Dallas ISD - Theory of ActionManaged Instruction with Earned Empowerment

2019-2020 TOA Leadership Team

2

Department First Name Last Name TitleCentralized Enrollment & Magnet Programs Keisha Crowder-Davis Executive DirectorCommunications Robyn Harris DirectorEarly Learning Derek Little Assistant SuperintendentEvaluation and Assessment Cecilia Oakeley Assistant SuperintendentFinancial Services Richard Straggas Executive DirectorHuman Capital Management Robert Abel Assistant SuperintendentInformation Technology Sean Brinkman DirectorLanguage and Literacy Shannon Trejo Deputy ChiefMagnet Schools Tiffany Huitt Executive DirectorOffice of Transformation & Innovation Shakeatha Butler DirectorOffice of Transformation & Innovation Angie Gaylord Deputy ChiefOperations (Maintenance) David Bates Executive DirectorPersonalized Learning Kristin Watkins DirectorPostsecondary Partnerships and Programs Usamah Muhammad-Rodgers Assistant SuperintendentP-TECH/ECHS Programs Cheryl Nevels Executive DirectorRacial Equity Office Michelle Pruhomme-Coleman DirectorRacial Equity Office Leslie Williams Deputy ChiefSchool Leadership Elena Hill Executive DirectorSchool Leadership Vincent Reyes Executive DirectorSchool Leadership Leslie Stephens Assistant SuperintendentStrategic Initiatives Jamie Luellen Project ManagerStrategic Initiatives Brian Lusk ChiefStudent Services Sharla Hudspeth DirectorVisual & Performing Arts Tim Linley Executive DirectorRusk Middle School Juan Cordoba PrincipalSOLAR Boys Adriana Gonzalez PrincipalConnor Elementary Kiashan King PrincipalJefferson High School Sandi Massey Principal

Theory of Action

Managed instruction with earned empowerment includes three core components:

Managed Instruction

Every school begins with the managed foundation for instruction and operations

School Ratings

All schools are rated according to the Local Accountability System (LAS)

Flexibility and Empowerment

Based on ratings, school’s earn autonomies from the managed foundation

Standards of ServiceAll schools should receive consistent services from each division in the district. The standard of service outlines the division’s primary responsibility, describes what campuses can expect from the central staff departments, and identifies the measures of success.

3

Systematic approach that rests on organizational philosophy

The Dallas ISD theory of action is Managed Instruction with Earned Empowerment

Theory of Action Timeline2019-2020

4

Local Accountability System (LAS)Component Weights by Domain

5

The Local Accountability System* was used to determine 2019 State Accountability Ratings for each school based on 2018-2019 data.

*Schools earning a State Rating of D or F will not include local metrics.

Domains 1-3 Domain 4 Domain 5 Domain 6

State Accountability(50%)⇩

Academics(30%)⇩

Culture & Climate (10%)⇩

Student Engagement

(10%)⇩

Domain 1 - Student AchievementDomain 2 - School ProgressBest of Domain 1 or 2 (35%)

Domain 3 - Closing the Gaps (15%)

SEI-lagged (30%)

Staff Climate Survey (5%)

Parent Survey (5%)

Student Survey (5%)

Extracurricular Participation

(5%)

Weig

htCo

mpo

nent

De

tails

Local Accountability System RatingsTying the theory of action together

✓Determines schools’ ratings

✓Quantifies belief system on what matters most (e.g., growth)

✓Measures campus performance according to beliefs

Local Accountability System Dallas ISD LAS Ratings

ACCOMPLISHED

BREAKTHROUGH

COMPETING

DEVELOPING

FOCUS

6

Rating SPF 3.1 (2018)

LAS (2019) Change

Accomplished 31 28 -3

Breakthrough 69 102 +33

Competing 116 75 -41

Developing 12 12 0

Focus 1 7 +6

All Schools 229 224

LAS Extracurricular Components

Number of students participating in at least one extracurricular or co-curricular activity

Variety of activity options available from the following categories• Athletics• Academics• Visual & Performing

Arts• Service & Leadership• Avocation

Number of teachers involved in supporting extracurricular and co-curricular activities

STUDENT PARTICIPATION PERCENTAGE

60 points

EXTRACURRICULAR & CO-CURRICULAR

OPPORTUNITIES

20 points

TEACHER PARTICIPATION PERCENTAGE

20 points

7

GOAL:100% student participation

GOAL:4 of 5 Categories Goals Vary by Level

GOAL:25% Teacher Participation

New Components

CATEGORY HIGH SCHOOL

MIDDLE SCHOOL

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

ATHLETICS 10 8 5

VISUAL & PERFORMING ARTS 10 8 5

ACADEMICS 10 8 5

SERVICE & LEADERSHIP 7 5 3

AVOCATION 7 5 5

CATEGORIES POINTS

4-5 20

3 15

2 10

1 5

8

ALL or NONE (no

partial points given)

LAS Extracurricular Activities

Teacher Participation

Number of teachers who coach, sponsor, or mentor an extracurricular or co-curricular activity

Rating is 20 possible points

TEACHER INVOLVEMENT

25%+

16-24%

11-15%

5-10%

Less than 5%

POINTS

20

15

10

5

0

2019-2020 Autonomies

9

Division/Department Autonomies Available

Teaching & Learning 4School Leadership 2Human Capital Management 2Finance 1Operations 6Information Technology 3Office of Transformation and Innovation 5

2019-2020 Master Principals

10

Elementary Master Principals

Sandra Barrios (Lowe)

Kathryn Carter(Donald)

Ida Escobedo(Henderson)

Lourdes Garduno(Winnetka)

Marion Jackson(Reilly)

Sonia Loskot (Burnet)

Melanie Mans (Mockingbird)

Tara Berry(DeGolyer)

Wendy Miller (Withers)

Israel Rivera(May)

Kelly Sanchez (Arcadia Park)

Rubinna Sanchez(Dorsey)

Julie Singleton (Central)

Damien Stovall (Titche)

Secondary Master PrincipalsTesmesghenAsmerom (Conrad)

Juan Cordoba (Rusk)

Gabrelle Dickson (YWSA)

Salem Hussain (Quintanilla)

Francine Taylor (Richards)

Choice Master PrincipalsNancy

Bernardino(Solar Girls)

Macario Hernandez

(Garza)

Ruby Ramirez(TAG Pleasant

Grove)

Arnoldo Zuniga (DESA)

On the Horizon• Identification/refinement of Standards of Service (ie. ACE and

FARE schools)• Develop an additional constraint for AE (LOCAL)• Review and Update the Theory of Action Playbook

• Incentive-based Allotment Pilot

11

Additional supports provided through ACE, FARE, and AIM

1 Autonomy

Additional supports provided through ACE, FARE, and AIM

1 Autonomy

Additional supports provided through ACE, FARE, and AIM

1 Autonomy up to 13 Autonomies

up to 23 Autonomies

AccomplishedBreakthroughCompetingDevelopingFocus

Questions?

Appendix

Theory of Action - Playbook

The Theory of Action Playbook describes all the components of

the district’s Theory of Action

framework

14

Playbook Content Includes

• Overview of TOA

• LAS Overview

• Standards of Service

• Managed Instruction

• School Autonomies

• Sample Scorecard

• LAS School Ratings

• Master Principal Overview

• TOA Board Policy

• TOA Rules and Procedures

• TOA Timelines

• Contact Information

TOA Overview Master Principals

Elementary

• 138 Schools•Note: This includes elementary and elementary/middle schools)

Secondary

• 53 Schools•Note: This includes middle, high, and high/middle schools)

Choice

• 33 Schools•Note: This includes magnet and OTI schools from all levels (ES, MS, and HS)

Master Principal GroupsMaster Principals were designated in each of 3 major groups

(Elementary, Secondary, and Choice)

16

1 2 3

Master Principals

14

Master Principals

5

Master Principals

4

Master Principal Criteria

At least 3 years of principal experience Proficient I or higher evaluation rating Current Dallas ISD principal Current school must not be Developing or Focus.

Growth

• School Effectiveness Index (SEI)

Achievement

• Domain I – STAAR

Climate

• School Climate (10%)• Parent Survey (10%)• Student Survey (10%)

1 2 3

17

(35%) (35%) (30%)

Master Principal Safeguards:

Master Principal Calculation

Use of deciles for each component rank

Adjust final score with the Intensity of Poverty Index (IPI)

Top 10% of each group (ES, MS/HS, Choice) will be designated as Master Principal

18

Use the LAS calculation system with the following rules:

Note: Each component’s statistics are ranked by school type (HS, MS, ES). When ranking, choice schools are ranked among all district schools, but non-choice schools are ranked only against other non-choice schools.