Illinois Partnership Zone: Supporting Partner Narrative ... · current human capital management...

REDACTED VERSION

Resubmitted: February 11, 2010

Illinois Partnership Zone: Supporting Partner Narrative Proposal and Cost Proposal Redacted Illinois State Board of Education

Copyright © 2010 Learning Point Associates. All rights reserved.

1120 East Diehl Road, Suite 200 Naperville, IL 60563-1486 Phone: 800-356-2735 Fax: 630-649-6700 www.learningpt.org

Chicago > Washington, D.C. > Naperville > New York

Illinois Partnership Zone Technical Proposal: Supporting Partner

Illinois State Board of Education

November 2009 Authorized Officials Geographic Area / Region Gina Burkhardt, CEO 1120 East Diehl Road, Suite 200 Naperville, IL 60563-1486 Phone: 630-649-6500 Fax: 630-649-6700 [email protected] __________________________________ Gina Burkhardt, CEO

1120 East Diehl Road, Suite 200 Naperville, IL 60563-1486 800-356-2735 630-649-6500 www.learningpt.org FEIN #37-1161423

Copyright © 2009 Learning Point Associates. All rights reserved.

4140_11/09

Contents Page

Cover Page Executive Summary .........................................................................................................................1 Service Area and Capacity Limitations ...........................................................................................3 Work Plan ........................................................................................................................................4

1. Needs Assessment ................................................................................................................6 2. Community Involvement and Engagement .......................................................................16 3. Human Capital Services Plan .............................................................................................17 4. Building Capacity for Sustained Improvement ..................................................................25 5. Outcomes-Based Measurement Plan .................................................................................26 6. Fiscal Status Reporting ......................................................................................................31

Demonstrated Record of Effectiveness ..........................................................................................32 Fiscal and Management Capabilities ............................................................................................ 39 Additional Information ..................................................................................................................50

Exceptions to the RFSP ...........................................................................................................50

Contracts With ISBE................................................................................................................50 References ......................................................................................................................................51 Appendixes

Appendix A. Biographies and Resumes

Appendix B. Contracts With ISBE (REDACTED)

Appendix C. Fiscal and Management Capabilities (REDACTED)

Cost Proposal

Executive Summary Learning Point Associates proposes to offer services and programs designed to assist Illinois’ lowest performing school districts with school improvement efforts. As a Supporting Partner for up to six Illinois districts, we anticipate implementing Illinois Partnership Zone strategies and supporting the work of Lead Partners in selected schools. Critical to the turnaround or transformation of low-performing districts into high-performing learning systems to occur, a robust human capital strategy at the district level must be coupled with high-quality interventions at the school level. There must be as systemic and systematic process of comprehensive support for low-performing schools and districts to attract, develop, and retain top talent. Learning Point Associates—in close collaboration with its partner, Pivot Learning Partners—will implement a set of strong human capital and capacity-building interventions for our partner districts to increase the effectiveness of their teacher, principal, and organizational leader workforce. Our theory of action for this work centers on districts engaging in a systemic review of their current human capital management strategies—aggressively identifying strengths and weaknesses—to refine their educator quality policies and practices. The goal of this effort is a targeted reallocation of resources in support of higher levels of student achievement. Districts will abandon the piecemeal, fragmented efforts that are inefficient and wasteful to focus on and attend to the whole spectrum of educator quality policies and practices. A district will have a comprehensive and strategic way to substantially and sustainably improve the quality of teaching and learning. The proposal consists of six sections. The first section addresses how Learning Point Associates and Pivot Learning Partners propose to provide human capital and capacity-building needs assessments in districts that have schools included in the Illinois Partnership Zone. The needs- assessment phase will systemically gauge the capacity of district leadership to strategically design human capital strategies that, in collaboration with the Lead Partner, will become the basis for an action plan for a high-performing learning system. In the remaining sections of the proposal, Learning Point Associates and Pivot Learning Partners offer a menu of design and implementation services, which together provide schools and districts in the Partnership Zone with a comprehensive approach to human capital development, management, and capacity building. Learning Point Associates and its partner have demonstrable experience and specialized expertise to work in the following areas:

• Reforming District Recruiting, Hiring, and Retention Policies and Practices for School Leaders (including principals and teachers)

• Establishing an Alternative Incentive and Compensation System

• Creating an Intensive Induction and Mentoring Program

• Establishing a Meaningful Performance Evaluation System

• Training and Coaching for Capacity Building for District Data Use, School Board Member Training, or Implementation of Partnership Zone Activities

Learning Point Associates ISBE Illinois Partnership Zone: Supporting Partner: Technical Proposal—1

We understand that districts and Lead Partners will use the results from the needs-assessment phase to select some or all of the specific strategies included in our menu of services. Learning Point Associates and Pivot Learning Partners stand ready to assist with implementation of each strategy selected. However, we feel strongly that the contribution of the Lead Partner and Supporting Partners is to guide the district toward a systemic solution that is successful in the short term at building capacity and aligning human capital management functions, but more important, results in long-term, sustainable improvements in teaching and learning. Learning Point Associates and its partner are able to work with districts in each of the 10 regions. However, our combined capacity is limited to intervention implementation in no more than six districts in the first year of implementation. We think that a network of districts in the same region would best serve the needs of Partnership Zone schools in developing local relationships, engaging district support and establishing a collaborative approach to school transformation. Learning Point Associates has a long history of working with a broad range of districts, including chronically low-performing school districts, inside and outside of Illinois to design, implement, evaluate, and monitor improvement and transformation efforts, especially in the area of managing educator talent. Learning Point Associates is a nonprofit educational organization with more than 25 years of direct experience working with and for educators and policymakers to transform education systems and student learning. Based on a long track record of collaborating with partners and managing a diversified portfolio of work ranging from direct consulting assignments to major federal contracts, we have the demonstrated capacity to work with Illinois school districts for multiple years to transform education in the Illinois Partnership Zone schools and districts.


Service Area and Capacity Limitations Learning Point Associates and its subcontractor, Pivot Learning Partners, are able to work with schools and districts in each of the 10 Illinois system of support regions. Our combined capacity is limited to intervention implementation in no more than six districts in the first year of implementation. We believe that a network of districts in the same region would best serve the needs of Partnership Zone schools in developing local partnerships, engaging district support, and establishing a collaborative approach to school transformation with other schools. This local or regional network approach also would allow for economies of scale in terms of professional development for school boards, district leadership, and teachers. Priority will be given to districts seeking to develop a network approach to district transformation. In order to implement some of the strategic professional development initiatives, some autonomy in structuring teacher planning time, schedules, and assignments may need to be granted by the district and local teacher contract.


Work Plan Introduction A focused use of federal funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act through Race to the Top and/or 1003(g) school improvement funds gives high-need, chronically low-performing Illinois schools the opportunity to engage in heavy-touch interventions as they strive for transformation. These critical, long-term interventions pave the way for robust developments and eventual overhaul of the status quo. To begin and sustain this robust school and district transformation, leaders in education must concentrate on interventions at the school level coupled with the strategic management by the district. Learning Point Associates, in collaboration with Pivot Learning Partners, believes that the surest path to long-term comprehensive school improvement and increased student achievement is building a system’s capacity to help itself. This goal can be achieved through conducting comprehensive needs assessments, the consistent application of human capital strategies based upon evidence from scientific research and rigorous practice, evaluation and continuous improvement of the implementation of those strategies, and ongoing technical assistance and monitoring support. The theory of action in this proposal centers on districts engaging in a systemic review of their current human capital management strategies—aggressively identifying strengths and weaknesses—to refine their educator quality policies and practices that ultimately lead to a targeted reallocation of resources in support of higher levels of student achievement. In collaboration with Learning Point Associates and Pivot Learning Partners, districts will attend to the whole spectrum of educator quality policies and practices in a comprehensive and strategic way in order to substantially and sustainably improve the quality of teaching and learning. Effectiveness and Equity at the School Level. High-quality instruction at the school level is the key to strong student learning, but chronically low-performing schools tend to have relatively few effective teachers. Teachers in such schools are often inadequately prepared for classroom teaching (Ediger, 2004) and are frequently “lower-skilled” (Mintrop & Trujillo, 2005, p. 18) or “the least talented” (Murnane, 2007, p. 164). Chronically low-performing schools generally have a difficult time attracting teachers with strong qualifications, especially in core subject areas, and often are unable to keep teachers for more than a few years (National Partnership for Teaching in At-Risk Schools, 2005). Intertwined with the issue of unqualified and ineffective teachers is the problem of inadequate leadership. Ineffective leadership is the second most consistent feature on the list of internal factors affecting low-performing schools (Nicolaidou & Ainscow, 2005). Leaders often lack the right set of skills—in particular, strength in managing and developing teachers (Mazzeo & Berman, 2003). According to Borman et al. (2000), success and failure depend on the leadership and culture of a school. These are substantial issues to confront; moreover, they contribute to and are confounded by teacher turnover. Schools with high teacher turnover are plagued by low levels of capacity as the constant churn of teachers diminishes ownership in the school, consistency of policies and practices, effective instruction, and overall morale (Mintrop & MacLellan, 2002; Ziebarth, 2004).


Strategic Capacity at the District Level. Districts must be able to secure and maintain a sufficient number of highly effective teachers and principals (their human capital) to ensure that their education systems can successfully deliver higher levels of student achievement. To guarantee highly effective teachers for all students, districts must create and put into practice a comprehensive vision and strategy for managing the human capital within the system and all aspects of the educator’s career continuum. Learning Point Associates and Pivot Learning Partners have years of practical experience and theoretical expertise in working with high-need schools and districts to address human capital issues—specifically teacher and leader quality. Research has increasingly demonstrated that school districts can play a vital role in improving teaching and learning. Studies by Stanford University’s Center for Research on the Context of Teaching (CRC) show that districts can make a difference; others have found a statistically significant relationship between district leadership and academic performance (Waters & Marzano, 2006). School reform efforts are not likely to be sustained without an actively supportive district office (McLaughlin & Talbert, 2002; 2003). The research and experience of Pivot Learning Partners (formerly Springboard Schools) through its three-year California Best Practices Study indictes that high-performing, high-poverty schools in California tend to be located in particular districts and not in others (Oberman, 2005). Pivot Learning Partners has worked with low-performing districts since 2001 to build the capacity of district leaders to put in place and sustain the structures, systems, and practices proven to improve student achievement, close the achievement gaps, and transform districts into high-performing, efficient organizations providing an excellent and equitable education for all students. Putting the Pieces Together. The combination of addressing human capital management—or, in more education-friendly terms, managing educator talent—and building district leadership capacity garners its power from the ability to understand and apply strategies for district transformation. When it comes to managing the talent in the school system, district leaders can no longer afford to maintain the status quo. Compared to other sectors, education lags behind in its efforts to strategically attract and retain top talent. Where other industries refer to a “war for talent” (MacMillan, 2008), the education field is far more subdued in its campaign for more high-quality teachers and its actions to meet this goal. A joint study by the IBM Institute for Business Value and the Human Capital Institute found that, while attention to human capital practices varied substantially across industries, the education field was found to be the least likely to engage in “enlightened talent management practices” [emphasis added] (Ringo, Schweyer, DeMarco, Jones, & Lesser, 2008, p. 9). This lack of prioritization of educator talent management is especially unfortunate given that research consistently finds teachers to be the most important school-level factor that affects student achievement. In the same way that the health of the human body requires the complete set of interconnected, interdependent DNA, the health of the education system requires that the complete spectrum of educator quality policy components—including preparation, recruitment, hiring, induction, professional development, compensation and incentives, working conditions, and performance management—be connected and addressed in a systemic, holistic manner. However, faced with so many critical components to managing educator talent, districts often instead take a piecemeal approach and try to improve the system by addressing only one or two


components. Addressing only induction or only compensation does not create the appropriate combination of components needed to make genuine, lasting improvements to educator quality. With the support of their states, districts need to attend to the whole spectrum of educator quality policies and practices in a comprehensive and strategic way if they are to substantially and sustainably improve the quality of teaching and learning. District leaders who genuinely support school transformation and are determined to impact, improve, and advance educator quality policies and practices must invest heavily in and take deliberate action in the systemic management of teachers and school leaders. To address these critical issues, Learning Point Associates and its partner, Pivot Learning Partners, propose through the following work plan to provide human capital and capacity-building needs assessments, as well as specifically address strategies for human capital development in districts that have schools included in the Illinois Partnership Zone. The work plan encompasses the following elements: (1) needs assessment, (2) community involvement and engagement, (3) services plan, (4) building capacity for sustained improvement, (5) outcomes-based measurement plan, and (6) fiscal status reporting. 1. Needs Assessment In order systemically gauge the capacity of district leadership and the ability to strategically design human capital strategies, Learning Point Associates and Pivot Learning propose two separate but aligned needs assessments: one for district leadership capacity building and another for managing and developing human capital. The results of both needs assessments converge and become the basis for one action plan, which also involves the Lead Partner. Framework and Needs Assessment for Managing and Developing Human Capital With so many issues related to educator talent management—from preservice training to professional development and compensation—and with district, state, and, to a growing extent, federal involvement in teacher policies, policymakers often have adopted a piecemeal approach to dealing with this system-level issue. In response, Learning Point Associates has developed a suite of Managing Educator TalentSM (MET) solutions called METworksSM to maximize educator effectiveness and ensure that every student has access to highly effective, well-supported teachers and leaders who stay in the system. Managing Educator Talent: A Research-Based Framework for District and State Policymakers (Behrstock, Meyer, Wraight, & Bhatt, 2009)—also called the METworks Framework—is one of these solutions. The METworks Framework enables policymakers to critically examine their human resource management policies, consider pertinent components where current practice might not be best practice, and create plans to address these gaps effectively. In addition, it ensures that states are not disconnected from the local stewardship of managing educator talent within the education system. The METworks Framework is intended to facilitate a more proactive and strategic approach to securing the teachers and school leaders needed to create a world-class, 21st century education system. In doing so, this resource provides guidance for states and districts to structure their


policies and practice using objective, research-based evidence. The framework is unique in its comprehensiveness, its basis in research, and its inclusion of strategies and a rationale for each component and subcomponent included. Based on an extensive review of the literature on educator quality, the framework is organized around eight components (preparation, recruitment, hiring, induction, professional development, compensation and incentives, working conditions, and performance management), as illustrated in Figure 1. These eight components span the career continuum of educators—teachers and school leaders alike.

Figure 1. The Components of Educator Talent Management

Figure 2 illustrates the educator career continuum. For teachers, the career continuum begins with entry: the decision to join the profession. The first step teachers take is to go through preparation program, be it traditional or alternative, during which they gain essential preliminary knowledge and skills to be effective in the classroom. After gaining certification, teachers are then recruited to schools and districts. At the hiring stage, there are tremendous implications for the equitable distribution of teachers across districts, schools, and classrooms as decisions about teacher placement are made. During their first several years on the job, teachers often engage in an induction program. Throughout their career, teachers’ ongoing professional development, compensation, and working conditions affect their decisions to stay in the profession or in a particular school or district. Through performance management, decisions about career advancement are made—including tenure or dismissal and, further along the career continuum, whether to embark on an administrator or teacher leader career track or to remain in the classroom.


Figure 2. The Educator Career Continuum

Each of the eight illustrated components of educator talent management is necessary, though insufficient on its own for authentic improvement to educator recruitment and retention. Each component also must be understood in relation to the others. It is the interconnections of these components that make up the career continuum and must be considered systemically, rather than as one component at a time in lock-step order. These interconnections, which are reflected in the METworks Framework, are represented in Figure 3.


Figure 3. Educator Talent Management Intercomponent Connections For example, preparation should transition seamlessly to a comprehensive induction program, which ought to be aligned with ongoing professional development throughout an educator’s career. The research indicates that professional development must be directly responsive to the performance management system, such that educators’ evaluations lead to genuine growth and improvements in effectiveness. The same performance management standards that are used by principals to evaluate teacher performance should be applied at the time of hiring to aid selection decisions; these standards also should be made known during the recruitment phase so that candidates who do not think they will be able to meet those standards can self-select out of the district (Milanowski, Prince, & Koppich, 2007). At the same time, compensation and other incentives also are most effective if linked in some manner to an educator’s development as a professional. Recognizing the connections among the eight key components serves several purposes. Most important, this recognition increases the effectiveness of policy implementation by creating coherence and consistency in the goals of each and in the strategies developed to achieve them. In addition, taking into account these interconnections creates efficiencies. Financial and other resources can be leveraged to avoid overlap in effort and to divide costs among reforms working toward common purposes. The METworks Framework is the driving force and foundation supporting the Learning Point Associates METworks District Assessment. In addition, the METworks District Assessment allows Learning Point Associates to collect district data and compare how district current policies and practices align with the METworks Framework as well as collaboratively pinpoint where educator talent policies and practices are working in concert to make a constructive difference and where current practices are ineffective and must be strengthened.


Past experience in other districts has proven that the most profitable beginning step in conducting an assessment is the convening of a kickoff meeting with district stakeholders. Such a step brings teaching staff, district decision makers, and school-level administrators together for an in-person presentation with the Learning Point Associates METworks District Assessment team to review the scope and requirements of the METworks District Assessment. Furthermore, it provides an opportunity to collaboratively determine how best to handle many of the logistics involved in gathering and disseminating data throughout the process—including setting dates for a number of events to occur during the needs-assessment phase. Learning Point Associates requires that the district assemble a team of eight to 12 people to be key participants in the entire project, with others brought in as needed. This team should include the district superintendent and/or assistant superintendents, representatives from the school board, and key leadership from human resources, school(s) in the Illinois Partnership Zone and the teacher union. During the data collection period of the needs assessment, Learning Point Associates staff collect and analyze the data needed to assess the status of the district in comparison with the METworks Framework. We employ a multivariate approach to data collection, collecting both quantitative and qualitative data from a variety of sources to allow for triangulation across data sets in identifying priority human capital strategy focus areas for the district. Data sources can include a combination of the following:

• Teacher and school administrator demographic data

• Online surveys for teachers and administrators

• District leadership interviews

• School administrator interviews

• Key document review

• Teacher focus groups (with teachers grouped according to their tenure in the district) To best meet the needs of the districts and their schools in the Illinois Partnership Zone, we offer three levels of service for the human capital needs assessment, as outlined in Table 1

Table 1. Levels of Service for the Human Capital Needs Assessment

METworks District Assessment Levels of Service

Components

Level I

• Kick-off meeting • Data sources and reports:

Teacher and school administrator demographic data Online surveys for teachers and administrators District leadership interviews School administrator interviews

• Co-Interpretation Meeting • Action planning


METworks District Assessment Components Levels of Service

Level II

• Kick-off meeting • Data sources and reports:

Teacher and school administrator demographic data Online surveys for teachers and administrators District leadership interviews School administrator interviews Key document review

• Co-Interpretation Meeting • Action planning

Level III

• Kick off meeting • Data sources and reports:

Teacher and school administrator demographic data Online surveys for teachers and administrators District leadership interviews School administrator interviews* Key document review Teacher focus groups

• Co-interpretation meeting • Action planning

*Depending on the number of schools in the Illinois Partnership Zone within one school district, interviews can be conducted with school administrators who lead schools in the Partnership Zone and interviews with school administrators who lead schools not in the Partnership Zone for qualitative data comparison and analysis Learning Point Associates staff will administer the online survey via distance and will work with a designated district administrator to collect the essential documents for review, as well as any demographic data. The document review and demographic data analysis are conducted off-site from the school district. The interviews and focus groups are conducted in-person at the school district. As a result of the data collection, Learning Point Associates produces one data report for each source of data collected in the needs assessment. These data reports are used by Learning Point Associates facilitators to lead a group of 25–35 district stakeholders (a METworks Team), as well as representatives from the Lead Partner organization, through a detailed and structured two-day process to interpret the data collected, then develop and prioritize key findings. Co-interpretation participants begin by developing an in-depth understanding of each data set and then combine and subsume findings from various reports into key findings across reports. The group then uses a rating process to prioritize key findings, as well as compare the current district practices for the key areas of managing educator talent to the research-based strategies and practices in the METworks Framework. From this process, which requires considerable thought and discussion, a list of critical key findings emerges.


Framework and Needs Assessment for District Leadership Capacity Building Guided by research, the Pivot Learning Partners model for district change is a systemwide effort that builds both the organizational and leadership capacity of districts to institute and implement the structures, processes, and programs necessary to make good teaching the norm in every classroom and to raise the achievement of all students. This model focuses on multiple levels of the education system to create strong school systems in which the work of educators at every level—from the boardroom to the classroom—is focused on the common goal of increasing student learning by engaging in a systematic and sustainable improvement process. To foster continuous improvement systems, Pivot Learning Partners conducts research that informs core service offerings for district change and also conducts professional development and coaching. In order for school districts to provide an excellent and equitable education for all students, both districts (as organizations) and the individuals who staff them must be equipped with the knowledge, skills, and tools necessary to use the strategies and put in place the systems and processes necessary to improve entire schools and school systems. That is why the Pivot Learning Partners framework for district leadership capacity building focuses on all levels of the system. Pivot Learning Partners holds that districts and schools can achieve transformative results for students by doing the following:

• Maintaining an unwavering focus on equity and excellence.

• Collaborating as professional learning communities.

• Using data to measure progress toward achieving vision, mission, and core strategies.

• Drawing on and utilizing best practices in decision making.

• Building the systems, structures, and processes that institutionalize the ongoing use of sound educational practices throughout the organization.

The Pivot Learning Partners Theory of Action also is reflected in its District Needs Assessment process, which begins with reviewing multiple sources of data, on both student learning and adult practice. Pivot Learning Partners employs a diagnostic and collaborative approach to needs assessment, helping districts to identify areas of need as well as areas of strength, and using these focal areas to develop a comprehensive action plan—which may take the form of a local education agency (LEA) plan, instructional action plan, district strategic plan, or school site plan. Data review always includes a review of extant data about student outcomes as well as adult work products, such as existing strategic plans, prior needs assessments, or outside consultant reports. Where possible and appropriate, Pivot Learning Partners supplements these data sources through the use of an online Best Practices Survey, which enables the collection of data from large numbers of teachers and administrators in a cost-effective and confidential manner. This survey reflects the Pivot Learning Partners Best Practices Framework, which synthesizes and groups together the core instructional areas of high-performing, high-poverty schools and districts and indicates how the various levels of the education system—from the classroom to the school to the district office—work together to support improved performance. The framework’s core areas are as follows:


• Aligned and Rigorous Curriculum and Measurable Goals

• Instructional Practices

• Continuous Improvement and Monitoring Performance

• Professional Development

• Recognition, Interventions, and Support These core areas serve as guiding question areas in the assessment process. For instance, under Aligned and Rigorous Curriculum and Measurable Goals, Pivot Learning Partners will seek to learn whether the district has—and whether teachers and administrators at all levels agree they have—specific and measurable goals in place for improving student achievement. Under Professional Development, Pivot Learning Partners will seek to gauge not only the level of professional development currently being provided for teachers and administrators but also its alignment with student achievement priorities and its plans to ensure that all staff are highly qualified. The traditional focus group and interview approach can be used to supplement the survey and review of district documents, and helps to reveal facts about the district’s culture and climate. Often in education, the phrase “best practices” is used to apply to teachers, not others. However, administrators and other adults working in the system also have professional practice. This means that they, too, need to understand best practices and work to align their own practice and that of their organization with best practices. Figure 4 depicts the elements in which best practices exist at the district level.


Figure 4. Best Practices at the District Level

The Pivot Learning Partners District Needs Assessment is a multiphased process that always begins with informal discussions to build both trust and transparency into the relationship-building process and to garner initial agreements on roles, responsibilities, and expected outcomes. A District Needs Assessment typically consists of several key steps, as outlined in Figure 5. Once the District Needs Assessment is completed, Pivot Learning Partners then works with a cross-functional district team to develop a plan that outlines a strategy as well as tactics, roles, and responsibilities for the improvement of teaching and learning. If no such plan exists—or if it exists on a shelf but is not a working, living document—the District Needs Assessment informs and helps to create a real improvement plan as well as a plan for a comprehensive suite of interlocking professional development and coaching on implementation that is customized to the unique needs and goals of the district. The support of Pivot Learning Partners is ongoing and multidimensional. It includes the regular review of data and consistent check-in meetings to track progress toward goals, to ensure that the district is on track or to make refinements and adjustments along the way. The action plan involves the Lead Partner and also takes into account the results of the needs assessment for managing and developing human capital.


Figure 5. Overview of the Pivot Learning Partners District Needs Assessment

As a result, Learning Point Associates works with the METworks Team, Pivot Learning Partners, and the Lead Partner for the Illinois Partnership Zone to translate key findings into an action plan that can drive changes and improvements in the critical component areas of human capital management. This action plan concentrates on the priority areas but also attends to the need for interconnectedness of a systemic approach, as supported by the METworks Framework, and supports implementation of specific human capital strategies, indicating how capacity at the district leadership level will be built to address and manage these strategies.


2. Community Involvement and Engagement The work of Learning Point Associates at the national, state, and district levels has helped schools build stronger and more vibrant partnerships with community organizations. For all services proposed, Learning Point Associates and Pivot Learning Partners will work hand-in-hand with district leadership to employ the best methods for engaging parents, the business community, community organizations, state and local officials, and other stakeholders into the services implemented. Whether part of data collection activities during the needs assessment, serving as part of the action planning team, or attending trainings, community stakeholders will be involved through each phase of the work. Learning Point Associates has a track record of working closely with community members in many different facets of education reform work. At the state level, our work with the Illinois State Board of Education implementing the 21st Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC) at the state level has focused on raising awareness of funds, building stronger and more sustainable partnerships, and involving key stakeholders to bring a rich breadth of community partners and stakeholders to help leverage resources already available in school communities and to build a stronger coalition of support for schools. We have worked closely on this effort at the local level with Chicago Public Schools as they have developed their Community Schools Initiative (CSI) over the past nine years. The CSI model is based on creating holistic support for students and their families in close partnership with schools—offering health services, expanded learning and afterschool opportunities, and providing a Resource Coordinator to help manage and strengthen the variety of partnerships with schools. Learning Point Associates has been the lead professional development provider for the CSI, providing training and technical assistance on building stronger partnership coalitions to provide a greater variety of activities for students and their families, establishing and nurturing stakeholder and partner oversight communities, and creating stronger community support for school improvement efforts. In working with the state of Utah to provide assistance in the communication and outreach to key stakeholders around compensation reform, Learning Point Associates worked with the Utah State Board of Education Differentiated Pay Work Group to serve as a neutral source for gathering stakeholder opinions and develop an outreach and communication plan for the state. In addition to conducting focus groups for conduct four key stakeholder groups: teachers, principals, parents, and community members, Learning Point Associates worked with the work group to establish a series of Town Hall meetings across the state. These meetings were held for various key education stakeholders in Utah, such as the district administrators and the teachers union, and will generate statewide communication about the proposed framework.


3. Human Capital Strategies Services Plan Capacity building is critical in the successful implementation of any strategy to improve the management and development of human capital. High-capacity school districts must possess the following characteristics:

• Ability to assess the district and school needs through comprehensive data collection and analysis in order to inform decisions

• Ability to develop solutions for those needs through the engagement of stakeholders and systematic coordination

• Ability to build systems of support for improvement through proven tools, approaches, and strategies

• Ability to improve its tools and systems through a continuous improvement approach Based on the results of the needs assessments and the resulting action plan, the following services describe solutions for those needs through systemic coordination, as well as proven tools and approaches. Services to Support Human Capital Strategies Services to support human capital strategies include the following: (A) reforming district recruiting, hiring, and retention policies and practices for school leaders; (B) establishing an alternative incentive and compensation system; (C) creating an intensive induction and mentoring program; (D) establishing a meaningful performance evaluation system; and (E) training and capacity building for district data use, school board member training, or implementation of Partnership Zone activities. A. Reforming District Recruiting, Hiring, and Retention Policies and Practices for School Leaders Given the overwhelming evidence that effective school leadership is a key level for reforming other critical human capital resource strategies, identifying, placing and supporting principals who can implement district reform strategies is often a challenge (National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality, 2008). In response to this challenge, Learning Point Associates has designed the Quality School Leadership Identification (QSL-ID) process for assisting school district leadership to recruit and select high-quality school principals. QSL-ID can support districts in prioritizing interview and hiring decisions for Illinois Partnership Zone schools. QSL-ID is a standards-driven and research-based hiring procedure intended to supplement or supplant current district procedures for hiring school principals This approach aids district personnel in selecting highly qualified new principals who are also a good match for school culture and leadership needs. QSL-ID addresses the following processes:

• Preparation of school principal hiring materials

• Development of a school principal recruitment strategy


• Establishment and training of a local hiring committee

• Screening applicants

• Facilitating candidate interviews and other data-gathering activities

• Final candidate selection

• Planning for school leadership succession QSL-ID consists of the following components:

• Facilitator’s Guide. The facilitator’s guide offers a step-by-step process for hiring a new school principal. The hiring process is research-based in that it draws extensively from business and education research literature on effective executive and administrator hiring practices.

• Candidate Evaluation Rubrics. The candidate evaluation rubrics provide a systematic approach to collecting and weighing information about each candidate, a bank of interview questions, and a screening checklist. Construct and content validation procedures were conducted to ensure candidate evaluations reflect the 2008 ISLLC principal professional standards (Council of Chief State School Officers, 2008) and best practices for instructional leadership.

• Hiring Tools. An interview question bank, teacher observation task, data analysis task, and other hiring tools were developed to gather evidence about candidate qualifications to lead organizations and instruction. The interview question bank was developed through a review of executive and school administrator screening protocols and an expert panel review.

QSL-ID tools are user tested and reliable. QSL-ID content and processes have been user tested by eight superintendents, five human resource directors, and 15 other hiring committee members from urban, suburban, and rural school districts. User testing was used to determine whether QSL-ID meets standard time, financial, and legal constraints experienced by districts of different sizes. User-testing also provided designers with data on the reliability of QSL-ID tools in a simulated hiring situation. Depending on district needs, Learning Point Associates provides two options for services focused on school leadership hiring: (1) train district personal to revamp hiring procedures to reflect QSL-ID, or (2) send trained personnel to facilitate the entire school principal hiring process.

• Level I Training. Level I training is a full-day training for individual school district superintendents, human resources directors, and others responsible for administering school principal hiring processes, or for regional consortia of school district personnel. The training orients and prepares district personnel to (1) lead school principal hiring committees, and (2) use the QSL-ID hiring process and tools to select and match principal candidates to schools. Hands-on training includes simulations of QSL-ID principal selection processes with applied use of the tools so that participants are able to use this research-based process and its supported tools. All participants receive copies of


the QSL-ID facilitator's guide, rubrics, and other tools for local use, as well as recommendations for customization of the process to fit their district’s needs and size. After the training, Learning Point Associates staff are available to respond to participant questions about QSL-ID, and participants are encouraged to join an online forum supporting QSL-ID use.

• Level II Facilitation. The Level II facilitation is intended for individual school districts. Learning Point Associates staff serve as the external facilitator for the entire QSL-ID process; lead the district hiring committee; and assist school district superintendents, human resource directors, and/or others to supplant or supplement existing school principal hiring processes with QSL-ID. Following a four step process across multiple committee meetings and within a timeframe customized to the district’s needs and size, Learning Point Associates supports a hiring process tailored to the unique conditions of each district and school. Working hand-in-hand with district leadership, Learning Point Associates staff provide process management, objective oversight, and build the capacity of district administrators by giving them the tools and skills to use the research-based QSL-ID process in the present and in the future. All participants receive the entire set of QSL-ID materials and are invited to join an online forum supporting better principal hiring and the use of QSL-ID.

B. Establishing an Alternative Incentive and Compensation System Learning Point Associates has concentrated and broad experience and expertise in the area of establishing incentive and compensation systems. Based on the emerging research about pay-for-performance, differentiated compensation systems, and alternative compensation, Learning Point Associates staff have worked with states and school districts to design, implement, and evaluate alternative compensation programs as well as aspects of education systems that impact or are impacted by pay reform, such as teacher evaluation. Specifically, the organization has expertise and experience in the following areas of alternative compensation systems:

• Designing Comprehensive Compensation Systems. Districts and states interested in developing or revising an alternative compensation system should consider several important planning, design, and implementation steps. Learning Point Associates has worked with states and districts to design alternative compensation systems and accomplish these important stages of the process in a customized way. This area of expertise includes the important steps of identifying sources of funding and budgeting for a high-quality, effective, and sustainable program; communicating with stakeholders; linking to teacher evaluation; and conducting a data management review.

• Creating Stakeholder Engagement Through Strategic Communication Approaches. Research consistently shows that communicating with and engaging stakeholders at every stage of the process concerning designing and implementing an alternative compensation program is vital for success. Learning Point Associates is able to support districts and states in the following ways:

Conduct surveys, focus groups, or interviews to gauge stakeholder perspectives about alternative compensation or to help share information about an emerging program and garner stakeholder feedback and input.


Develop communication plans and materials for continually talking about an alternative compensation system with a range of stakeholders, including parents and the media.

Plan informational meetings, including agendas, speakers, materials, and small-group discussion topics.

• Connecting to Teacher Evaluation. This area of expertise includes the essential work of revising teacher evaluation systems to support alternative compensation programs. Learning Point Associates also is prepared to work with and train school leaders to prepare them to support and implement teacher evaluation systems tied to alternative compensation.

• Reviewing Data Management Systems. Most districts and states embarking on an alternative compensation system do not have data systems equipped to collect, analyze, or report information that supports a performance-based compensation system. Learning Point Associates can help school districts review their current data systems to determine the extent to which they have the capacity to sustain an alternative compensation program and then improve these systems based on areas of need.

These areas of expertise provide clients with a road map for designing and implementing alternative compensation programs in a systemic way. Clients may be interested in working with Learning Point Associates on a comprehensive compensation system design or on specific components of that design. Learning Point Associates is one of the partners in the federally funded Center for Educator Compensation Reform, which provides direct technical assistance to the 32 Teacher Incentive Fund grantees at the state and district level. Each grantee has proposed outcomes related to improvements in educator recruitment, retention, and student learning. Learning Point Associates has further supported the development of teacher evaluation guidelines in Ohio and contributed to the design of alternative compensation initiatives being piloted in districts in Iowa and Utah. Shortly after Learning Point Associates staff worked in Utah regarding communication with stakeholder engagement, Utah enacted legislation to implement a pilot of alternative compensation with a select group of elementary schools across the state. C. Creating an Intensive Induction and Mentoring Program Learning Point Associates can support a district in establishing a new or reforming a current induction and mentoring program through two primary avenues: design/redesign with district leadership, and professional development services to mentors and administrators. In addition, Learning Point Associates can provide additional expertise to support the evaluation of an induction and mentoring program. Design/Redesign of an Induction and Mentoring Program. Learning Point Associates (2009) has developed the Continuum of High Quality Mentoring and Induction Practices for districts to assess all of the components of their induction and mentoring program for teachers as either Emerging, Developing, Sustaining, or Integrating. This tool is based on the Illinois Standards of Quality and Effectiveness for Beginning Teacher Induction Programs (Illinois State Board of


Education, 2008) as well as other research titled High Quality Induction and Mentoring Practices conducted by the New Teacher Center (2007) and an SRI publication titled Teacher Induction in Illinois and Ohio (Humphrey, Weschler, Bosetti, Park, & Tiffany-Morales, 2008). Used in the design phase, this tool supports a representative district team in identifying the current state of practices that allow the additional planning and design needed to implement a high-quality mentoring and induction program. This tool is intended to help initiate and support collaboration among administrators, beginning teachers, mentors, and other key participants to assess the components of an induction program and develop clearly articulated goals and steps needed to produce a comprehensive program of support for teachers and administrators. Learning Point Associates then works collaboratively with a district team to determine the best strategies and policies for closing the gap between current and best practices. Professional Development. Based on previous experiences in working with districts to establish or reform an induction and mentoring program, Learning Point Associates staff know that additional professional development for mentors and administrators is often needed to support and sustain changes to the program. Learning Point Associates offers professional development to mentors and administrators on the following topics:

• “Conducting Classroom Observation for Sustained Beginning Teacher Growth”

• “Examining Student Work as Job-Embedded Professional Development”

• “Building Professional Learning Communities through Lesson Study”

• “Supporting and Developing Generation Y Teachers”

• “Creating Culturally Proficient Classrooms and Schools” Evaluation Support. A critical component to effective induction and mentoring programs is the ability to evaluate the program for its impact on teachers (both mentor teachers and beginning teachers), administrators, and ultimately on students. Learning Point Associates can support the evaluation of an induction program through additional data collection activities such as surveys, interviews, and focus groups. These data are analyzed and triangulated for an accurate picture of the impact of the induction program. Learning Point Associates has worked with the following Illinois school districts to improve and enhance their induction and mentoring programs: Geneseo Unit District 228, Plainfield Community School District 202, Oswego Community School District 308, and Yorkville School District 115. In each of these school districts, Learning Point Associates has used the Continuum of High-Quality Mentoring and Induction Practices as a beginning place for program design and development as well as for a foundational structure for the program evaluation. As a result, Learning Point Associates supported these districts to completely and comprehensively revamp their induction and mentoring programs. For example, both the Plainfield and Oswego school districts moved from a one-on-one mentoring system to a more inclusive system that includes full-release mentors, tiered support for first-year teachers and second-year teachers, and sustained trainings for school administrators. Impact can be seen in the following data:


• In the Plainfield School District, 64 percent of first-year teachers in a one-on-one mentor

relationship agree/strongly agree that they are more effective teachers because of their participation; 84 percent of first-year teachers with a full release mentor agree/strongly agree that they are more effective teachers because of their participation.

D. Establishing a Meaningful Performance Evaluation System As a supporting partner to Illinois Partnership Zone schools and districts, Learning Point Associates would work closely with the participating school districts and schools to establish a high-quality performance management system for teachers, which includes both formative and summative components to identify effective teachers, enhance or improve effective instruction, and consider where ineffective teaching may be hindering student improvement. Through work for the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality (TQ Center), staff at Learning Point Associates have been engaged for the past four years in efforts related to defining and measuring teacher effectiveness (for research syntheses of this work, see Goe & Croft, 2009; Little, Goe, & Bell, 2009). Learning Point Associates staff would use this experience and expertise as part of the support for participating districts looking to improve or revise this important component of the teachers’ career continuum and the overall approach to managing educator talent. The Learning Point Associates approach would be to work with the participating districts to establish a high-quality performance management system in two primary phases: design and implementation. Design Phase. The first phase would focus on designing the performance management system, from taking stock of the teacher evaluation processes that are already in place to revising or enhancing those components to realize a rigorous, transparent, and comprehensive system that works for all involved, including students. Learning Point Associates believes that this first phase is an important part of building capacity for and gaining buy-in from those who will be involved in implementing and sustaining such a transition. Teaching contexts differ greatly across subjects, grades, intentional groupings of students in schools, and subgroups of students, and between schools with different student populations and local circumstance. In that case, in concert with the participating districts, Learning Point Associates would like to consider teacher effectiveness in light of these different contexts, and then incorporate measures that take into account differences in subject matter, teacher activities, student background, personal characteristics, and school culture and organization (Campbell, Kyriakides, Muijs, & Robinson, 2003). Learning Point Associates has experience working with the state of Ohio on such a design phase (see “Example of Relevant Work” below). While not an exhaustive list, the first phase would include the following steps:

• Create a committee to involve teachers and other stakeholders in the design process (Goe & Croft, 2009).


• Come to consensus on what teacher effectiveness means for the district as well as the purpose of teacher evaluation—i.e. for instructional improvement, salary considerations, tenure decisions (Coggshall, 2007).

• Take into account various teaching contexts and how the evaluation system will accommodate them (Goe & Croft, 2009).

• Review teacher evaluation and performance management system models and best practices from other districts and states (Mathers & Oliva, 2008).

• Consider various evaluation methods, including those related to student achievement or student work, and indicate how these methods may align with the emerging system and/or how they might be used in the participating schools and districts (Little, Bell, & Goe, 2009).

Implementation Phase. The second phase would seek to roll-out a detailed plan for implementation that would focus on outreach and communication related to the revised performance management system as well as the necessary training required to ensure that policy and research transitions well to practice and that the design components agreed-upon by the district are implemented with integrity in the schools. Learning Point Associates engaged with the state of Ohio to create an evaluation model for the state beginning with creating guidelines for its evaluation system (see Rowland, 2009). In addition, Learning Point Associates is now working with Ohio to develop a: state evaluation framework, which is the guidance for all district-level evaluation; supporting research materials; and a gap analysis tool. The gap analysis is designed to help districts move from their current evaluation system to the enhanced model established by the state evaluation framework. E. Training and Coaching for Capacity Building for District Data Use, School Board Member Training, or Implementation of Partnership Zone Activities Pivot Learning Partners brings together the three strands of research, professional development, and coaching in its model for districtwide change, the District Partner program. Recognizing the unique needs and circumstances of every district, Pivot Learning Partners provides a menu of services that stretch from the classroom to the district office rather than a “one-size-fits-all” approach, enabling districts to co-create a customized package of support focused on all four of the following building blocks that together constitute the Pivot Learning Partners Theory of Action: an interlocking support model. Pivot Learning Partners helps districts build capacity in several or all of the four components of its Theory of Action:

• The Cycle of Inquiry process engages educators in a continuous improvement process of data-based decision-making that centers on results. In the process, educators use data (both on student achievement and teacher and administrator practice) to pose questions, identify gaps in achievement and instructional practice, and create plans to address these issues and ensure equitable outcomes for all students.


• Best Practices center on discovering and implementing research-based tools, materials, and approaches at every level of the system to scale up the approaches that lie behind the strong results in high-performing, high-need schools—at multiple levels of the system. At the district level, work on best practices includes work on resource alignment, curriculum management, data and accountability systems, governance and community engagement, and human capital management.

• Professional Learning Communities create the structure and culture to review data, identify and implement best practices, and carry out the hard work of improvement. Pivot Learning Partners teaches leaders how to implement and lead these communities in their schools and districts as a key part of creating a collaborative and supportive environment that supports inquiry, sets common goals, and helps educators both learn from and challenge one another.

• Leadership Systems are what link the components of the Theory of Action together and cultivate a shared vision and strategy to improve student achievement while maintaining a laser-like focus on equity. These skills are necessary for superintendents, principals, and other leaders to implement and sustain the systems, processes, and practices focused on continuous improvement and raising student achievement.

Depending on the particular needs of the district, Pivot Learning Partners professional development can target educators working at every level of the system, from the board room to the classroom, in three core capacity-building services:

• Leadership development training

• Coaching

• Building internal systems to monitor progress Examples of Pivot Learning Partners leadership development training include governance training; building leadership of superintendents, principals, and district office staff; and helping all staff increase capacity to serve a particular subgroup of students, such as English learners. All of this professional development draws on the extensive research-based suite of professional development materials created by Pivot Learning Partners, but it is highly customized to best meet the needs of the district and the group of staff participating. As a follow-up to professional development, Pivot Learning Partners provides coaching—often the missing piece of improvement efforts—that helps educators implement and sustain the practices and strategies they have learned, providing hands-on support in dealing with real-life situations in their schools and districts. The Pivot Learning Partners coaching model is a synthesis of several well-known coaching models; it is distinct from other models through the “coaching continuum” across which Pivot Learning Partners coaches move fluently and have the ability to play multiple roles with educators, ranging from thought partner to consultant. All Pivot Learning Partners coaches are themselves former educators—superintendents, district administrators, principals, and teacher leaders, and many also have experience in providing professional development support to teachers and administrators. Pivot Learning Partners provides a team of coaches under the guidance of a highly qualified Project Lead in its District Partner program. As a final step, Pivot Learning Partners shows districts how to build internal


systems to monitor progress, foster internal accountability and adjust the work on an ongoing basis to maintain continuous improvement systems aligned with increased student achievement. An internal analysis conducted in 2008 demonstrated that the Pivot Learning Partners District Partners that received both leadership and training made greater improvements than districts that received only coaching. While respecting the needs and unique circumstances of every district, Pivot Learning Partners advocates for the full-service model whenever possible to effect the most dramatic change. In California, districts that engage with Pivot Learning Partners make more gains than those that do not. Despite the challenges of educating a diverse, at-risk student population, these districts continue to improve more rapidly than others across the state, even though they serve a higher population of students living in poverty (55 percent), students of color (60 percent), and students learning English (28 percent). These partner districts range from small, rural districts like Corcoran Joint Unified with approximately 3,000 students, to Fresno Unified School District, the fourth largest in the state with nearly 80,000 students. 4. Building Capacity for Sustained Improvement Learning Point Associates believes that the surest path to long-term comprehensive school improvement and increased student achievement is building a system’s capacity to help itself. This goal can be achieved through conducting comprehensive needs assessments, the consistent application of human capital strategies based upon evidence from scientific research and rigorous practice, evaluation and continuous improvement of the implementation of those strategies, and ongoing technical assistance and monitoring support. We will focus considerable attention on building the capacity of district teams to:

• Use needs assessment data to drive action planning and decision making.

• Plan for implementation of human capital strategies that are well-aligned with research-based practices.

• Lead the continuous school improvement process.

• Engage community stakeholders in the process of continuous improvement and increase awareness of accountability.

• Comply with all Illinois Partnership Zone activities. Over the course of five years of working with districts as part of the Illinois Partnership Zone, we propose to structure the activities in the work plan to ensure that the services can be managed by the school district to sustain the improvements and resulting growth. Our experience indicates that in order to make continuous progress over time, a district must closely monitor its performance against the indicators set out in the action plan, as well as against the research-based practices in the METworks Framework and/or Best Practices Framework. Table 2 indicates the tasks by project year.


Table 2. Tasks by Project Year

Year Needs Assessment and Planning

Implementation of Human Capital Strategy Services

Evaluation of Services and Improvement Cycle

Monitoring Support and Technical Assistance

Community Engagement

Year 1 X X Year 2 X X X Year 3 X X X X Year 4 X X X X Year 5 X X X As indicated in Table 2, the needs assessment and initial planning will take place in Year 1. In Year 2, the implementation of selected services for human capital strategies commences along with additional action planning. Beginning in Year 3, districts will engage in additional data collection activities to assess the ongoing implementation. This information will be used by the action planning team to refine efforts using a continuous improvement cycle and will guide decisions about program adjustments and improvements to increase the likelihood of positive impact. As district teams begin to lead the key activities for implementation of human capital strategies, Learning Point Associates moves into a role of providing only monitoring support and technical assistance in Years 4 and 5. Monitoring support and technical assistance often takes the form of quarterly or semiannual meetings or check-in reports, whereby, over time, Learning Point Associates builds the district’s capacity to self-monitor progress and make changes to the plans and indicators as required for stronger implementation. Throughout all five years, Learning Point Associates and the school district ensure community engagement through various strategies (see Section 2. Community Involvement and Support). 5. Outcomes-Based Measurement Plan To ensure the successful creation and implementation of a comprehensive vision and strategy for district capacity-building across the three key areas of resource alignment, curriculum management, and establishment of data collection and accountability systems, an outcomes-based measurement plan will be adopted. This plan will roll out over the course of five years, with an initial assessment after two years and a final assessment after five years. Intermediate Outcomes (After Two Years) To initially assess progress and determine necessary adjustments to ensure that the final outcome is successful, we will assess intermediate outcomes after 2 years (1 year of planning, 1 year of implementation). At the intermediate stage, district capacity objectives will be assessed using a combination of surveys, review of work products, and other extant information. If it is found that the specified outcomes have not been met, the Supporting Partner will consult with stakeholders before developing a plan to address any barriers that may have arisen. In the event that


intermediate outcomes have not been met after 2 years, a second intermediate assessment will be conducted after 3 years. Resource Alignment Objectives

• Objective 1: The development of a more comprehensive and strategic picture of how resources should be allocated to meet district goals.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Attendance of 25–35 district stakeholders at a goal-setting and resource allocation session; post-event survey of stakeholders attending this session indicating that at least 85 percent of participants believed this objective was met.

• Objective 2: Enhanced knowledge about issues and priorities for reallocation of

resources.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Cross-district leadership team will have completed an initial analysis of current patterns of resource allocation.

• Objective 3: Concrete district action taken to improve the alignment of resource

allocation with goals.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: A section of the District Action Plan about reallocating resources that addresses issues (e.g., allocation of resources across schools and to high-need student populations, and efficacy of district investments in professional development) with at least three areas of reallocation specified and initial action steps under way.

Data and Accountability Objectives

• Objective 1: The development of a more comprehensive and strategic picture of what data should be collected and how data should be used to support improved teaching and learning.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Attendance of 25–35 district stakeholders at a 2-day Best Practices professional development and data systems review session; post-event survey of stakeholders attending session indicating that at least 85 percent of participants believed this objective was met.

• Objective 2: Enhanced knowledge about issues and priorities for improved data

collection and use.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Completion of a district data system map (including data from finance, human resources, student information system, assessment, and special programs) and identification of at least three high-leverage areas of action to collect new data, improve data quality, link existing data sources for purposes of analysis, improve data analysis or reporting, and/or provide data to additional users.


• Objective 3: Concrete district action taken to improve data and accountability. Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: A district action plan for improved data use in three high-leverage areas (e.g., providing teachers with formative data to improve instruction; measuring the impact of interventions for students not at grade level; using data to place students in appropriate levels of English language development) with at least three specific action areas specified and initial action steps under way.

Curriculum Management Objectives

• Objective 1: The development of a more comprehensive and strategic picture of tools that high-performing, high-poverty districts use for curriculum management.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Attendance of 25–35 district stakeholders at a two-day Best Practices professional development and curriculum management systems review session; post-event survey of stakeholders attending session indicating that at least 85 percent of participants believed this objective was met.

• Objective 2: Enhanced knowledge about issues and priorities for improved curriculum

management.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Completion of the Pivot Learning Partners Best Practices Survey section that concerns curriculum and curriculum management issues by a cross-section of teachers and administrators; the review of the resulting data by a cross-district team of stakeholders including teachers and the identification of 3–5 issues for action.

• Objective 3: Concrete district action taken to improve curriculum management.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Completion of District Instructional Action Plan section that specifies 3–5 specific actions to improve curriculum management in the district in at least three high-leverage areas (e.g., aligning of curriculum with standards; establishing processes for monitoring quality of instruction and fidelity of curriculum use; creating teacher professional learning communities; providing new and/or struggling teachers with coaching support) with at least three action areas specified and initial action steps underway.

Final Outcomes (After Five Years): Human Capital Objectives The final outcomes will be assessed after five years to confirm that the final outcome is successful. Measurable indicators of progress against outcomes will address district capacity-building objectives and building capacity for sustained improvement. The final human capital objectives include each of the intermediate human capital objectives as well as objectives related to improved teacher recruitment, retention, morale, and effectiveness. The building capacity for sustained improvement objectives relate to changed thinking and approaches to improving human capital within the district.


• Objective 1: The development of a more comprehensive and strategic way of thinking

about human capital/educator talent management among key stakeholders.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Informal interview of a random sample of five of the key stakeholders after five years, indicating that at least four of the five stakeholders believe this objective was met.

• Objective 2: Enhanced knowledge about district-specific human capital/educator talent

management issues among key stakeholders.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Informal interview of a random sample of five of the key stakeholders after five years, indicating that at least four of the five stakeholders believe this objective was met.

• Objective 3: Concrete district action(s) taken to improve human capital/educator talent

management.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: The adherence to the district strategic action plan; the full implementation of at least three policy changes that were identified as priority areas.

• Objective 4: Improvements in teacher retention.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Extant data indicating that preretirement teacher attrition declined by a district-determined amount. (Note: This reduction in attrition may be a goal for some subject areas only.)

• Objective 5: Improvements in teacher morale.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: The online teacher survey (in condensed form) will be administered after five years to assess whether teachers’ views of the district have changed for the better. Success will be determined in advance by the district but may include, for example, 30 percent of teachers perceiving workplace conditions to have improved; a 10 percent increase in the number of years that teachers intend to remain in the district; and other such indicators of morale.

• Objective 6: Improvements in teacher recruitment.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Extant data indicating that recruitment has improved by a district-determined amount. This may include improvements in the number of applications per position, the qualifications and experience levels of applicants, or the number of positions not staffed by the start of the academic year. (Note: This improvement in recruitment may be a goal for some subject areas only.)

• Objective 7: Improvements in teacher effectiveness/student performance.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: While the effect of human capital/educator talent management reforms may take many years to show an effect on


student performance, extant test score and student discipline data will be reviewed after five years to determine improvements.

Final Outcomes (After Five Years): District Capacity-Building Objectives The final outcomes will be assessed after five years to confirm that the final outcome is successful. Measurable indicators of progress against outcomes will address district capacity objectives, human capital objectives, and building capacity for sustained improvement. The final district capacity objectives include each of the intermediate human capital objectives as well as objectives related to improved teacher recruitment, retention, morale, and effectiveness. The district capacity objectives include an array of improvements in districts’ resource alignment, data and accountability, and curriculum management systems. The building capacity for sustained improvement objectives relate to changed thinking and approaches to improving human capital within the district.

• Objective 1: The development of a more comprehensive and strategic way of thinking about resource alignment, data and accountability, and curriculum management among key stakeholders.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Informal interview of a random sample of five of the key stakeholders after five years indicating that at least four of the five stakeholders believe this objective was met.

• Objective 2: Enhanced knowledge about district-specific resource alignment, data and

accountability, and curriculum management issues among key stakeholders.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Informal interview of a random sample of five of the key stakeholders after five years indicating that at least four of the five stakeholders believe this objective was met.

• Objective 3: Concrete district action(s) taken to improve resource alignment, data and

accountability, and curriculum management in the district.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Adherence to the District Action Plan; full implementation of at least three policy changes that were identified as priority areas; partial implementation of at least three additional changes.

• Objective 4: Additional resources allocated to low-performing schools.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: Extant data indicating that additional resources allocated to low-performing schools by a district-determined amount (This goal may be for specified schools or districtwide.)

• Objective 5: Improvements in data quality and use.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: The district data system map will be updated to identify improvements in district data capacity; the Pivot Learning Partners


online Best Practices survey will be readministered after five years to assess whether teachers’ views of the usefulness of district data, and their reports of their own data use, have changed for the better.

• Objective 6: Improvements in curriculum management.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: The Pivot Learning Partners online Best Practices survey will be re-administered to a cross-section of teachers and extant data reviewed to assess the consistency and quality of curriculum implementation across the district or in target schools. (Note: this improvement may be a goal for some subject areas only.)

• Objective 7: Improvements in teacher effectiveness/student performance.

Measurable Indicators of Progress Against Outcomes: While the effect of improving district capacity may take many years to show an effect on student performance, extant test score and student discipline data will be reviewed after five years to determine improvements.

6. Fiscal Status Reporting Learning Point Associates will provide quarterly year-to-date and contract-to-date expenditure reports that are tied back to the budget by line item submitted under the proposal. Learning Point Associates will provide any additional fiscal reports deemed necessary by ISBE or school districts as specific contracts are negotiated and finalized.


Demonstrated Record of Effectiveness Demonstrated Record of Effectiveness for District Capacity Building Pivot Learning Partners has a long history of improving teaching and learning in underperforming schools. Pivot Learning Partners was founded in 1995 as the Bay Area School Reform Collaborative (BASRC) and was part of the national Annenberg Challenge—an ambitious effort by Ambassador Walter Annenberg to transform schools in major urban areas. The intensive, five-year external evaluation of BASRC by Stanford University’s Center for Research on the Context of Teaching (CRC) found that the BASRC schools improved more rapidly than a matched sample and that those schools implementing BASRC’s data-based decision-making program, the Cycle of Inquiry, made the most progress. BASRC also took on the challenge of building a program that would be replicable, scalable, and sustainable— expanding into the Central Valley and the Los Angeles basin in 2004 and 2005, and changed its name to Springboard Schools to better reflect its wider presence in California. In July 2009, Springboard Schools became Pivot Learning Partners but remained committed to its 15-year history of advancing its mission of working with educators to raise student achievement and close the achievement gaps. The Pivot Learning Partners core District Partner Program consists of long-term partnerships with districts around the state of California. It is in this network of nearly 50 school districts serving some 750,000 students across California that Pivot Learning Partners brings together its core operating principles of research, professional development, and coaching to create a customized package of support for district-level and districtwide change. The commitment of Pivot Learning Partners to working in districts that serve students in need is reflected in the demographics of its District Partners. Despite the challenges of educating a diverse, at-risk student population, these District Partners continue to improve more rapidly than others across the state, even though they s

Illinois Partnership Zone: Supporting Partner Narrative ... · current human capital management...

Documents

Transcript of Illinois Partnership Zone: Supporting Partner Narrative ... · current human capital management...