what % of
the budget?
1) 60-70%
2) 70-80%
3) 80-90%

80-90% of a schools budget is typically spent on staff;
therefore, strategic budget reform must look first and foremost
at people or “Who does What?”
26
65%
5%
2%
5%
8%
1%
2%
9%
School X
Teachers
Instructional Aides
Student support
Administration
Clerks & Other Staff
Substitutes
Supplies & Contracted
Services
Utilities & Maintenance

Linking dollars to student performance:
A one-word research history and the word is “no.”
27
A generation of research: Do resources/inputs matter?
 Hanushek summarizes the existing literature to say
“no.”
 Dollars per pupil are NOT systematically related to
student outcomes
 Very consistent finding over time
 Consistently cited as reason to oppose spending
increases

Common resource
misalignments
Setting the stage:

Many districts and schools still invest in practices with
little impact on student outcomes
29
Restructuring Resources for High Performing Schools .(2011). Watertown, MA: Education Resource Strategies
Up to $0.40 of every $1 spent is not
correlated with student outcomes
Teacher comp.
not aligned
with student
learning
Whole day
class size
reductions in
all subjects
Students
in overly
restrictive
settings
Time not
varied for
student
proficien
cy
5-15¢ 10-15¢ 3-5¢ 3-5¢
“Resource
Misalignments”

Four types of Resource Misalignments
Underinvestment in the
right things
Non-strategic over-
investment in “good
things”
Piecemeal investment in
an integrated solution
Opportunities for
Reallocation
Opportunities for
Strategic Investment
Resources tied up in
the wrong things

Example: Investing more time for struggling
students
24% 25% 24%
29%
21%
19% 20%
16%
19%
21%
17%
15% 15% 14%
16%
Fulton Hall Treutlen Vidalia Marietta
% Time in 9th Grade Math, by Prior Year
Proficiency
Did not meet standards Proficient Advanced
Source: ERS
Piecemeal
investment in
an integrated
solution
24%
14%
Math Support Teachers All Math Teachers
% of All Teachers that are Novice
Most GA districts gave additional time to struggling
students….
However, these classes were
disproportionately staffed by novice teachers

Reflection (3 minutes)
32
Turn to your neighbor:
What resource misalignments have you seen
in your district, CMO, or across your state?
Why do you think they persist?

The status quo persists because re-aligning
resources is hard
 Pure operating efficiencies are small and miss
the point
 Quick timelines inhibit significant changes
 Complex reallocations are multi-year, some
with up-front investment
 Hard to mobilize around the “from” without a clear vision for the “to”
 Can require eliminating policy barriers and/or changing peoples’ jobs
 Realigning resources may not be what the public or board wants

Re-aligning resources is necessary
 Dramatic, stubborn achievement gaps
 Perennially limited resources
 Higher standards / Common Core
 Demand for information-age learning
 Increasing competition for students between traditional
and charter schools
 Our pursuit of equity and social justice require us to act

Guiding questions – from up on the balcony
1. What is my district’s/CMO’s overall resource picture
with regard to strategic vs. non-strategic use?
2. What process does my district/CMO use for making
resource decisions? How can I influence that
process?
3. What aspects of resource use do I control? How can I
have the most impact with the control I have?
4. What will I do when I get back to work?
Districts and CMOs

1. What state policies or practices are intended to
support districts’ strategic resource use? How well do
they currently accomplish that aim?
2. What tools/supports/data does my state offer districts
to support their resource decision-making?
3. How can I influence policies/tools/etc. within and
support their effective use? How can I have the most
impact with the influence I have?
States

37
Agenda
Time Topic
40 min System 2020
30 min Lunch
15 min Break

 Inspiring innovation: Transform Now video
38
Transform Now

The School System 20/20 framework

Transforming outcomes for all students
requires tackling outmoded structures
40
System 20/20 Domain From To
Standards &
Instructional
Resources
Inconsistent or inadequate standards with
little support for teachers.
Rigorous, information-age standards
supported by effective curricula and
assessments.
Teaching
Isolated teachers with limited support,
flexibility, opportunities for growth.
A new way we hire, assign, support, team,
pay, and promote teachers.
School Design
A one-size-fits-all learning environment
that holds everyone back.
A re-imagined school day with new
schedules, dynamic groupings and
targeted instruction.
Leadership
Limited autonomy, flexibility & support to
develop and reward strong leaders.
Clear standards, support, and account-
ability for principals and district leaders.
School Support
& Accountability
Central office staff responsibilities that
focus on compliance and oversight.
The central office is a service and
strategy partner in sharing best practices
and ensuring all schools reach learning
goals.
Funding &
Portfolio
Wide funding variances across schools.
Systems that allocate resources equitably
and flexibly across schools.
Community
Engagement
Schools providing a wide range of
services in addition to their core
educational mission.
Partnering to create innovative and cost-
effective ways to serve students better.

1. Revise funding formulas to achieve greater equity,
transparency and flexibility
2. Implement strategic school designs that personalize
learning for students based on need
3. Restructure investments in PD and teacher time to create
“connected professional learning” for teachers and
leaders
41
Three high-priority levers for transformation:

Elements of a healthy school funding system
Flexibility
School leaders
define the
resources they
need to drive
student
achievement
Equity
Resources are
distributed
equitably based on
student need
Transparency
Clear and easily
understood rules
for where, how, and
why dollars flow

$0
$2,000
$4,000
$6,000
$8,000
$10,000
$12,000
$14,000
$16,000
60
15
39
367
346
51
61
99
34
114
82
105
79
42
14
90
49
54
88
107
31
103
327
109
69
48
384
93
94
315
83
359
19
63
106
391
356
44
55
87
96
57
74
302
58
16
43
70
65
621
716
618
501
614
723
626
617
708
School Attributed $ per Weighted Pupil ($pwp)
Magnet Traditional
43
After adjusting for student need, District X still has a
significant amount of variation in its student funding
Source: ERS analysis
Median: $7.3K
Hi-Lo Spread: 1.9x
Median: $8.9K
Hi-Lo Spread:
2.3x
ES/K-8
HS

The extent to which spending levels vary based
on need varies across systems
44
R² = 0.767
$0
$2,000
$4,000
$6,000
$8,000
$10,000
$12,000
$14,000
1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40
R² = 0.2562
$0
$2,000
$4,000
$6,000
$8,000
$10,000
1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50 1.60
R² = 0.499
$0
$2,000
$4,000
$6,000
$8,000
$10,000
$12,000
$14,000
1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50
R² = 0.1437
$0
$2,000
$4,000
$6,000
$8,000
$10,000
$12,000
1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40

45
Districts should determine if variation is intentional and
strategic and then adjust accordingly to improve equity
District Strategy
School opening/closure
$
School Level
$
School Type
$
Student Need
Special
Education
$$$
English Language
Learners
$$
Economic
Disadvantage
$$
Other Student Needs
$
Unplanned
Enrollment/
School Size
$$$
Teacher Compensation
$
Building Utilization
$
Enrollment Projections
$
Ad-hoc exceptions
$

1. Revise funding formulas to achieve greater equity,
transparency and flexibility
2. Implement strategic school designs that personalize
learning for students based on need
3. Restructure investments in PD and teacher time to create
“connected professional learning” for teachers and
leaders
46
Three high-priority levers for transformation:

47
Most schools organize people, time, and money the
same way they did 50+ years ago
One teacher
per class
20-30 students
per class
Studying a
particular subject
For a set period of time
(e.g., 50 min/day)
For a set duration
(e.g., full year)

48
ERS’ Strategic School Design Essentials
Expert-led
Collaborative Work and
Professional Learning
Organize teachers into expert-led teams
focused on the design and delivery of
instruction, and provide ongoing growth-
oriented feedback
Talent Management and
Teacher Leadership
Attract and retain the best teachers,
and assign roles and responsibilities
to match skills to school and student
need
Empowering
Curricula, Instruction,
and Assessment
Uphold rigorous, college-and-
career-ready standards and use
effective curricula, instructional
strategies, and assessments
to achieve them
Personalized Time
and Attention
Match student grouping, learning
time, technology and program to
individual student needs
Responsive
Learning Community
Ensure students are deeply known
and more intensive social and
emotional supports are integrated
when necessary
Growth-oriented
Adult Culture
Grow a collaborative culture
where teachers and leaders share
ownership of a common instructional
vision and student learning

Most districts have opportunities to
strategically raise class size…
49
Source: Elementary Grades Homeroom file Oct 2009; Includes elementary schools and K-8 schools (grades K0-5); excludes classes that are special
education 60%+, ELL 60%+; includes Advanced Work classes; excludes schools with Two-Way bilingual program; excludes classes with “mixed” grade
(mainly due to teacher data NA); ERS analysis
21
22 22 2222
25
28
31
Grades K-2 Grades 3-5 Grades 6-8 Grades 9-12
In this District Class Sizes are Far from Maximum
and Do Not Vary by Grade
Average class size Contract max

…and to target class sizes to priority subjects
and students
*Core class defined as ELA, Math, Science, Social Studies; Non-core defined as Arts, Computer Literacy, Vocational, Foreign Language
Source: District A and B 9th and 12th grade course data (internal – Resource Mapping presentation); ERS analysis
In these districts class sizes for core subjects are higher than non-core
27
21
18 18
District T District L
Average Class Size by Course Type
9th Grade Core Class Size* 12th Grade Non-Core Class Size
50

Most schools have the opportunity to
optimize time by subject…
51Source: ERS analysis
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
ES 7-9 10-12
PE
Electives
Foreign Language
Science
Social Studies
Math
ELA
Typical District Percent of Student Time
By Grade and Subject

….And by student need
52
Note: % Time is based on the instructional time throughout the school day. It only includes periods entered in PowerSchool and does not include passing time, lunch, recess or
maintenance/homeroom classes.
Source: ERS Analysis, CMS SY2013-2014 Course Schedule PowerSchool Data, CMS SY2012-2013 EOG Performance Data
22% 22%
22% 22%
16% 14%
16% 14%
2% 5%
Below Basic Proficient
%ofInstructionalTime
Prior Year ELA EOG
Avg. % of Time by Core Subject for Below Basic and Proficient Middle
School Students
Foreign Lang.
Social Studies
Science
ELA
Math

Many districts have an opportunity to increase
instructional time by increasing the school day
53
Sources: District figures are from Time and Attention in Urban High Schools: Lessons for School Systems (Frank, 2010) and from ERS analyses for the
Aspen CFO network. Leading Edge school figures are from Shields, R. A., and K. H. Miles. 2008. Strategic Designs: Lessons from Leading Edge Small
Urban High Schools. Watertown, MA: Education Resource Strategies. Charter school figures are from The Boston Foundation report (May 2010) “Out of
the Debate and Into the Schools.” ERS analysis.
963
1080
1110
1120
1125
1138
1160
1170
1180
1200
1210
1250
1250
1260
1276
1476
Chicago
PG County
LA
Boston
Seattle
St Paul
Milwaukee
Washington DC
Rochester
Denver
Baltimore
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
Atlanta
Leading Edge schools
Boston Charters
Student Hours Per Year
National Avg. = 1170

To target individual attention to students, in
the short term, you can...
54
To Support Sustainable Transformation
Invest transition
resources to
 Provide expert PD to increase teacher capacity to use individual
attention strategies
 Create and use formative assessments and tools to enable targeted
instruction and grouping
Lay the
groundwork for
long-term
change by…
 Build understanding of impact of targeted group sizes & teaching
effectiveness in strategic designs
To Reverse Misalignments
Reduce
spending by…
 Increasing general class size targets
 Increasing class size for specific low need students, grade levels, and
subjects
 Leveraging technology for high cost courses and selected lessons
Increase
spending to …
 Reduce group size for high need students, skills, grade levels and
subjects

How does Revere High’s ninth grade academy
reflect the Strategic School Design Essentials?
Introduction: Revere High School has prioritized the 9th grade student
experience though a 9th grade academy. The academy is designed to
provide additional support and time to students as they face more rigorous
content through flipped learning and flexible groupings.
As you watch, consider:
 Which design essentials are most evident in Revere’s ninth grade
strategy?
 How do the design essentials identified relate to the larger System 20/20
Framework?
 In what specific ways can we draw a connection between the conditions
we as system leaders we create and the empowerment of school
leaders to support students in creative ways?
55

 Revere 9th grade Academy: Video
56
How does Revere High provide personalized
learning to students?

Foundational concepts
1. There are consistent guiding principles for strategic
resource use, regardless of the specific priorities and
sequence of action a single district pursues
2. In successful systems, strategy and resource
allocation decisions connect to actual improvement
in outcomes, however they can
3. Strategic resource decisions have implications at all
levels – for schools, for how you think about
supporting schools, and for each district function
57

59
Agenda
Time Topic
40 min System 2020
30 min Lunch
15 min Break

 Informing Equity: A study of resource allocation across
Oakland’s charter and traditional district schools
 Discussion questions:
1. What were the most striking resource misalignments both
between systems of schools and within each system?
2. To what extent do the findings here resonate with your
experience in your home cities/states?
3. What do you see as the key opportunities to begin moving
toward a more equitable system of schools across
Oakland?
60
Connecting to Oakland: Informing Equity

61
Agenda
Time Topic
40 min System 2020
30 min Lunch
15 min Break

Strategic Systems:
Examples of Transformation In Action
62
Denver, CO
Lawrence, MA

Denver timeline
63
Standards
Teaching
School Design
Leadership
School Support
Funding
Partners
2008-11
Enabling Conditions
2012-14
Empowering
Schools
2015-16+
Continued Growth

Denver: Summary of results
66
Proficiency 2004 2014 ∆
ELA proficiency 24% 47% +23 pts
Math proficiency 45% 54% +9 pts
Graduation Rate 2010 2016 ∆
HS graduation 54% 67.2% +13.2 pts

Lawrence timeline
67
Standards
Teaching
School Design
Leadership
School Support
Funding
Partners
Spring 2012
Actions with immediate
impact
2012-13
Targeted supports
Enabling cond’ns
2013-14+
Empowering
schools

Lawrence: Summary of actions
68

Lawrence: Summary of results
69
Success metric 2011 2014 Change
Math proficiency 28% 41% +13 pts
ELA proficiency 41% 44% +3 pts
SGP: Math 39% 57% +18 pts
SGP: ELA 45% 52% +7 pts
HS graduation 52% 61%
(2013)
+9 pts
Exceed state average

Digging into the Denver and Lawrence cases
Take 10 minutes to review how one district has approached
its transformation.
Then, share what you learned with a colleague (5 min each),
addressing the following questions:
1. In your view, what was the most important decision/s the
district made? Why?
2. What did you like most about the choices the district
made? What did you like least?
3. What feedback would you give Tom or Jeff based on
what you have observed?
70

Applying lessons in your context
Reflect individually and consider:
1. What would you tell your superintendent/state leadership
about the Denver and Lawrence case examples?
2. District/CMO: What do these cases imply about the
trajectory your district/ CMO is on – both what makes
sense and what the district’s/CMO’s leadership team
might want to re-consider?
3. State: What do these cases imply about your support of
districts – both those in turnaround and those working to
make incremental, strategic change?
71

72
Agenda
Time Topic
40 min System 2020
30 min Lunch
15 min Break

In one word, how would you describe the
relationship between school leaders and
the central office in your district?

Principals in most districts do not rate central office
support highly
75
12% 14% 19% 24% 21%
9%
18%
17%
29% 31%26%
34% 31%
29% 28%
30%
25% 17%
13% 14%24%
9% 16%
5% 5%
Staff evaluation Budget Hiring Curriculum and
Instruction
Professional
Development
Q: On a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being “Very Poor” and 5 being
“Excellent,” how would you describe the quality of support you receive
from your district’s central office in the following areas?
5
4
3
2
1
Average 3.5 3.0 2.9 2.5 2.5
Source: ERS Survey of Principals, 2014

Principals seek more flexibility in many areas
76
Don’t have and don’t want (8)
• Set base compensation and benefits
• Contract with food service vendors
• Contract with transportation partners
Don’t have but want (26)
• Hire non-instructional staff
• Determine how many gen ed teachers are
placed at the school
• Eliminate a position based on school needs
• Exit staff based on philosophy, commitment
or team contribution
• Hire/allocate social/emotional positions
• Set student assessment schedule
• Choose student assessment instruments
Have and want to keep (6)
• Screen general education
teachers for fit and
qualification
• Assign teachers to
leadership positions
• Final say on which teachers
to hire
Have but don’t want (0)
Bulleted items are a sub-set of flexibilities in the category. Have/want based on at least 50% of principals surveyed answering that they have and/or want the autonomy
Source: Principal survey, ERS analysis
Of 40 flexibilities tested in the context of improving student learning,
at least half of school leaders say they…

Empowering principals with high-leverage flexibility
77
Don’t have but want (26)
• Hire non-instructional staff
• Determine how many gen ed teachers are
placed at the school
• Eliminate a position based on school
needs
• Exit staff based on philosophy,
commitment or team contribution
• Hire/allocate social/emotional positions
• Set student assessment schedule
• Choose student assessment instruments
Bulleted items are a sub-set of flexibilities in the category. Have/want based on at least 50% of principals surveyed answering that they have and/or want the autonomy
Source: Principal survey, ERS analysis
 Why do principals want
these flexibilities?
 What can we do to
empower principals in
these areas?
 If we can’t provide these
flexibilities, what’s the
root cause? What’s the
workaround?

Why focus on improving the quality of school
support?
 Perceptions of central office support correlate
with principals’ likelihood to stay in the system
 Especially in systems where rules around
flexibility vary, district leaders must ensure that
each school is making the most of the
resources they have
 Mistrust between school and district leaders
distracts from everyone’s ability to do what’s
best for our students
78
Retention
Equity
Impact

Without a strong central office partnership, schools
are unable to realize their full potential
79
Data/ Reports Process
Policies/
Accountabilities
Tools
Expertise/
Illustrations
StrategicFunctional
The right
information
Clear and
understood
Limited to
requirements
User-
friendly
Compliance-
focused
Benchmark
against best
practices
Design &
needs driven
Aligned with
school
accountability
system
Push
thinking
School design
focused
How strategic district leaders can better support principals
Note that Functional and Strategic are distinct dimensions - it is entirely possible that you are neither, both, some of each, etc.

Self-Assessment: How can district leaders best
support principals?
Consider the functional area you have direct responsibility for or the
district’s/ CMO’s support to principals overall (up to you on where you want
to focus) - State Fellows, think of a district in your states or your support of
districts overall:
1. What is one of your bright spots? What examples can you cite within
the framework of effective functional and/or strategic support to
school leaders?
2. What is one of your biggest gaps? What current structures, teams,
processes are furthest from being strategic?
3. What is one barrier to improvement? What is preventing/will prevent
improvement in the area(s) you cite as having the biggest gaps?
4. What is one opportunity for improvement? What can you or your
system/CMO/state readily do that will enable more strategic support
to school leaders?
80

82
Agenda
Time Topic
40 min System 2020
30 min Lunch
15 min Break

Impact modeling is an ERS R&D initiative that helps connect
actions to student outcome goals districts are setting
 Help make the case to district leaders for actions
that will have the most impact on students by
 Illustrating the relative impact and cost of different actions
 Drawing attention to the magnitude of effort needed to
accomplish goals
 Translating research for practitioners and district context
 Help District leaders build stronger plans to achieve
their goals that take a holistic approach to
improvement
84

Broadly, how we are thinking about this…
 What change is the district trying to accomplish?
 What are goals around student outcomes?
 What improvement is necessary to meet those goals?
 How does this compare to what other districts have
accomplished?
 To what extent are district initiatives likely to contribute to
meeting its goals?
 Detailed: Impact Model, a customized tool that models out
the potential impact of different actions
 High level: Budget Hold’em, an interactive exercise that
helps district leaders and stakeholders explore tradeoffs in
building budgets to help all students succeed
85

How is this work different from currently available
research/modeling?
86
Other Research/Modeling Our Modeling
 Targeted at academics and
practitioners with a deep
understanding of research methods
 Targeted at practitioners and
policymakers regardless of
understanding of research methods
 One action/intervention in isolation  Combinations of actions
 Requires translation to context  Uses district specific data to estimate
in their context (e.g. student mobility,
effectiveness of new hires)
 Scenarios that aren’t always realistic
or scalable (e.g. The average student
impact of permanently removing
teachers below a 5th or 10th percentile
cutoff from the current workforce and
the hiring pool Hanushek, 2009)
 Scenarios customized to represent
scenarios more likely to occur (e.g.
increase attrition among bottom 10
percentile of teachers)

We estimate district-wide impact by “spreading out”
student-level effects observed in research
87
Improvement
initiative
Per student effect
size (SD*)
% of all Students
Impacted
Districtwide Impact
(SD)
Workforce
Management
0.30 6% 0.02
Tutoring 0.21 7% 0.01
How does this translate to
strategies implemented
across the district?
District-Wide impact depends on
the # of students affected, as
well as the effect size.
Where do we get effect sizes?
Peer-reviewed research
Experimental/Quasi-experimental
Meta-analysis where available otherwise
individual studies
*SD: Standard Deviation

Our methodology allows us to estimate the impact of
interventions targeted to different groups of students, such as
by school and performance level
0.21 0.16
- - -
0.14
0.11
0.07 0.05 0.02
0.12
0.11
0.07
0.05
0.03
0.09
0.05
0.02
0.00
0.00
-
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
Lvl 1 Lvl 2 Lvl 3 Lvl 4 Lvl 5
StudentPerformanceImprovement(SD)
Student Performance Level
Small Group Tutoring Reduce Class size to 15
Extend School Day by 60 min Add Pre-K
88
Strategy
Cost
($M)
Implement small group
tutoring of 8:1 for Lvl 1 and 2
students in C,D and F schools
$2.5
Reduce 3rd grade class size
from 18 to 15 in C, D, F
schools
$5.0
Extend school day by 60
minutes to additional C,D,F
schools
$2.0
Add 20% Pre-K seats,
focusing on FRL and ELL kids $7.9
Sub-total Stu.
Perf Improv.
0.56 0.43 0.17 0.10 0.05
Source: ERS analysis.

The result is typically aggregated measures of
student performance and teacher effectiveness
89
-1.6
-1.4
-1.2
-1.0
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0.0
Year
0
Year
1
Year
2
Year
3
Year
4
Year
5
Year
6
Year
7
Year
8
Year
9
Year
10
DistancefromMathProficiency(SD)
Proficiency Gains for Lowest-Performing
Students
Baseline Intervention
56% 59%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Year
0
Year
1
Year
2
Year
3
Year
4
Year
5
Year
6
Year
7
Year
8
Year
9
Year
10
District-wide Change in Math Proficiency
Rates over Time
Intervention Baseline

Where we are in this work…
 Proof of concept model using Python: models out
changes in, e.g., teacher retention/attrition and small-
group instruction (Complete)
 Adding 1-2 additional interventions over the next
several months (Not started)
 Sensitivity analysis: How does the quality of the
teacher pipeline impact the efficacy of strategic
retention/attrition? (In Progress)
 Learning from others who have related expertise, or
are working on similar problems (In Progress)
90

Therefore, for the foreseeable future, system leaders
should…
1. Ensure “Impact/Return on Investment” mindset for
decision-makers:
 Clear on the “logic model” and expected impact of
investments, including synergy among initiatives
 Focused on maximizing returns across functions v. within
 Committed to monitoring results and adapting based on data
2. Ensure budget development processes span
departmental boundaries and include structural
costs/strategies
3. Invest in data collection and analysis opportunistically
to inform discussion of strategic options
91

Goal of this exercise:
Help District X use its limited resources strategically to improve
student achievement and meet our goals.
1. Identify the core needs
2. Consider broad range of investment and savings options
3. Weigh investment and savings options
4. Make coordinated, strategic investment and savings decisions
that drive student performance improvement
93

 Create a “hand” of impact and savings cards that represents
a new budget for District X
 Your hand must meet the district’s priorities (see handout)
 Your hand must achieve a cost neutral status and improve
student achievement
94
The Object of the Game

Add 60 min of learning time
to the school day in the 25%
lowest performing schools
Extended learning time can raise
student achievement if it is
targeted on core instruction with
high quality teachers who are
expert in critical subject and
instructional areas.
1.7%
Student impact
points
Investment (+) or
Savings (-) as % of
budget
Explanation
Note: Extending learning time
can be costly. Ensure that the
schools in which you invest have
leaders and teaching staff who
can deliver high quality
instruction to struggling
students.
Note
There are also wild cards
that let you add more
savings or investment
options.Turnaround schools
Some cards can have
stronger impact when
played together
Time+
What’s a Hold’em card?

Things to consider
 Select cards thoughtfully – consider your priorities
 Consider inter-relationships between cards and try to get
those bonus points
 Acknowledge approximation
 Be bold
 Consider different staffing allocations
 Use Wild Cards
 Have fun!
96

Directions:
98
Step 2
1 min
Choose someone to read the cards and
someone to record decisions online
Step 3
45 min
The card reader will read the cards aloud
(just the title and description), and your
group will collectively sort them into Yes
and No piles. Try to reach consensus,
but if you can’t, put it in a Maybe pile
Step 4
15 min
After your first pass, go back through your Maybe pile and make changes
in order to reach your target. Calculate your budget and student impact.
Step 5
2 min
Take stock: Consider the expected performance outcomes of your choices
– are you maximizing impact given resource limitations and district
priorities?
Step 1
5 min
Read the District X fact sheet individually. Note priorities and challenges.
Online Scoring Instructions
1. Go to:
erstrategies.org/scoresheet
2. Enter your team’s “Access
Token” (on your table)
3. Enter decisions as you go (it
will recalculate your budget
% each time)

Discussion questions
100
1. What were the biggest insights and/or surprises in
your choices?
2. Which options are off the table or challenging, but
promising, interesting, or important? What must
change to make them a real option?
3. How did this exercise influence your thinking on:
a. How to improve outcomes with limited resources?
b. The use of impact data for leadership decision-making?

101
Agenda
Time Topic
40 min System 2020
30 min Lunch
15 min Break

1. What state policies or practices are intended to
support districts’ strategic resource use? How well do
they currently accomplish that aim?
2. What tools/supports/data does my state offer districts
to support their resource decision-making?
3. How can I influence the policies/tools/etc. within my
control and support their effective use? How can I
have the most impact with the control I have?
States

Resources for SSLF available on the ERS website!
https://www.erstrategies.org/tap/school_systems_leaders_
fellowship_resources
104
Wednesday, February 14, 2018

District Resource Strategy: Presentation for SSLF

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie District Resource Strategy: Presentation for SSLF

Ähnlich wie District Resource Strategy: Presentation for SSLF (20)

Mehr von Education Resource Strategies

Mehr von Education Resource Strategies (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

District Resource Strategy: Presentation for SSLF

Hinweis der Redaktion