1. District and campus improvement planning process ILT – August 6, 2012 Elizabeth Clark David Holland

2. I’m glad the hole is not in my end!

3. The Problem…. Existence of “Organizational Slack” which is the ambiguity of expectations within the system.

4. Tighten the core work of the organization by increasing connections and coordination required between major functions Improve focus on measured results by aligning to the identified targets Reduce options/initiatives at operational levels that threaten internal connectivity and alignment to the targets Prohibit substitutions that reduce alignment Reduce the Slack by Tightening

5. Audit Standard 1 The school system is able to demonstrate its control of resources, programs, and personnel.  Governance  Organizational Structure  Planning and Plans  Roles and Responsibilities Audit Standards

6. District Goals & Measures Aim of the District …will not lead to sustained improvement over time. Random Acts of Improvement

7. Quality improvement is eliminating random variation around an optimal targeted value. District Goals & Measures Aim of the District Aligned Acts of Improvement

8. Systemic Planning System Alignment – Removal of SlackSystems Improvement - Focus on ResultsSystems Integration - Coherency

9. Building Commitment to Vision, Mission, and Goals

10. Leaders must ensure that the organization is properly aligned so that it can accomplish the mission efficiently and effectively. It’s All About Alignment

11. Organizational Alignment Is achieved when each of the individual components of the organization operates in harmony. Requires leaders to view— and help others view—the organization holistically. Occurs when departments commit to and align with the mission causing them to operate interdependently, thus producing a culture of synergy and innovation. Marvin Fairman: OHI

12. Personal Alignment Leaders facilitate the growth and development of people from dependent to interdependent by building shared commitment to mission, vision, and values. As trust is gained, synergistic results are achieved and the collective “we” moves closer to advocacy levels.

13. Path Forward………….

14. Where do we start? Create and Implement Constancy of Purpose that Provides a:  Clear sense of direction  Unified and strategic focus  Relationship to goals and targets regarding student learning  “Hanging in there” attitude in all that we do

15. Setting Direction Needs Assessment Goals Measures Targets Actions Evaluation

16. Align each individual campus plan to a focused district-wide plan for increased student achievement. Align Campus Plans to the District Plan

17. Putting the Pieces Together

18. The Knowing-Doing Gap “The question confronting most schools and districts is not, ‘What do we need to know in order to improve?’ but rather, ‘Will we turn what we already know into action?’ ” Rick DuFour

19. Outcomes View planning from a systems perspective Align the work of stakeholders (i.e. campuses) to support and accomplish district goals and targets Generate ideas as a collaborative group on how to use the district planning process to develop campus plans

20. Planning system ComponentRoleFrameExample Strategic system Board and Superintendent Establish vision, mission, goals, policies Global, long- range Students exceed state and national standards Design system Central administration Design a district response to the strategic system Intermediate in scope and time frame Design and implement a district- wide writing program Delivery system Campus and classroom Deliver the district response Immediate, discrete, time bound Train all teachers in Norma Jackson strategies in fall; Set expectation for all PLCs to incorporate strategies in team planning during spring semester Planning alignment

21. District plan components Approval timeline (4) –Oct 5: CIP deadline –Nov 1: Board carousel SMART goals model / terminology (8)

22. Eighty-five percent of students will be proficient writers at their grade level within 3 years. Organization State Test District Assessment 65% will be proficient by the end of year 1. 75% will be proficient by the end of year 2 85% will be proficient by the end of year 3. Proficient by the end of year 3: 60% special education 70% ELL 75% minority 65% will be proficient by the end of year 1. 75% will be proficient by the end of year 2 85% will be proficient by the end of year 3. Proficient by the end of year 3: 60% special education 70% ELL 75% minority Vision Statement Students will exceed state and national standards in all subject areas Vision Statement Students will exceed state and national standards in all subject areas SMART GoalIndicatorsMeasures Targets The Power of SMART Goals. Jan O’Neill and Anne Conzemius Strategic / Specific Measurable Achievable Results-based Time-bound Needs assessment Areas most in need of improvement to achieve goal (OFIs) Assessments used to gauge progress on the indicators Mechanics/ Conventions Levels of improvement necessary to meet goal within the time frame

23. District plan components Approval timeline (4) –Oct 5: CIP deadline –Nov 1: Board carousel SMART goals model / terminology (8) Continuous improvement model (9) Goals, targets, interim measures (5,13) Planning parameters (7) Comprehensive needs assessment (10) Actions (20)

24. Creating campus plans Campus expectations for planning (33) Templates –Needs assessment (34) –Improvement plan (38) –Review sheet (39) –SBDM membership form (40) –Communications checklist (41)

25. Data; Needs Assessment SMART Goals Areas of greatest need Measures Indicators Targets Actions Accountability for delivery Interim measures Action adjustments Summative evaluation Formative evaluation Writing 90% proficient by 2016 State assessment, local assessments Organization, mechanics 70% by 2013, 80% by 2014 Informs and Aligns District Plan Campus planning process

26. Campus targets Based on district targets Set expectations for campus improvement Forms component of summative evaluation as percentage of targets met Calculated as per Campus Target Descriptors Includes all accountability subgroups regardless of size

27. High school targets EOC performance –Based on recommended standard not phase-in –All tests within subject area grouped together Graduation on-track –Grade 9 promotion rate –EOC minimum performance all tests

28. Middle school targets STAAR 3-8 performance –Based on 50% and 90% cuts in 2013 only EOC performance –Based on recommended standard not phase-in –Includes only subjects taught on MS campuses –If no students in group, then not counted as a target AP performance evaluated on campuses with programs

29. Elementary targets ISIP performance based on national norms (percent at or above 50 th percentile) STAAR 3-8 performance –Based on 50% and 90% cuts in 2013 only Special Ed referrals and Tier III placements only counted at elementary