5 Steps to Connect Dollars to

Student Achievement

Created By :

Educational leaders have an ongoing obligation to provide ready answers to questions

about what’s working in their districts. Public education funding and the means of collecting

and distributing it heighten the scrutiny under which all school and district leaders operate,

a reality that becomes abundantly clear early in the career of every public education

administrator.

Rather than being blindsided by questions about programs, personnel, or student

achievement, successful educational leaders have a plan to keep the public informed on

aspects of district operations that by design neatly tie together the expenditure of funds

and the impact of that spending on student achievement. The essence of great teaching

requires reflective practice, and the same must be said of the administrative aspects of

school governance, especially in the area of data procurement and analysis.

If former Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill was correct in his 1935 election campaign

assertion that “All politics is local,” so too are the specifics of any approach to establishing

the nexus of dollars spent to achievement gains made in public school districts. Offered

herein are the elements common to most plans that succeed, with the hope that the

conversations necessary in any district to enable this process may be spurred by reflections

and suggestions meant herein more as a guide than a recipe.

5 Steps to Connect Dollars to Student Achievement

1. Good data in, good data out

2. Feedback loops

3. Transparency and the culture of reflective practice

4. Sharing and learning

5. Issues and opportunities as catalysts for change

Step 1- Good Data In, Good Data Out

School districts rarely suffer from a dearth of data. School and district “report cards” in many

states and districts have in the last few decades become standard fare for public

consumption, with some data more useful and valuable that the rest. Third parties, often

with a connection to the popular media, commonly take some of this public data and

extrapolate from it a picture of districts that is often more fiction than fact.

The mere existence of data and its use by the media to rank districts, however, has little

connection with the reality of local districts and their successes and challenges. Such

rankings are a great way to sell magazines, but a poor way to gauge school success.

Visionary school leaders know better than to ascribe much importance to data

reconstituted by media sources, often developed by people who’ve never stepped foot in

the schools they purport to rank. Experienced educational leaders understand and value

the data points that actually do matter most in their local context.

Graduation rates for high school students provide an ideal case in point to illustrate the folly

in accepting data at face value from dubious sources, rather than taking a closer look at

how the data was derived and ensuring that comparisons are apt and fair. Adding the

qualifier that graduation rates must be calculated as a percentage of students who

graduated within four years has led to much more reliable and useful data than previously

had been the case. Parts of NCLB were in fact based on unreliable graduation rate data

from the Houston Public Schools that was collected and shared before this critical qualifier

was standardized, with predictably counterproductive results.

Virtually all statistics found on a school report card are worthy of close scrutiny, in addition

to being at least somewhat contingent upon local factors, another reason to resist the urge

to compare districts based on data alone. Cohort analysis, namely the performance of the

same group of students over a number of years, is similarly more valuable as an indicator of

program or product value than yearly comparisons of different student groups.

Another data point of dubious value that nonetheless is regularly reported in media-driven

school assessment activities is ratio of student-to-computer. In the debate over a one-to-

one approach to technology access as opposed to a Bring Your Own Device initiative is

often lost the infinitely more important question of what students are doing with their

computers, regardless of how they may be provided. Solving real-world problems is vastly

superior to creating impressive PowerPoint presentations, and data on the difference is the

kind of “good data” that school leaders should pursue and share.

Attendance rates are another statistic typically available when school performance is

assessed and the results publicly reported. It is wise to consider the statistical significance of

any such data over a period of years rather than as a snapshot of what may be true for a

given year. School leaders are quite able to explain the value of one approach and the

inadvisability of the other. Sharing the details behind the data, especially with a school

board that commissions it, is critical to obtaining “good data” that can and should inform

decision-making.

Clearly, good data is anything but a given when assessing school or student performance.

Wise school leaders have long known this to be the case and they take the time to explain

some basic statistical characteristics whenever data is publicized. The only way to get good

data at the end of a process or program is to ensure that the methodology of deriving that

data adheres to social science standards and is reliable over time. The skill of explaining

these realities without sounding defensive in the process is another skill that education

leaders possess and cultivate.

Feedback loops, the process of establishing vertical and horizontal communication

characteristics throughout a school district, is linked directly to developing reliable and

actionable data. Those loops will be the subject of the next item in this series of steps to

linking dollars to student achievement.

The importance of obtaining accurate and reliable information is a critical first step in the

process of connecting dollars to student achievement in any school district. Good data can

be a school or district leader’s most important ally in reassuring the board or the public

about the return on their investment in public education.

Accountability can best be evidenced proactively. Regular communication of what’s

happening in a district, with the data to back it up, has rightly become a standard

expectation of most school board members and the public at large. Effective educational

leaders are as proactive in the ways they gather data as they are in sharing it publicly. As

with virtually all human endeavor, communication is the key to success.

Step 2- Feedback Loops

If accurate data is the foundation of connecting money spent to outcomes achieved, the

means of gathering that data is a vital companion in the process. In addition to anecdotal

evidence that inevitably drifts about in most school districts, the painstaking process of

establishing and nurturing feedback loops horizontally and vertically holds the greatest

promise of providing the data needed for the best decisions on programs, products, and

personnel.

Horizontal feedback between and among people with similar functions in an organization is

one way for the standardization of effective practice to be established. In school districts,

arguably the best way to make this process part of the culture is to establish a model that

includes instructional coaching. Regular, non-evaluative feedback from the most talented

teachers and seamlessly delivered to willing colleagues is a recipe for encouraging

innovation in the classroom.

Ideally, the horizontal loop created by instructional coaching may also include a vertical

element. When administrators express an interest in being invited to witness the innovative

practices of teachers, the response can be enlightening for supervisory personnel and

affirmational for instructional personnel.

It is inherently wrongheaded to view feedback loops in general as either horizontal or

vertical. Blending the two provides the most authentic data possible, but only in a climate

that is purposely collaborative. Just as data is the foundation of the process to connect

dollars to achievement, relationships are the foundation in the process of obtaining good

data.

Another effective practice for educational leaders is to communicate to teachers their

active interest in seeing for themselves the great things happening in classrooms. Most

teachers are eager to demonstrate their valuable contributions to the district, and the most

effective leaders are honored to be included in the process.

Another opportunity to blend horizontal and vertical feedback is to establish the practice of

inviting recent graduates back to meet with groups of high school juniors and seniors. The

information provided by these visits is important for students to hear, and even more

important for teachers and administrators to know.

The chance to hear firsthand about preparedness for college from the homegrown

participants currently immersed in that situation is a priceless opportunity for everyone in the

district to understand what is working and what needs modification. Prudent educational

leaders never miss the chance to hear such feedback and are comfortable putting reliable

anecdotal evidence to valuable and practical use.

Grade level meetings are to teachers as administrative council meetings are to

administrators, and a careful examination of the structure of both is critical to enhancing

their value. Grade level meetings within one building can enable the same kind of benefits

as more formalized instructional coaching, and expanding the practice to include

occasional visits among groups from different buildings in larger districts is another effective

practice worth implementing.

Administrative council meetings should include as little sharing of mundane and

organizational information as possible. A good rule of thumb is rarely if ever to share things in

a full administrative council meeting that are best dispatched in a memo, and another is to

keep such meetings to an hour in duration or less.

One effective way to structure meetings of administrators is to have volunteers highlight

something happening in their department or building with colleagues, rather than

expecting everyone to listen to those from the central office drone on about less

immediately applicable items. The benefits of learning from one another should never be

discounted by administrators who recognize the importance of this approach in all other

aspects of their work.

Obtaining feedback is and should be a painstaking process, undertaken with the noble

goal of learning what’s actually happening around the district from those closest to the

teaching and learning process. Not all feedback will be positive, but all of it is necessary to

hear if leaders are to honor the philosophy of continuous improvement. The next item in this

series will examine the value of transparency and establishing a culture of reflective

practice, especially when feedback loops provide information that deserves and requires

administrative consideration.

Providing evidence that a purchased program or product is improving student outcomes is

one of the most important responsibilities of school and district leaders. The discretionary

portion of district spending is a remarkably small part of the overall budget in most districts,

and spending wisely on innovation meant to improve student achievement has never been

more important.

If collecting data is the first logical step in this process, and establishing a means of

collecting reliable and actionable data is the second, the third must be deciding what to

do with that data. If the first two steps are implemented logically and in fidelity with district

goals, the result will be exactly what is needed to guide the future and improve the product

provided by any public school district.

Acting on good news revealed in the data is the easy part of school administration.

Continuing with any initiative is more comfortable than embracing the concept of change,

and the value of negative feedback as a catalyst for moving forward in a new and better

direction may sometimes be an overlooked aspect of the administration of public schools.

Step 3- Transparency and the Culture of Reflective Practice

Once a program or product is implemented or purchased, feedback on how things are

going usually begins quickly. Typically, anecdotal at first, it is entirely predictable that the

first impressions people have of anything new in a district is likely to be negative. Institutional

inertia is a phenomenon that compels leaders to wait for the inevitable first wave of

feedback to subside before deeper analysis can occur.

Investing in the means to undertake fluid analysis of effectiveness in real time, ideally with

the aid of software designed specifically for this purpose, can be used to gently refute the

negative first impressions of those inherently resistant to change. Sharing the results of any

such effort, preferably proactively rather than in response to negative information of

questionable reliability, is another inclination of seasoned school and district leaders.

Teachers are typically the people most directly responsible for implementing a new

program or using a new product, and therefore their feedback is of particular importance

in assessing effectiveness and guiding decisions. One of the most common refrains from

teachers centers around technology and its questionable value, most often heard from

experienced teachers who’ve done well without technology for the bulk of their careers.

Data is critical in overcoming inaccurate but nevertheless extant impressions of technology

as a particular burden rather than a valuable tool. An important companion to locally

derived data in this context is the need to heed the advice originally dispensed by Plutarch

to avoid blaming the messenger rather than looking deeper into the message and the

reasons for it.

Parents are another rich source of anecdotal data on things new to a district that their

children are experiencing. Given this easily anticipated outcome to implementing change,

communication of what’s new in a district and, more importantly, why investment in a new

program or product has been made, is one of the best ways to forestall concerns that may

otherwise take root.

Even before teacher or parent feedback is considered, the board of education members

themselves must be made partners in understanding the value of anything for which they’re

asked to approve funding. The best way to embed reflective practice in a classroom or an

entire district is simply to demonstrate it as a standard part of the implementation phase in

any new endeavor, ideally coupled with the inclination to be transparent in sharing of data.

The best teachers constantly monitor and adjust their practice, based on the needs,

interests, and reactions of their students. The best administrators engage in the same

process. Allowing the data that flows from anything new in a district to guide future

decision-making is an act of courage, especially if the best decision to be made may be to

abandon something that is not working or overhaul something that isn’t delivering on its

initial promise.

Transparency can be uncomfortable from the perspective of school and district leaders,

made more so if a spirit of collaboration has not first been nurtured by everyone in the

organization. Leaders can overcome naysayers by sharing data, encouraging feedback

rather than its opposite, and by demonstrating an inclination to be reflective in the process

of implementing anything new.

Coming in this series will be the value of sharing and learning, a logical next step in the

process of connecting dollars to student achievement. Professional learning, from people

within a district and from the wider circle of colleagues and service providers, is another

aspect of educational leadership that deserves consideration and analysis.

Educational leaders understand the value of providing ready evidence that the innovative

practices in their districts result in student achievement gains, and many of them wisely

invest in the technological infrastructure that generates reliable data. Good data, coupled

with a feedback mechanism for collecting it, provides leaders with the opportunity to

optimize the effectiveness of products and programs in which they have invested.

The return on that investment often hinges on the courage it takes to embrace what works

and abandon or modify what does not, and effective leaders are comfortable with their

responsibility to welcome all feedback and respond accordingly. One of the most valuable

attributes of school and district leaders in this process is to rely on the experiences of

colleagues locally, regionally, and nationally by maintaining an active interest in learning

and sharing what is happening in public education.

Step 4- Sharing and Learning

Educational leaders who engage in innovation are typically proud of their efforts and eager

to share their successes. Hosting visits from colleagues who are interested in learning more

about a particular initiative often provides a dual benefit to host and visitor, generating

conversations which typically reveal more commonalities than differences in a given pair of

districts.

One practical example of this likely outcome can be found among districts at different

stages of implementing an instructional coaching model. After a year or two of initial

experience, districts that host visits from others considering the practice in their own setting

mutually benefit by discussing what is working and why. This organic way of generating

ideas is the most natural way to grow a practice in an authentic and productive manner.

Leaders who are eager to learn more about what is working elsewhere as a means of

improving their own districts are often the same leaders who can be found in attendance

at any number of local, regional, and national conventions. It is the reason why many

leaders in public education are inclined to abandon the phrase “professional

development” which carries with it the idea that something is “underdeveloped” and in

need of remediation.

“Professional learning” more aptly describes the process of collaboration among peers and

colleagues. While some may posit that the difference between the phrases is merely a

semantics exercise, others who have made the conscious decision to use professional

learning to describe their efforts to improve practice can testify to the advisability of doing

so.

Leading by example is certainly not a new concept, and demonstrating a continued

interest in learning about what’s new and effective in other districts positions school and

district leaders for success when they expect the same characteristics in their teachers. This

foundational principle is one reason why the initial implementation phase any new product

or program must be accompanied by embedded professional learning for practitioners

and leaders.

Providers of new products and programs have long understood that the support they

provide is the most critical factor in the successful rollout of anything that represents a

change in current practice. Leaders who insist on intensive and embedded professional

learning to accompany any new initiative are demonstrating the key characteristic of those

who implement change successfully.

The effort to connect dollars to student achievement is a noble goal, best accomplished by

remembering and demonstrating the value of actively embracing learning and sharing. The

willingness to host visitors, the inclination to describe ongoing training as professional

learning, and the frequency with which leaders attend conferences and seminars, are all

indicators of transformational leadership.

People in any organization take their cues from the leadership, a fact abundantly clear to

school and district leaders who succeed in creating a culture that embraces change and

innovation. Clear communication of not only what is happening but why it is beneficial,

followed by an investment in the training necessary for successful implementation, are the

best ways to demonstrate a sincere appreciation for the professionalism of colleague

faculty and staff.

Sharing and learning is a process and not an event. If the standard practice in a district is to

embrace innovative change, it is likely due to the behavior of leadership more than any

other single factor. The steps to connect dollars to student achievement are each valuable

and necessary, and the attitude of leadership at all stages of the process is one of the most

critical factors for ultimate success.

The next item in this series will examine the concept of actionable intelligence as a catalyst

for change. Issues and opportunities are the fodder for professional learning, especially

when leaders welcome reliable data and use it to inform policy and practice.

Since the advent of readily available technology that enables formative assessment in real

time, school and district leaders have been investing in the hardware and software that

enables data to inform their decision making. The connection between discretionary dollars

spent and student achievement gains made has never been easier to establish, and

progressive leaders have increasingly been sharing actionable data with their board and

the public as the rationale for recommendations in program, product procurement, and

personnel.

This series has examined the steps necessary to connect dollars to student achievement,

and the first four steps (Good Data, Feedback Loops, Transparency and Reflective Practice,

Sharing and Learning) are neatly unified by the fifth suggested step in the process, which

requires actionable data and the willingness to use it.

Step 5- Issues and Opportunities as Catalysts for Change

In districts where innovation is the expectation rather than the exception, the ease with

which reliably and locally procured data can be collected and shared has the potential to

improve student outcomes. The process of transforming a district into a place where

innovation drives the future begins with relationships. Only in districts where calculated and

informed risks are taken, based on sound research and careful implementation, can

innovative practices take root and flourish.

Such districts have leaders who cultivate mutually trustful relationships, a requirement if

innovation is to characterize the approach that teachers and administrators take in their

daily interaction with students. The ability to act on the intelligence that technology can

provide has as its foundation a robust system of data collection, analysis, and distribution.

The issues and opportunities uncovered by data can only then be the catalysts for needed

change.

The willingness to act on available intelligence takes a much more human component,

hinging on the degree of comfort teachers have with trying something new without fear of

failure. Instructional coaches can serve a critical role in helping teachers innovate in a way

that encourages formative evaluation meant to improve performance, rather than relying

solely on supervisory personnel who by definition perform a different function in the process.

Draft guidelines for the rollout of ESSA, released in early July 2016 and currently in the 60-day

public comment phase, support the concept of innovation as a cornerstone of school

improvement. This welcome news must be accompanied by the continued investment by

districts in the technology that enables data collection and in the personnel needed to

carry out innovative practices. One without the other hinders both, with diminished

opportunity for students.

For the first time in a generation, it seems that political leaders are acknowledging the role

educators must play in school improvement and reform efforts. It is the rare topic that seems

to unite the left and the right politically, at least for public consumption. From both sides of

the political aisle, calls for less standardized testing and more local control and innovation

can thankfully be heard, a clarion call long overdue and readily embraced by educators

everywhere.

At this critical time in the history of public education, school and district leaders must be

prepared to take back their rightful authority to implement what works and champion the

products and programs that are likely to improve student performance. The best way to

ensure that outcome is to allow data to make the case for what to do and how to do it,

accompanied by the willingness to share that data publicly.

The process of using actionable data to inform practice must also be accompanied by the

willingness to engage in continuous measurement. Software now exists to connect dollars to

student achievement to an unprecedented degree, perhaps the wisest investment

educational leaders can make in an era when they are being granted unprecedented

freedom and encouragement to innovate.

Many school and district leaders have been waiting an entire career for this moment, when

politicians and giving way to educators to lead public education reform and improvement.

Educators are up to the task, particularly those who embrace the tools of technology in the

most human of endeavors, the art and science of educating children.