The Power of Collaborative Partnerships
Sandra Hancock, Ed.D. Genise Henry, Ph.D. Daryl Michel, Ph.D. February 2015 Institute for Public School Initiatives 5316 Highway 290 West, Suite 510 Austin, Texas 78735-­‐8931 www.ipsi.utexas.edu The Institute for Public School Initiatives (IPSI) solves education’s complex problems by building strategic partnerships with agencies, foundations, business leaders, and associations. Launched in 2004, the Institute is known for its innovative statewide solutions that increase student achievement and teacher and school effectiveness. The Power of Collaborative Partnerships One year after the influential 1983 report entitled “A Nation at Risk,” Texas began developing an extensive school-­‐wide accountability system to measure improvement and hold schools accountable for continued growth and improvement. For many school districts in Texas, the increasing measures of accountability challenged their traditional modes of operation and called for change. For some districts, those with stable demographics of middle-­‐ to high-­‐income students, the recognition of a need for change did not show up until the inception of the highly rigorous State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR). The STAAR began showing widening gaps among students of different races, students of varied income levels, and students in special education. While many federal initiatives such as Title I, No Child Left Behind, and Race to the Top have provided support to districts to address the increasing gaps in student performance, Texas sought to continue accelerating the support to districts in the area of literacy through the Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy grant, also known as the Texas Literacy Initiative (TLI) grant. The TLI goals include 1. increasing the oral language and pre-­‐literacy skills of participating preschool children; 2. improving the performance of participating K–2 students on early reading assessments; 3. increasing the percentage of participating students who meet or exceed proficiency on the state English language arts assessments in grades 3–12; 4. increasing the use of data and data analysis to inform all decision making in participating districts, campuses, classrooms, and early learning settings; and 5. increasing the implementation of effective literacy instruction through Literacy Lines. Sub-­‐grantees who were awarded TLI grant funding agreed to partner with a state-­‐approved entity for ongoing leadership support to achieve these goals, as well as develop a comprehensive literacy program at the district level. Connally Independent School District in the Waco, Texas, area is one of thirty sub-­‐grantees in the TLI, and they partnered with the Institute for Public School Initiatives (IPSI) for support. The two organizations set out to work collaboratively to achieve grant goals and invest in the Connally ISD’s growing and changing demographics of students. At the onset of the grant, each sub-­‐grantee formed a local Grant Implementation Team to guide, oversee, and support the Initiative. This team was expected to continuously analyze and monitor data, as well as support campuses in improving student performance in literacy. In January 2013, the Connally ISD Grant Implementation Team and IPSI convened with the goal of reviewing and discussing literacy data at the early childhood, elementary, middle, and high school level. Leaders met in a district conference room, which allowed for everyone to literally and figuratively come to the same table, and expectations were set: Tame your technology, be an active participant, and be open and honest with one another. It was important that everyone around the table understood that going forward could not occur without the commitment of all leaders. The IPSI assistant director and state literacy liaison, as well as the Connally assistant superintendent of curriculum and instruction, worked together to organize the meeting and anticipated seeing a slow, 3 The Power of Collaborative Partnerships methodical emergence of the common deficit of a single skill or component (e.g., vocabulary, writing, making inferences) across all grade levels and campuses. Instead, they discovered issues much broader than standards or student expectations. The outcome revealed a chaotic misalignment of effort across the district. Recognizing that research links school leaders to school performance (Murphy, 2004), the meeting organizers asked each campus leader to present data for each grade level at his/her campus, beginning with the early childhood center and ending with high school. Each campus leader presented the priority strengths and priority needs as evidenced by campus data, while other attendees recorded commonalities and differences. Periodically, meeting organizers posed questions such as What commonalities and/or differences exist in the data presented thus far? What might the data tell us about instructional practices, development of foundational literacy skills, and so on? What consistencies or inconsistencies are you noticing in the data? What other patterns are emerging from the data? After campus leaders shared data and reflected, it became apparent that there was no shortage of data. Rather, it appeared as though the district might be operating as a testing factory. For example, each Friday in one particular grade and content area, students took a traditional spelling test of about 20 words, a test over the story of the week, a test formatted like the state standardized test, and an academic vocabulary test. Additionally, progress-­‐monitoring probes for Tier 2 and 3 students were administered each week or biweekly. Thus, Fridays seemed to be about testing and a lost day for instruction. At another campus during one month, students took an end-­‐of-­‐unit common assessment, benchmark assessment, semester exam, and state-­‐
mandated exams. For this campus, a similar conclusion was drawn: A great deal of testing occurred, resulting in an abundance of lost instructional time. As the Grant Implementation Team discussed these patterns, they came to the conclusion that there was a fragmented, redundant, and ineffective assessment plan, and it became clear that procedures and processes were unclear in regards to student programs. As a result of the initial findings, there was now a feeling of urgency and the need for additional critical conversations to take place without the blaming of others. Knowing that there was a fragmented, redundant, and ineffective assessment plan and that procedures and processes were unclear in regards to student programs, the Grant Implementation Team generated questions about why this was the case. Why didn’t the system have clearer processes and procedures? How did the assessment plan become fragmented? They came up with many reasons and then started sorting the reasons into two categories: what was within their control and what was out of their control. After narrowing the list of reasons within their control, they combined like reasons and identified a root cause. From the root cause, two main themes emerged: •
•
Develop and clearly define a comprehensive assessment plan; and Develop and clearly define processes for identifying and serving students in need of specialized services, e.g., gifted and talented, English as a Second Language (ESL), Response to Intervention (RTI), dyslexia, and 504. The Grant Implementation Team established short-­‐ and long-­‐term goals for each, identified actions, assigned persons responsible, and set timelines. Fast forward eight months from this meeting, and Connally ISD has a comprehensive assessment plan in place, K-­‐12, for reading and mathematics. Processes and guidelines for gifted and talented, ESL, RTI, migrant, and 504 are complete and loaded onto a secure section of the district Web site, accessible to all instructional employees. Beyond the initial targeted student programs, systems for the identification and services of at-­‐
risk and homeless students were defined. 4 The Power of Collaborative Partnerships Within one year of this meeting, an Instructional Planning System was developed, and an online, district learning community was established. This online learning community also serves as a materials storage center. Eighteen months after the meeting, the district added a district-­‐wide structure for Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID); a professional learning system outlining required trainings for all staff members; expectations for professional learning communities; and a framework for instructional rounds. Additionally, due to the Texas requirements implemented during the 2013-­‐2014 school year, the district refined continuums for evaluating fine arts, health and wellness, career and technology, and parent involvement. During the fall of 2014, systems for positive behavior support, early college high school, library support, and dyslexia were established, and the district unveiled “Building Foundations: Classrooms the Connally Way.” The unveiling of “Building Foundations” aligns and communicates specific norms related to curriculum, instruction, assessment, environment, and data analysis and provides hyperlinks for additional information and walk-­‐through forms. The school reform efforts have resulted in improvement for the district. In November 2012, campus and district leaders scored six school improvement continuums, on scales from one (lowest rating – system or practice not in place) to five (highest rating – system or practice clearly defined), from Education for the Future, and the results ranged from 1.5 to 2.1. In January 2015, campus and district leaders were asked to rate the same categories, and average scores ranged from 3.2 to 3.8. The average scores increased for every continuum category. Continuum Average November 2012 Score Average January 2015 Score Leadership 1.5 3.8 Professional Learning 2.1 3.8 Quality Planning 2 3.8 Student Achievement 2 3.5 Partnership Development 1.9 3.2 Continuous Improvement and 1.8 3.2 Evaluation The feedback from the leaders has been phenomenal. Campuses and departments are embracing the processes and have greater ownership of the initiatives. It is no longer a top-­‐down approach but rather an “all of us together” approach, and the campus and district leaders have witnessed the power of forming and sustaining collaborative relationships. While additional improvement can be made, Connally ISD is making progress toward the goal of being a unified team. The attitudes about performance gains are positive and future studies are planned to monitor student achievement. The belief is that increases in student performance will come; however, systems for obtaining the results need to be in place. 5 The Power of Collaborative Partnerships References Murphy, J. (2004). Leadership for literacy: Research-­‐based practice, PreK-­‐3. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. 6 The Power of Collaborative Partnerships About the Authors Dr. Sandra Hancock is the assistant superintendent of Connally Independent School District in Waco, Texas. Sandra has been a school administrator in the district since 2003 and has worked as an adjunct faculty member with Tarleton State University for 9 years. Dr. Hancock received her doctorate in educational administration through a joint program between Texas A&M University at Commerce and Tarleton State University. She is passionate about leadership issues. Dr. Genise Henry has served in various roles as an instructional leader with a focus in the areas of language and literacy. She has provided professional development and technical assistance to school districts at the national level and currently supports districts funded through the Texas Literacy Initiative as a senior field trainer/analyst at the Institute for Public School Initiatives. Her experience, at the elementary and secondary level, is foundational for her work in implementing research-­‐based and data-­‐driven best practices for school improvement. She earned her Ph.D. and M.Ed. at Texas State University in San Marcos, and a B.A. at Huston Tillotson University in Austin, Texas. Dr. Daryl Michel is an assistant director at The University of Texas at Austin’s Institute for Public Initiatives (IPSI). Daryl came to IPSI in 2005 and served as a project manager for the Texas Reading First Initiative. He has national experience in providing support to educators and school and district leaders in areas such as instructional leadership and effective teaching practices. Currently, he co-­‐leads the Texas Literacy Initiative, leading multiple teams in developing facilitated course modules, providing face-­‐to-­‐face and online professional development and technical assistance, and supporting Texas schools and districts in literacy education and using data to guide instruction. Dr. Michel received his Ph.D. from Texas State University with an emphasis in Education: School Improvement. His research interests include learning communities, leading effective meetings, and teacher and administrator development. Institute for Public School Initiatives The University of Texas at Austin 5316 Highway 290 West, Suite 510 Austin, Texas 78735-­‐8931 512-­‐232-­‐6569 www.ipsi.utexas.edu