Douglas County: Building a Better Education Model

7/27/2019 Douglas County: Building a Better Education Model

1/32

by Benjamin DeGrow, Senior Policy AnalystEducation Policy Center

Douglas County: Building aBetter Education Model

IP-8-2013 | September 2013

by Benjamin DeGrow, Senior Policy AnalystEducation Policy Center


2/32

Douglas County: Building a Better Education Model September 2013

IndependenceInstitute.org Page 1

Executive Summary

Eecting successful suburban school reform posesan authentic challenge. Many students do wellcompared to their peers in neighboring districts,but overall test scores conceal shortcomings. The

U.S. spends more per person on education thanany other country, yet even middle-class studentsacademically lag their peers in other countries.The fast-growing Douglas County SchoolDistrict (DCSD) south of Denver, Colorado, hasattempted a dierent approach to aim higher.The relatively high-performing suburbandistrict has broken down boundaries througha wide range of innovative strategies. Since the2009 election of a reform-minded school boardmajority and a change in district leadership,

DCSD has implemented a scally responsible,three-pronged strategic plan:

Enhanced student and parental choice,including public and private options

An enriched system of world-classstandards, curriculum, and assessments

Performance-based instructionalevaluations, pay, and career growth

The ambitious program is designed to enhancedistrict operations, and, ultimately, outcomes forstudents. By adopting the Blueprint for Choice,including the rst-of-its-kind Choice ScholarshipProgram, DCSD leaders have given tremendousattention to serving individual student needsbased on parental direction. By developing anew curriculum rooted in world-class educationstandards, and aligning assessments andprofessional development to serve the needs ofschools and teachers, DCSD has expanded their

vision and raised the bar for students.

At the core of the performance-based systemupgrade are new evaluation frameworks forteachers and principals. DCSD has placed itselfa year ahead of a 2010 state laws requirementsto tie educator eectiveness to new quality

standards and to student academic growth. Thedistrict further has taken the unprecedentedstep of blending substantive performance paywith market-based salary bands that distinguishteacher specialties based on supply and demand.More than 40 career options provided throughProfessional Pathways give teachers atremendous degree of career exibility.

To complete all the changes in a cost-eectivemanner, DCSD leaders took a bold stance in theirrst-ever open negotiations with the teachersunion. While the union conceded on many points,they would not give up all tax dollars to subsidizeunion ocers, nor the privilege of district duescollection to fund a national union organization,nor the exclusive authority to bargain for alllicensed educators. The collective bargainingagreement lapsed in 2012, even as many teachersworked directly with district leaders to craftmany elements of the innovative system.

The crafting of a new order has generated some

friction. The repurposing of current resourcesto raise expectations and reward performancehas motivated interest groups to marshal afocused opposition. DCSD leaders face a politicalchallenge as they build a better education modelthat seeks to translate comprehensive innovationinto long-term student benets. As key elementsof the model spread and take hold, DouglasCountys example points the way to transformingAmerican public education.


3/32



Introduction: The Case forSuburban School Reform

In a speech delivered at the AmericanEnterprise Institute on April 26,2013, former U.S. Secretary of

Education William Bennett observed,Somebody is trying to do all of thegood reforms at once out in DouglasCounty, Colorado. Bennett hadrecently returned from a visit to seethe school district rsthand. Citingthe eorts to increase parental choice,enhance accountability, and raisestandards, he also predicted that thereforms will be challenged.

Indeed they have been challenged.Opposition from formidable interestgroups, notably the displacedAmerican Federation of Teachersbargaining unit, creates the impressionof widespread discontent. Inevitablediscontinuities arise when reformersovercome the inertia of manydecades-long patterns, policies, andpractices. Five hundred years ago,the Florentine political philosopher

Niccolo Machiavelli keenly identiedthe challenge in his classic volumeThe Prince:

There is nothing more dicultto take in hand, more perilousto conduct, or more uncertainin its success, than to take thelead in the introduction of anew order of things. For thereformer has enemies in all

those who prot by the oldorder, and only lukewarmdefenders in all those whowould prot by the new order,this lukewarmness arisingpartly from fear of theiradversaries and partly fromthe incredulity of mankind,

who do not truly believe inanything new until they havehad actual experience of it.

Across the United States, countlessdollars and hours have been expendedto reform K-12 education, to changepolicies and to weaken powerstructures that preserve a schoolsystem little changed from a centuryearlier. Due to the challenging impactsof poverty and social dysfunction,urban school environments haveserved as the primary venue foreducation reform. Schools in moreauent settings seem to be doing anadequate job. Suburban residents tendto be satised with schooling in theirown communities. Half of Americansgive an A or B grade to their localschools, but only one in ve give asimilar high grade to public schoolsnationally.1

The United States spends more percapita on education than anywherein the world, yet the nations studentsrank 32nd in math and 23rd in science

among developed countries.2 Someapologists try to dismiss the troublingstatistics by attributing the decit to theeects of poverty. But a closer look atthe achievement of middle- to upper-middle class American students (thosein the 50th to 75th percentile of familyincome) refutes the claim that povertyis the only reason that Americanslag educationally. Controlling forpoverty and comparing U.S. students

only to their foreign socioeconomicpeers yields similarly weak Americanresults (32nd in math, 21st inscience). The poorest 25 percent ofShanghai students outperform upper-middle class Americans in reading.3Relatively high-performing suburbanschool districts, properly compared

The United

States spends

more per capita

on education

than anywherein the world,

yet the nations

students rank

32nd in math

and 23rd in

science among

developed

countries.


4/32



on the competitive international stage,certainly have room to improve.

Eorts to increase performancethrough traditional methods andstructures largely have been tappedout. The declining productivity ofU.S. schools is well documented. Overthe past 40 years, the cost to educatethe average K-12 student has nearlytripled. Yet the measurable mathand reading skills of the nations17-year-olds have not signicantlychanged (see gure 1). Adding moreemployees to the K-12 payroll hasyielded substantial costs with very fewbenets. The already-limited positiveeects of shrinking class sizes, at themargin, yield rapidly diminishingreturns.

The No Child Left Behind Act of2002 exposed how many schoolsystems inadequately serve certaingroups of students and how stateaccountability systems helped to

conceal shortcomings in achievement.Policymakers have directed attentionand resources to failing and marginallyperforming districts and schools.Meanwhile, relatively high performerslargely have avoided external policy

pressures that could motivate a climbtoward excellence. A concerted eortto improve achievement withoutthese pressures requires extraordinaryleadership.

Underlying the hard-to-seeshortcomings in traditional suburbanschool systems is the centralizationof decision-making power at moredistant levels of government. DouglasCounty leaders have boldly stakedsuccess on a dierent approachthat more broadly shares powerand responsibility. The signicantexperiment along Colorados FrontRange seeks to forge a dicult butsuccessful path to maximize studentachievement.

Douglas County

leaders have

boldly staked

success on a

different ap-

proach that

more broadly

shares power

and responsi-

bility.

Figure 1.


5/32



Douglas County StepsForward

Located directly between Denverand Colorado Springs, DouglasCounty, Colorado, covers about 840

square miles of mixed suburbanand rural composition. The 2010population of 285,465 marked a 62.4percent increase from 10 years earlier,making it one of the fastest-growingcounties in the United States. With amedian household income at roughly$100,000, the county is the states mostauent.4

The Douglas County School District

(DCSD) educates more than 64,000students, making it Colorados third-largest school district and the secondfastest growing district in the Denvermetro area. In the 2011-12 school yearthe district collected $8,582 in taxrevenue for each full-time studentenrolled, roughly seven-eighths of thestate average. About 72 percent of the$8,582 ($6,215) came in as Per PupilRevenue (PPR) through the states

School Finance Act. Two years later,the districts PPR has increased 2.75percent to $6,386.5

DCSDs payroll (which accountsfor the vast majority of its annualbudgeted costs) covers about 7,000employees, a large majority of whomare also Douglas County residents,making the district far and away thecountys largest employer.6

In 2008 a majority of the seven-member Board of Education agreed toraise teacher salaries on the promiseof additional local tax dollars. Monthslater, Douglas County voters rejectedthe tax proposal. In November 2009 aslate of reform-minded school board

candidates swept to victory on aplatform that promised more parentalchoice and teacher performance pay.Since assuming the majority followingthe November 2009 election, Board

leaders have delivered an ambitiousthree-part strategic plan:

Enhanced student andparental choice, includingpublic and private options

An enriched systemof world-class standards,curriculum, and assessments

Performance-based

instructional evaluations, pay,and career growth

The Board has combined the strategicplan with a scally conservativeapproach. Saving an additional4 percent of annual general fundspending beyond the constitutionalrequirement has moved the districtaway from the boom-and-bustbudgeting method that depends ontaxpayer bailouts through additionalmill levies.7 The policy has earnedthe district a very high AA+ bondrating, which yields considerablesavings through lower debt nancingcosts.8 Further savings have beenachieved through the elimination ofunion-negotiated perks as well as a25 percent reduction in spending oncentral oce administration from2009 to 2013.9

The interconnected components ofinnovation are meant to devolvepower to families and local schools,and to reshape what is taught andhow. The strategy also is designedto attract more entrepreneurialteachers and creative school leaderswho will enhance student learning

In November

2009 a slate ofreform-minded

school board

candidates

swept to victory

on a platform

that promised

more paren-

tal choice andteacher perfor-

mance pay.


6/32



opportunities. The following sectionshighlight the course of many keychanges, the challenges they face,and the promise of greater successthat comes from fundamentally

reimagining how education isdelivered in an American suburbanschool system.

Blueprint for Choice

The Douglas County School Districtspioneering work through the March2011 adoption of the Blueprint forChoice represents one leg of theambitious reform agenda. The Board ofEducation recognized that traditional

district programs cannot best serveevery student, and that competitionhelps to foster excellence. Citizen inputand sta research built the Blueprint.In 2010 board leaders convened aSchool Choice Task Force made upof educators, parents, communitymembers, and other policy experts.10Participants recommended policychanges in numerous areas includingprivate vouchers, open enrollment,

charter schools, neighborhood schoolempowerment, contract schools,home education options, and virtuallearning.

At the forefront of the Blueprint is theunique Choice Scholarship Programto provide publicly funded, parent-directed learning options with partnerprivate schools. The pilot program wasdesigned to serve 500 eligible students

starting in the 2011-12 school year.Family income does not factor intoeligibility, but prior district enrollmentis required. The district approved21 private school partners16religiously aliated, 5 independentto receive tuition payments worthabout $4,600 a year for each student

who opted to enroll. The ACLU andother plaintis led a lawsuit, and aDenver district judge enjoined theprogram in August 2011. In March2013, the Colorado Court of Appeals

reversed the lower courts injunctionand upheld the constitutionality of theprogram. Undaunted by the appealscourt ruling, plaintis have soughtreview in the Colorado SupremeCourt, which has not yet decidedwhether to take the case. Regardless,the litigation should be concluded by2014.11

The groundbreaking advances forprivate school choice are especiallyremarkable in an area where demandfor educational alternatives isrelatively small. The DCSD board hasdemonstrated an extremely rare blendof commitment to seeing all childreneectively and suitably served,respect for parents as the primarydirectors of their childrens education,and humility in recognizing that thedistrict cannot provide the best servicefor every single child.

The commitment to parentalchoice extends well beyond ChoiceScholarships. Thirteen charter schoolsoperate under authorization by thedistrict, ve of which have openedsince 2010.12 Most of the charters oera Core Knowledge program, thoughthere are other options as well. TheDCSD board stands out as one of veryfew to extend full, equitable sharing

of local property tax dollars with itsauthorized charters. They also haveused facility leasing arrangementswith new charters to achieve scallyresponsible development whilestriving to meet demand for dierenteducation options with a growingpopulation.13

In March 2013,

the Colora-

do Court of

Appeals re-

versed thelower courts

injunction and

upheld the con-

stitutionality

of the [Choice

Scholarship

Program].


7/32



Following the Blueprint, DCSD alsohas extended neighborhood schoolauthority to the site level to caterprogramming that matches with morelocalized student interests and needs.

An online School Choice Selectorhelps families nd the most suitableoptions.14

Under a parent-friendly openenrollment policy, the rate ofstudents who enroll in DCSD fromoutside district lines is more than50 percent greater than those wholeave the district.15 District leadersalso are working to expand theexible digital course options withinthe in-house eDCSD cyberschool.16

Finally, they have expanded servicesfor homeschoolers by providing arange of options that include dualenrollment and enrichment, as well asregistration and testing services.17

World-Class Education:Raising the Bar

Not surprisingly, Douglas County has

sustained a record as a relatively highachiever. Typical DCSD students showslightly more year-to-year learninggrowth than their counterparts inother Colorado public schools. Amongthe states 30 largest school districts,none earns as high a share of A-levelschools as DCSD.18

Students in the suburban districtsignicantly outperform Colorado

averages on rates of state-assessedprociency, on-time graduation, andremediation at in-state colleges. DCSDstudents tested prociency outstripsthe state by an average of 12 percentagepoints on the Transitional ColoradoAssessment Program (TCAP). On themandatory ACT exam, the districts

11th graders maintain a nearly 2-pointlead over the state average, havingimproved their score nearly a fullpoint from 2009 to 2013.19

DCSDs student enrollment has grown10 percent during the same time span.Even so, the number of studentstaking rigorous Advanced Placementcourses has increased by more than60 percent. The share of students whoreceive credit from the AP test hasdropped but slightly.20

From 2010 to 2012, with consistentgraduation standards in place, therate of DCSD students who complete

high school on time rose from 83 to87 percent.21 Student attainment isstrong, but could be still stronger.Though considerably better than thestate at large and better than previousyears, a quarter of DCSDs 2011graduates who enrolled at a Coloradopostsecondary institution still needextra academic help before they cantackle college-level material.22

Nonetheless, the relatively highperformance only tells part of thestory. Without pressure from state ornational policymakers to excel further,DCSD for years has reached thecomfort of an achievement plateau.Academic growth as a crediblemeasurement represents a relativelyrecent phenomenon. The ability totrack individual student progressprovides a more nuanced picture of

learning success, and a platform forfuture improvement. In Coloradogenerally, and in DCSD particularly,most students who fall behind inmath or reading are not on track tocatch up.23

...DCSD alsohas extended

neighborhood

school author-

ity to the site

level to cater

programming

that matches

with more lo-calized student

interests and

needs.


8/32



Broader international comparisonssuggest targets of opportunity to excelfurther. A tool known as the GlobalReport Card builds on state, national,and international testing data to

estimate how a given school districtstacks up against a select group of othernations. In math, DCSD outperformsCanada and Switzerland, rates abouteven with Finland, and lags behindtop-performing Singapore.24

Major employers seek more qualiedapplicants for knowledge-based jobsboth present and future, applicantswho possess skill sets that vary fromthe industrial demands of priorgenerations.

DCSD leaders have confronted head-on the challenge of raising the bar ofexpectations, when they easily couldrest on their relative standing withinthe state. As a result, the district canhelp prepare even more well-educatedcitizens to reach their potential.

21st Century Curriculum

Douglas County superintendentElizabeth Fagen, hired by the reformboard majority in 2010, frequentlyarticulates the need to provide studentswith deeper learning opportunities.The districts systemic overhaul isframed around the four recognized Csof 21st century education: Creativity,Collaboration, Communication, andCritical Thinking.25

To implement a district-wide programfocused on developing 21st centuryskills, DCSD has worked to providea new guaranteed and viablecurriculum (GVC). The guaranteeis that students will have access tothe same learning outcomes, partof the change from what previously

was taught.26 The viability is thatthe material can be presented andmastered by the appropriate level ofstudent in a timely manner. To workeectively, GVC has to align across

grade levels and across subject areasin order to oer students a coherentlearning experience.

Following legislative changes, theState Board of Education in December2009 adopted new Colorado AcademicStandards (CAS) that now cover 10subject areas. The CAS representformal expectations of what studentsought to know and be able to do inorder to advance to the next step oftheir academic career, and ultimatelyto become responsible and productivecitizens. In 2010 the State Board signedon to the Common Core standards,making changes to the CAS in mathand language arts, as a conditionto apply for federal Race to the Topfunds.27

Under state law, Colorado schoolsmust implement fully the new

standards by the 2013-14 school year.DCSD leaders reviewed the CASand Common Core and determinedthey did not focus suciently on thehigher-order thinking studentswill need to succeed and even lead globally. GVCs design embracesthe idea of teachers as facilitators, ofstudents taking greater ownershipof their learning. Focusing on thefour Cs, the set of 21st century skills,

the curriculum infuses greater useof technology into helping studentsmaster content more deeply throughprojects both inside and outside theclassroom.28

In the summer of 2012 about 300teachers participated in a three-

In math, DCSD

outperforms

Canada and

Switzerland,

rates about

even with

Finland, and

lags behind

top-performing

Singapore.


9/32



day lesson writing academy, thenimplemented the lessons in classroomsduring the subsequent school year. Alltold, more than 500 district teachersfrom across subject disciplines helped

to craft the latest iteration of GVC.DCSD reached out to local rms andFortune 500 companies to make surethe knowledge and skills promoted inthe new curriculum aligned to private-sector workforce needs. The responsewas overwhelmingly positive.

DCSD leaders continue the workof collecting model lessons that canbe shared through a district-widedatabase. Though small adjustmentsmay continue to be made, the GVCcommenced full-scale implementationin the fall of 2013.29

In July 2013 the DCSD Board ofEducation asserted its constitutionalprerogative to direct local instructionand adopted a resolution opposingthe Common Core as inadequate forthe districts goals and expectations.The justication rests in a condence

that the GVC will work eectively asit unfolds:

[T]he Douglas CountySchool Districts standardsare more rigorous, moredemanding, more thorough,and reect higher expectationsand aspirations for ourstudents than any nationalstandard now in existence,

including the Common CoreStandards. In Douglas County,our taxpayers, parents,teachers and students expectthe very highest and rigorousstandards as embodied inour Guaranteed and ViableCurriculum that will allow

our students to learn todayand lead tomorrow.30

Balanced Assessment System

The current standardized testing

regime only roughly capturesstudents overall learning, not tomention 21st century skills likecreativity and collaboration. Statetests provide a helpful but limitedpicture of the knowledge and skillsstudents acquire that will serve themin their future lives and careers.Coming up with a system to measuremore eectively the depth anddiversity of student learning poses

a real challenge. Without the criticalcomponent of a Balanced AssessmentSystem (BAS), it would be extremelydicult for DCSD educators to show,and for others to see, that students aremastering the new curriculum.

The systems purpose is to provideteachers, parents, and students the fullspectrum of student performance.31

While achieving a perfect picture is

impossible, room to improve the oldmodel remains. The end goal is todemonstrate learning on a higherlevel, says DCSD chief systemperformance ocer Syna Morgan.Her oce regularly refers to theimportance of measuring transferskills, knowledge that students willbe able to use in dierent situations,especially in a college or careerenvironment.32

The process of creating the BASincludes the development andcoherent alignment of new assessmenttools. The objective is to present theresults in a clear and timely mannerto teachers and parents in order tohelp students close learning gaps

DCSD lead-

ers reviewed

the [Colora-

do Academic

Standards]and Common

Core and de-

termined they

did not focus

sufciently on

the higher-or-

der thinking

students willneed...


10/32



and maximize their potential. Duringthe 2012-13 school year, the districtimplemented new valid interimassessments for math and reading.Tests for science and social studies

are being released for 2013-14.33

Theseinstruments are capable of providingschool-level comparisons showingachievement and growth. Puttingtogether the various assessmentpieces, DCSD is making progresstoward a system that ultimately maylead to the use of video games andvirtual learning to measure studentlearning (see Appendix A).34

As part of the districts uniquenew InspirED Innovation softwareplatform (see page 10), all schoolsthis year can access a common bankof performance-based assessments.In addition to state and district-widetest data, teachers and leaders alsowill be able to draw from multiplewriting assessment systems, district-purchased components of the PARCC35

and Smarter Balance interstate testingconsortia, and the products of a largercooperative venture. DCSD belongs toEd Leader 21, a network of 120 schooldistricts in 32 states teaming togetherto create and share performance-basedassessments that measure 21st centuryskills, or the 4 Cs.36 All these tests areavailable for formative purposesto diagnose student strengths andweaknesses so teachers can prescribeinstruction in a more timely and

eective manner.A System Rebuilt to Perform

Before and Beyond SB 191: CITE 1.0

Successfully raising the academic barwithout bankrupting the treasuryrequires signicant adjustments to alarge-scale K-12 education system. At

the core of Douglas Countys high-prole, performance-based changesis the CITE evaluation tool, shortfor Continuous Improvement ofTeacher Eectiveness. The district,

in conjunction with the DouglasCounty Federation of Teachers, beganto develop a new evaluation systemin 2009. As employees wrappedup months of work crafting a pilotsystem for the 2010-11 school year,the General Assembly adopted SenateBill 191. The bipartisan legislation setnew requirements for the LicensedPersonnel Performance EvaluationAct. Among the changes, at least 50

percent of evaluations must be linkedto measures of student growth.37

The states Council on EducatorEectiveness began to implement thelarge-scale changes required in thelegislation. The prescriptive reformspresented DCSD leaders with adecision. They rejected the option ofusing the model evaluation instrumentcrafted by the Colorado Departmentof Education (CDE).38 Seeing thestates 30-page evaluation tool astoo redundant, and too ambiguous,the district instead opted to revampthe original CITE plan, aligning it tostate guidelines and making furtherrenements.39 DCSD is one of onlyseven districts statewide to craftits own evaluation system both forteachers and principals, as allowedunder the 2010 law.40

Evaluating Teachers with CITE 2.0

Mirroring the requirements ofthe updated Licensed PersonnelPerformance Evaluation Act, DCSDstemplate for evaluating teachersfeatures six instructional qualitystandards. CITE 2.0s rst ve

DCSD is

making prog-

ress toward

a system that

ultimately may

lead to the use

of video games

and virtual

learning to

measure stu-

dent learning.


11/32



standards were used in classroomsduring 2012-13 to rate teachereectiveness across the district.In coming years these standards,summarized in Appendix B, together

will comprise 50 percent of a teachersevaluation.41

The rst ve standards are brokendown into 29 elements. On 28 of the 29elements teachers can earn one of fourratings.42 From highest to lowest, theratings are Highly Eective, Eective,Partially Eective, and Ineective.Teachers also accumulate an overallevaluation rating on the same four-tiered scale.

The CITE evaluation tool was built toalign with the important developingpieces of the Balanced AssessmentSystem. Formal input from teacherswas crucial to the development of thetool, and of various rened rubrics forspecialized licensed positions. Manylicensed educators from art and musicteachers to counselors, librarians,and literacy specialists have pitched

in to dene relevant rubrics thatcorrespond directly with their job-specic duties.43

Hundreds of hours of collaborativework have resulted in a clearer setof professional targets for teachers tomeet. We are measuring the mostimportant things teachers teach,wrote DCSD board president JohnCarson.44

The sixth and nal standard willmeasure student academic growth.TCAP tests are just one of a host ofreliable assessments used to helpdetermine a teachers evaluationrating. Also included in Standard6 are basic literacy testing tools,

Advanced Placement exams,specialized instruments for special-needs and English language learners,and various internally developedassessments.

To comply with the statewideimplementation of SB 191s signicantchanges, DCSD will make use of theStandard 6 assessments to determinethe other 50 percent of a teachersevaluation rating in 2013-14. Districtleaders believe the large-scale pilotprogram in the prior school year hasgiven them an edge. We think werea year ahead of other school districtsbecause weve used [the CITE 2.0]tool, said assistant superintendentDan McMinimee.45

InspirED Innovation

In July 2013 the district unveiled thenew InspirED Innovation softwaretool, designed to help enable DCSDteachers enhance their professionalperformance. The unique creation wasdeveloped internally through hours of

extra work by DCSD technology sta.In its rst phase, the tool streamlinesthe process of creating lessons withrelevant student learning activitiesthrough Backward Planning. A drag-and-drop computer interface givesteachers easy access to standards andassessments that measure studentprogress. The tool streamlinesplanning time so teachers can focus ondeveloping high-quality instruction

focused on students needs.

The software also allows teachers toreceive real-time feedback from theirschool leadership on student growthresults and other classroom data.This feature will help teachers tomeasure their own progress toward

We think were

a year ahead

of other school

districts be-

cause weve

used [the CITE

2.0] tool.

-DCSD

Assistant

Superintendent

Dan McMinimee


12/32



professional evaluation milestonesand increased compensation, as theacademic year proceeds.

After a preview of the nal product,one DCSD elementary teacher ratedthe system an A-plus. I did notbecome a teacher to do paperworkor to sit at a desk and cipher throughthings. I want to be in the classroomwith my kids, another teacher said.Whether we knew we wanted it ornot, this is the tool that teachers havebeen waiting for, because it compileseverything.46

Principals LEAD

Corresponding with the CITEevaluation upgrade for teachers andother licensed specialists, DCSD alsohas focused on dening and measuringschool principal performance. A largegroup of principals met during the2012-13 school year to adapt the statesmodel standards for school leadersand to align them closely (though notexactly) with CITE.47 In addition to

the Standard 6 assessment piece, theLeadership through Eective Analysisand Data (LEAD) system ratesschool-level administrators on veperformance standards, summarizedin Appendix B.48

The LEAD framework captures thebreadth of important responsibilitiesin a principals job description.A meaningful application of the

Instructional Leadership andEvaluation standards particularlycould yield powerful eects onclassroom outcomes. In mosttraditional K-12 systems, evaluatorsface far greater costs than benetsfor identifying poor classroomperformers. Attaching accountability

to the challenging role of instructionalleadership and evaluation shifts thebalance of incentives. A performance-based system broadly aligns theinterests of teachers and principals

so that ineective instruction isimproved, or ultimately removed andreplaced.49

LEAD was used to benchmarkprincipal performance on thestandards in the 2012-13 school year,and to set goals for professionalimprovement during 2013-14.

Rethinking ProfessionalDevelopment

To meet the changing needs of adistrict dedicated to achieving world-class academic standards, DouglasCounty has redened professionaldevelopment to align with educatorevaluations. As the process continuesto unfold, the number of availablecourses continues to grow. ManyDCSD teachers need enhancedunderstanding of goal-setting and

Backward Planning, of successfulprofessional habits, of fostering 21stcentury learning, or of restorativeclassroom practices. DCSD hasdiscarded the sit-and-get methodof professional development in favorof product-based learning thatis expected to manifest itself in theclassroom setting. All courses requireteachers to complete a project in orderto earn credit.50

In keeping with the districts emphasison choice in its strategic plan,professional courses look dierentfrom place to place. The needs ofindividual school programs andphilosophies largely drive contentand delivery. Many courses are

The needs of in-

dividual school

programs and

philosophies

largely drive[professional

development]

content and

delivery.


13/32


14/32



The original version of the CITEevaluation system was designedto underlie a series of individual,group, and school-wide payincentives for teachers. Seen as a tool

to promote harder work and betterclassroom results, the track recordof incentive pay has been mixed atbest. Prominent studies in Nashvilleand New York City have shown verylittle or no benet for students fromeither blindly distributed individualincentives or school-wide bonuses.58

By contrast, a true performance-basedpay system, like the one DCSD hasadopted, completely disconnects from

the single-salary schedules automaticincreases for seniority and credentials.

The process of moving to aperformance-based and market-basedfooting was accelerated by a dramaticchange in labor relations. While somegroundwork was laid in previousyears, district leaders, teachers, andprincipals forged the bulk of thetransformation during the 2012-13term.

Opening Negotiations

A 2010 Independence Instituteanalysis found only one of Colorados42 bargaining school districts had anestablished policy that thoroughlyensures the publics right to observebargaining negotiations.59 Sincethat time, an increased interest intransparency has led three districts

to open at least some of theirbargaining sessions, with morecitizens demanding and boardleaders considering the approach.Among them, Douglas Countyclearly has provided the greatesttransparency and public access tounion negotiations.

The districts master contract withthe Douglas County Federation ofTeachers (DCFT), an aliate of theAmerican Federation of Teachers, wasscheduled to expire or be renewed on

June 30, 2012. The contract had giventhe DCFT exclusive representativestatus over negotiated teacher issuessince 1972.60 Most prominent amongthe negotiated issues was whether tocontinue or discard DCSDs modiedsingle-salary schedule. A fundamentalredesign of teacher compensation rstwould have to proceed through thebargaining table.

Douglas County voters in theNovember 2011 election solidiedthe unanimous pro-reform schoolboard majority. They also rejected acontroversial request to raise localproperty taxes that would have fundedthe infrastructure of a new evaluationand performance system. Shortlythereafter, tensions between the Boardof Education and the teachers unionbegan to boil over.

In February 2012 a locally-createdcitizens group known as Parent LedReform circulated a petition callingfor the next round of negotiationsto be held in public session sodierences could be aired andresolved openly. The groups leader,Karin Piper, delivered the requestduring public testimony at a schoolboard meeting. By the next meeting inearly March, DCFT president Brenda

Smith formally oered to hold opennegotiations for the rst time in theschool districts history.61 The Boardvoted to accept the request on March20, and open sessions commenced onApril 11. A total of 10 sessions wereheld between April and June.62

DCFT president

Brenda Smith

formally offered

to hold open

negotiations for

the rst time in

the school dis-

tricts history.


15/32


16/32



thus simply lapsed. Colorado schoolboards have great latitude in decidingwhether and how to negotiate withemployee representatives. DCFTspleas to the state labor department

director for intervention wentunheeded. Lt. Gov. Joe Garcia and Gov.John Hickenlooper went no furtherthan to urge publicly that a spiritof collaboration and cooperation bemaintained in Douglas County.65

The district is now free to negotiatedirectly with its licensed teachers.

On September 5, 2012, the Board ofEducation ratied a policy stating thatDCSD no longer would collect, orparticipate in the collection of, duesor fees of any kind from its employeesfor, or on behalf of, any labor union orlabor-union aliated organization(see Appendix C for full policy).66Board leaders made the prohibitionenforceable by explicitly granting theright of Douglas County residentsto sue the district for breaching theclear language. The policy furtherended the practice of compensatingunaccountable union ocers.

Most Colorado school districtscollect and bundle dues payments tolabor organizations through publicpayroll systems. The 40 districtswith recognized unions all havethe practice protected in bargaininglanguage to ensure funds are gatheredat the local level and then funneled tothe state and national organizations.

Yet even most of the states non-uniondistricts send money to the ColoradoEducation Association or other labororganizations on behalf of individualemployees who have opted to join.A survey of 95 of the states 138 non-union districts found 74, or nearly 80percent, collect union dues on this

basis.67 Though it is the largest non-union district and only recently endedits contractual relationship with thelocal union, DCSD stands in theminority and may be the only district

to have a formal prohibition in eect.DCSD board leaders recognizedthat less than 1 percent of collectedunion funds served the purpose ofproviding professional developmentto instructors, and that more than 60percent of funds supported the stateand national AFT organizations,particularly in their eorts toinuence political campaigns andelections. During negotiations, unionrepresentatives resisted the demandto stop payroll dues collections, evenclaiming that such a change wouldviolate the First Amendment of theU.S. Constitution. They threatened alawsuit.68 No such legal complaint hasever been led.

When the District collected dues onthe unions behalf, about 70 percent ofDCSD teachers participated in payroll

withholding. Since its monopolybargaining status and its access todistrict resources have ended, thenumber certainly has decreased,though DCFT closely guards itscurrent membership gures. Theunion now oers on its website adirect deposit option from a bank orcredit card account, including separatesignups for general dues paymentsand a political campaign fund.69

A New Compensation System

Pay for Performance Now aReality

Two decades ago Douglas Countyestablished itself as a pioneer inteacher compensation reform. The

Yet even most

of the states

non-union

districts send

money to the

Colorado Edu-

cation Associ-

ation or other

labor organiza-

tions...


17/32



system in operation from 1994 to2008 frequently was classied aspay for performance, though itqualied in only a rudimentary sense.The plan essentially represented

modest additions to the single-salaryschedule. Knowledge-based inputsand years of experience were still theprimary driving factors. To receivecredit for seniority, instructors hadto cross the relatively low bar ofreceiving a procient evaluation in abinary (two-tier) rating system. In the1999-2000 school year, 98 percent ofteachers were rated procient.70

The system added a series of bonusesatop the traditional salary scale.To receive an Outstanding Teacheraward, educators had to submitclassroom portfolios. Many of the bestcandidates lacked time to completethe project. Skills-Based Pay wassupposed to be given in supportof school district goals, but oftenrewarded skills blocks that didnot develop better employees. Siteleaders were given very small pots ofmoney in the form of ResponsibilityPay to distribute at their discretionto teachers who worked on acommittee or with an extra-curricularactivity. Small stipends also wereavailable to compensate teachers forworking on district-level projects,such as implementing the payfor performance plan. Finally, therecord of Group Incentives to reward

collaborative eorts was uneven,sometimes going to excellent eortsand sometimes funding gloried bookclubs.71

In the programs rst 10 years,DCSD employees took in a totalof $12.5 million in bonuses. Morethan 40 percent funded 12,207

Group Incentive payouts, whileabout 3,000 Outstanding Teacherbonuses went out in the amount ofnearly $3.3 million. The rest coveredResponsibility Pay and Skills-Based

Pay. In 2008, then-DCFT presidentBrenda Smith touted three localproperty tax measures passed since1994 as successes of the performancepay plan.72 Shortly thereafter cameDouglas Countys failed mill levy andbond elections that helped to launchthe shift in school board power andthe truly groundbreaking changes tothe local education system.

By 2013, with the CITE evaluationsystem in place, DCSD was fullyprepared to embrace performance-based compensation that represents atrue departure from the single-salaryschedule. The rst ve standards ofCITE all were used to assign roughly3,000 teachers one of the four ratings,from Highly Eective to Ineective.The rating not only represents theprimary factor in determining changesto a teachers compensation, but alsomakes a teacher eligible for additionalcareer and pay opportunities at theEective level or higher (see gure2).73

Adhering to the guidelines of SB 191,pay for performance in the 2013-14school year and beyond also willincorporate measures of studentacademic growth. Results from theTCAP state assessment and from

district internal assessments in mathand reading will comprise 50 percentof educator evaluations, and thus playa more signicant role in determininglevels of teacher pay. Eectivenessnow has become the primary factor indierentiating educator salaries. The

The union now

offers on its

website a direct

deposit option

from a bank orcredit card ac-

count...


18/32



new program therefore truly deservesthe title of Pay for Performance.

Market-Based Pay

Nearly all American K-12 pay systemsnot only fail to distinguish teachersby eectiveness but also by jobdescription. First-year teachers inelementary classrooms are paid thesame as rst-year physical education,foreign language, math, and special

education instructors. A few exceptionsexist. The Classical Academy, a largeColorado Springs charter school, has

pioneered dierential pay to suit theneeds of its instructional program.Salary premiums have been usedas high as 20 percent (for qualiedLatin teachers).74 But no large-scaleprecedent of market-based pay inK-12 education is known to exist.

Nearly allAmerican K-12

pay systems

not only fail

to distinguish

teachers by

effectiveness

but also by job

description.

Figure 2.Source: Douglas County School District, http://www.dcsdk12.org


19/32



Several states have consideredinitiatives to pay math and scienceteachers more. Union resistanceoften derails such policy changeswith arguments that dierentiated

pay undervalues certain kinds ofinstructors, or even discriminatesagainst women (who are less likelyto teach math and science). Someinitiatives have overcome resistancebut either never get o the ground or, ifthey do, fail to eect signicant change.A dierential pay plan in Californiahas borne no fruit because changesare made subject to local collectivebargaining processes. A Georgia state

law and Denvers own ProComp planoer bonuses for limited numbersof hard-to-ll positions, but fail toprovide sustainable pay systems thatrecognize scarcity in certain teachingspecialties.75

When Brian Cesare joined DCSD aschief human resources ocer aftermore than 20 years in comparableprivate-sector positions, he could notbelieve that licensed educators inso many dierent positions all werepaid the same based on two factors:seniority and degree credentials. Iwas baed we were looking at onlytwo positions for setting pay, hesaid. A teacher is a teacher, eventhough there are 70 dierent types ofteachers?76

DCSD at rst has used market demandfactors to dierentiate base pay only

for new hires. Existing teachers couldnot earn less under the new system.However, the rate of 2013 salaryincreases partly was determined bythe market demand for a teachersjob position. Pay changes were setaccording to the reported input ofnew state funding, with the Eective

teacher who is at market used as thenorm.77

In May, the district issued all Eectiveteachers a 2 percent bonus plusa permanent salary increase. Theincrease for those in harder-to-llspecialties was 3 percent, comparedto only a 1.5 percent increase for theirpeers in above market positions.Likewise, all Highly Eective teachersearned a 1 percent bonus. But based onsupply and demand, they also couldcollect anywhere from a 4.5 percent toa 7 percent permanent raise.78 DCSDsboard followed a conservativebudgeting approach. When extraproperty tax revenues later arrived,DCSD further increased teachersalaries on average by an additional1 percent. More eective instructorsin higher-demand positions receivedlarger increases.79

Developing an equitable and coherentsystem presented DCSD ocials witha challenge. In the private sector,a human resources ocer can call

various industries to gather a usefulpicture of the job market in settingcompensation. National data on theeducation sector gave Cesare verylimited help, however. Further, the fewmodels within the world of educationuse only bonuses for certain positionsinstead of a truly comprehensivemarket-based pay system. DCSDbegan to build a market-based paymodel that stands as the rst of its

kind in K-12 education. Essentiallystarting from scratch, district leadersasked all principals to rank the 70-plus positions based on their scarcity.DCSD began to test the model in thespring 2012 hiring process. Dailyfeedback from school leaders resultedin continual adjustments. By 2013, the

[DCSDs human

resources of-

cer] could not

believe that

licensed educa-

tors in so many

different posi-

tions all werepaid the same

based on two

factors: senior-

ity and degree

credentials.


20/32



market-based pay model had beensuciently stabilized. Nearly all of thepositions remained in the same band,with a few more specialized positionsadded.80

As shown in gure 3, DCSD hasplaced all teaching positions in oneof ve dierent salary bands, basedon the supply of qualied applicants.Average entry-level pay in the highestband for occupational therapistsand teachers who work with severespecial needs students exceedsthat for physical education, middleschool drama, and upper elementaryclassroom teachers by roughly 40percent. Still, the bands are exible intwo ways. First, as job market trendschange, positions may move into

dierent bands. Second, signicantroom exists within each band todistinguish educator pay based onprior experience, special skills, andjob performance. In fact, unlike nearly

all K-12 systems, the characteristicof performance is the true primarydriver of Douglas County teachercompensation.

Dierentiating pay by job descriptionlikely will lead to the attractionand retention of more high-qualityprofessionals in harder-to-llspecialties. The eects of competitionover time could lead surroundingdistricts to adjust their own paymodels accordingly. In turn, collegesof education would receive stronger,clearer signals concerning how much

DCSD began

to build a mar-

ket-based pay

model that

stands as the

rst of its kind

in K-12 educa-

tion.

Figure 3.Source: Douglas County School District


21/32



teaching talent in dierent specialtiesthey ought to prepare.

The Denver Posts editors describedas innovative DCSDs bold shift tomarket-based and performance-basedpay: If it worksand its importantto note that no one is being asked totake a pay cutit could set an examplefor how to attract good teachers in allsubjects while oering incentives forthem to go the extra mile.81

More than a Ladder: ProfessionalPathways

Douglas County teachers who earn

an Eective or Highly Eectiverating are eligible to participate inthe Professional Pathways program.Through demonstration of increasingskills, classroom instructors canaccess a variety of other professionalopportunities to contribute to thedistricts educational mission.Professional educators who wishto devote themselves to classroomduties are free to pursue that path.

The district also has worked toincrease the number of avenuesavailable for employees to ply theirtalents and their passions. Then-DCSD administrator Marie Ungersummed up the vision behind thisfocused eort. When skills increase,so should opportunities, she said.82

In their initial 2012 negotiationsproposal, DCFT leaders called for

the creation of a joint committeewith the districtsix representativesfrom eachto create a newcareer ladder-based compensationsystem.83 Both sides initially agreed.In three meetings, a team of teachers,principals, and central administratorsbroadened the focus from a vertical

career ladder and decided to renamethe system Professional Pathways.The group then was reformulated.The district insisted on broaderteacher representation than a group

handpicked by DCFT, no longer amonopoly bargaining agent. A smallcross-section of teachers based onexperience, geography, and gradelevel provided input into the nalplan adopted by district leadership.Feedback was solicited from teachersand leaders at dierent DCSD schoolsites.84

The biggest inspiration for DCSDsProfessional Pathways concept camefrom ACTs World of Work Map,a visualization designed to helpaspiring college students see therelationships between dierent typesof careers.85 Into this design the groupt 42 dierent pathway options, somefor dierent job classications, underfour major headings (see also gure4):86

Development (mentoring,

training): 20

Innovation (includingorganizational design): 10

Leadership (organizationaland employee leadership): 8

Systems Performance(assessment development, dataanalysis): 8

About half of the dierent pathwaysformalized practices alreadytaking place in DCSD, while theremainder represent newly denedopportunities. Each of the pathwaysincludes a formal description,corresponding quality measures, anda link to recommended professional

Through

demonstration

of increasing

skills, class-

room instruc-tors can access

a variety of

other profes-

sional opportu-

nities...


22/32



development opportunitiesto guide a teacher down herchosen path.87

World Class EducationTargets

DCSD teachers who earn aHighly Eective rating areeligible for an additional bonusthrough the achievementof World Class EducationTargets (WCET). Based on2012-13 evaluation results,about one in seven teacherswere eligible to be rewardedfor going above and beyond

the standard expectationsin 12 dened areas. Besidesexhibiting exceptionalperformance in prominentaspects of the districts largerthemes (e.g., imparting 21stcentury skills, performing BackwardPlanning, and practicing restorativejustice) WCET also incentivizesteachers to respond to the results ofteacher and student surveys.88

In all, more than 160 teachers dedicatedfour long Saturdays during the schoolyear to do the challenging work ofdening WCET. 89 Displaced unionleaders have attacked the project forlack of specicity. However, teacherswho participated in the design processhave expressed condence that theWCET aligns well with the larger pay-for-performance program and should

motivate excellence. If Im workingas a teacher to be Highly Eective, ifthats my goal, the Targets are going tofall right into line, one middle schoolinstructor observed.90 The rst roundof bonuses was issued in September2013. Eleven dierent Highly Eectiveteachers achieved a total of 22 World

Class Education Targets. Peer reviewdetermined which of the 15 eligibleapplicants qualied for rewards underthe program. DCSD gave teachersstipends worth $500 for each Target

achieved.91

Signs of Progress

The First Round

During February and March 2013,teachers across the state of Coloradoparticipated in the states thirdbiennial TELL survey. The inquiryinto classroom educators opinions ofprofessional learning environments

and working conditions not onlyyielded a signicant increase inDCSD teacher participation butalso substantially higher marksof satisfaction. Out of nearly 100questions, two-thirds showed morefavorability than 2011, and three-fourths were signicantly higher

...more than

160 teachers

dedicated four

long Satur-

days during

the school year

to do the chal-

lenging work of

dening [World

Class Educa-

tion Targets].

Figure 4.Source: Douglas County School District


23/32



than the state average. For example,95 percent of DCSD teachers saidthey are held to high professionalstandards for delivering instruction,and 88 percent agreed with the

statement, Teachers are eectiveleaders in this school.92

One area of notable weakness,however, was the response frominstructors to the new, less-than-fully-known CITE evaluation system.About 35 percent of DCSD teachersfelt that evaluations were unfair, whileonly 37 percent expressed a belief thatthe components of the evaluationaccurately identify eectiveness.93Assistant superintendent DanMcMinimee compared the responsesto the state of Denver Broncos fansearly in the 2012 season. QuarterbackPeyton Manning then engineered ahistoric second-half comeback againstthe San Diego Chargers that resurrectedhopes and began an unbroken stringof regular season wins. McMinimeebelieves considerably better resultswould be seen after the rst round ofnew evaluations was completed.94 Afuture gauge of teacher satisfactionwith the CITE system could providevaluable insights, as well.

Major district evaluation systemswith two dierent ratings typicallynd 99 percent or more of teachers toproduce satisfactory performance.

Districts with more rating optionsstill nd upwards of 94 percent landin one of the top two categories.95 Forits rst full run, CITE 2.0 issued theHighly Eective designation to 14.7

percent of instructors and the Eectivedesignation to 71 percent (see table1). DCSDs outcomes demonstratesomewhat greater variation thanother district evaluation systems have

shown.96

Teacher evaluation systems intraditional K-12 settings often havebeen criticized for their subjectivity.Any system faces the challenge ofproducing reliable results amongdierent schools and evaluators.Despite publicized challenges at twoelementary schools, DCSD largelyfound reliable results among dierentschools on the more subjective half ofthe new evaluation model requiredby state law. Were closer to a levelof perfect consistency than everbefore, McMinimee said, expressingcondence that the district is ahead

of nearly all its peers beginning fullimplementation of state-requiredevaluation changes in 2013-14.97

New Professionals Flock In

Turnover of Douglas County licensedteachers increased from 2012 to 2013,but remained within range of pastperformance and of neighboring

Table 1. Douglas County Teachers by Evaluation Rating and Market Salary Band, 2013

DCSD TeachersHighlyEective Eective

PartiallyEective Ineective TOTAL

Above Market 216 780 113 2 1,111

At Market 142 650 111 1 904

Below Market 112 834 222 4 1,172

TOTAL 470 2,264 446 7 3,187

...95 percent of

DCSD teacherssaid they are

held to high

professional

standards for

delivering in-

struction...


24/32



districts. The number of DCSDteacher retirements nearly doubledfrom 53 to 101. The increase partiallywas due to some veteran teacherstaking their last chance at claiming the

Extended Service Severance Benetsbeing phased out. More teachers alsosubmitted their resignations (302, ascompared to 219), a result that canbe explained by a district in a majortransition from a compensationsystem based on entitlements to aperformance-based system.98 Evenso, as of the end of June, ve DCSDschool sites reported 100 percentteacher retention for 2013-14.99

Pay-for-performance programs,though typically less dramatic thanwhat Douglas County has developed,can be used as a tool to motivateunderperforming instructors, retainhigh-quality instructors, and to attractinstructors with new characteristics.A strong case can be made that DCSDis succeeding at the third strategy. Atotal of 6,389 applicants vied for 481teaching positions in 2013. Amongthe pool of new teachers, most enterthe workforce earning more than theywould have under the old single-salary schedule.100

An Island or a Bridge?

In 2010 Douglas County embarked on abold plan to craft a new model of publiceducation. Leaders acknowledge thatthe district beneted from a favorable

starting point. The traditional modeof running a large-scale public K-12enterprise limited their predecessorsability to cope with revenue cutbacksand left scal challenges to inherit.Overall, though, DCSD undeniablyis blessed with some key advantages.Student population growth in the

relatively high-performing districthas eased the acceptance of publiccharter schools as alternative programoptions. Charter schools also nowshare as equal partners in DCSD mill

levy dollars, virtually unmatchedamong Colorado districts. Auenceand comparatively strong academicachievement may mean a shorter pathto excellence. These advantages alsomay make it harder for parents andcommunity members to see the needto push higher.

Nonetheless, DCSD has more thanits share of engaged parents whoreadily have taken on leadershipand advocacy roles at the schooland district level. Board leadershave come from the professionalranks, including respected attorneys,business executives, a former stategovernment ocial, an engineer, and aphysician. The board crucially hired asuperintendent who shared the visionand surrounded herself with otherleaders who have played instrumentalroles in guiding the large pioneeringproject.

The program of decentralized decision-making, parental empowerment,performance-based management,high standards, 21st century learning,and ongoing innovation continues.Whether breaking down theboundaries of choice, raising the bar oneducational standards, implementingmarket-based pay, or reining in union

power, the facets of Douglas Countystransformative agenda have gatheredboth critics and admirers from nearand far. For now, DCSD stands largelyunique and unmatched.

However, a very real question emergeswith which other reform-minded

A total of 6,389

applicants vied

for 481 [DCSD]

teaching posi-

tions in 2013.


25/32



education leaders in Colorado andbeyond will have to wrestle. Otherdistricts will nd certain ingredientsof DCSDs formula cannot be easilytransplanted into their particular

environments. Reformers in otherplaces will encounter their ownchallenges of inertia and politicalwill, and may wonder if DCSD isdestined to be an island of innovationthat thrives for a time on its own.At the same time, many aspectsof the growing suburban districtseducational reinvention (e.g., market-based pay) could create a formidablecompetitive pressure that builds a

sturdy bridge to other communitiesthat seek to follow, or even surpass,their achievements.

Should its program grow and thriveinto 2014, DCSD still faces realchallenges to overcome throughpersistence and innovation. Observersthen will note how signicantlyand how quickly the decentralized,performance-based model buildsbridges within and beyond Colorado.The model someday may grow to bea formidable force within AmericanK-12 education. And if it does, manyof its roots will be traced to the largeand growing school district south ofDenver.

Conclusion:K-12 Re-imagined

The combined result of Douglas

Countys broad and fast-pacedchanges represents in many respectsa fundamental break from systemsand practices long embedded inAmerican K-12 education. Thefearless commitment to a broaddenition of parental choice iswithout parallel at the local level.

Deeper classroom content, measuredby a new battery of tests, evidences adelity to higher learning standardsthat clearly sets DCSD apart frommost of its school district peers. And

the holistic upgrade of performance-based systems to develop and rewardeective professional instruction hasvery few, if any, rivals. The district hasbegun to re-imagine what elementaryand secondary education can be withlofty aspirations focused on preparingthe youth it serves for a dynamicfuture.

The verdict on the bold reform planultimately rests on the outcomesachieved for students. DCSDmaintained its relatively highprociency numbers on 2013 statetests, though no signs of newly chartedprogress are yet evident. The extensivefocus on deeper learning and higherstandards means TCAP or other statetests alone cannot adequately capturethe results, and that the broaderpicture of other assessments andrigorous metrics will have to be used.

It certainly is too soon to issue thenal verdict. Nearly every availableindicator, though, signals that thetransformation ought to continue.The promise of a new and greaterpublic education systemrooted inprofessionalism and the pursuit ofexcellence, with tax dollars soundlyused and focused on empoweringdecisions at the most local level

possibledemands it. DouglasCounty leaders have forged a pathtoward success for generations topursue. It will take the continuingwork of many parents, teachers, andother leaders to see it through.

The model

someday may

grow to be a

formidable

force within

American K-12

education.


26/32



Appendix A: Three States of DCSDsBalanced Assessment System

Douglas County School Districts BalancedAssessment System is conceived to unfoldthrough the following series of three well-dened

states:

1. Critical State: Aligning the state andcommon district assessments onto an electronicplatform to review and share data has alreadybeen achieved. The critical state also includesthe development of a Parent Dashboard to viewtheir students attendance and test results, aswell as a public platform on the DCSD websitethat provides more performance content than isavailable on the states SchoolView site. These are

set to be rolled out in a future phase of InspirEDInnovation.

2. Desired State: In two years, DCSD leadersare aiming to move beyond the Critical State tothe point where student performance connectsseamlessly to educator performance. A full arrayof appropriate assessment tools would enableall district teachers to collect, analyze and sharemeasurements of higher-level student thinking.

3. Ideal State: Chief system performanceocer Syna Morgan envisions a somewhatfuturistic science ction scenario inwhich students inhabit a virtual learningenvironment.For all students formal learning nolonger would be bound to a physical school siteduring a prescribed set of hours. Young learnersinstead could be at a library interacting withinternational experts in a specic eld as part of adeeper educational experience. Rather than beingdisruptive, assessments would be a seamless

part of learning that could be captured bydecisions made or prociencies demonstrated ina video game or other virtual environment.

Appendix B: Summary of CITE andLEAD Evaluation Standards

DCSDs Continuous Improvement of TeacherEectiveness (CITE) system measuresperformance based on ve standards, summarized

as follows:

1. Outcomes: Eectiveness is demonstratedthrough the focused and constructive useof Backward Planning, the formulation ofchallenging learning objectives rst as aguide to planning lessons and other studentlearning activities.

2. Performance Assessments: Eectiveness isdemonstrated through careful analysis of

testing data, sharing timely feedback withstudents, and using assessments that fosterthe 4 Cs and various 21st century skills.

3. Instruction: Eectiveness is demonstratedthrough content expertise and facilitatinglearning opportunities that use the bestavailable technology to engage all studentsand to develop higher order thinking and21st century skills.

4. Culture and Climate: Eectiveness is

demonstrated through promoting safetyand positive relationships, respectingdierences, and fostering a restorativeclassroom community to address andprevent wrongdoing.

5. Professionalism: Eectiveness isdemonstrated through practicing ethics,collaborating with colleagues, creatingand applying professional growth thataligns with school needs, and using various

methods to communicate with familiesabout classroom goals.

DCSDs Leadership Eectiveness throughAnalysis and Data (LEAD) measures theeectiveness of principals based on ve standards,summarized as follows:


27/32



1. Instructional Leadership: An eectiveprincipal inspires teachers to excel in therst three CITE standards (Outcomes,Assessments, and Instruction), as well asdevelops and implements innovative plans

for school-wide improvement.2. Evaluation: An eective principal conducts

thorough, consistent, and condentialevaluations, while coaching sta membersto improve and empowering them to lead.

3. Operational Leadership: An eectiveprincipal hires and retains qualityemployees; keeps the building safe;develops and manages a student-centered,site-based budget; and communicates

school values to the community and schoolprogress to the public.

4. Leading Continuous Improvement: Aneective principal carries forward the visionfor how to get the school to its desired state,inspiring teachers to deepen their level ofinstruction and to take learner-centeredrisks.

5. Professionalism: An eective principalstays updated on relevant research,models personal integrity and professionalrelationships with sta and stakeholders,and assumes responsibility for decisions

aecting the school.

Appendix C: Douglas County SchoolDistrict Board Policy HB

Policy Governing Relationships withLabor Unions or Labor Union-AfliatedOrganizations (Adopted September 5, 2012)100

The Douglas County School District shall notcollect, or participate in the collection of, duesor fees of any kind from its employees for, or onbehalf of, any labor union or labor-union aliatedorganization.

The Douglas County School District shall not useany taxpayer funds to pay, directly or indirectly,any salary, wage, fringe benets or other

compensation of any kind whatsoever (whetheror not such payments are reimbursed to theDistrict) to any person for the purpose of suchperson serving, on either a full or part-time basis,as an ocer, director, employee, representative,

or agent of a labor union or labor union-aliatedorganization.

It shall be considered an unlawful breach ofthe duciary duty of a Director or the Board ofDirectors to violate this policy.

The Board recognizes and supports the rightof any resident of the Douglas County SchoolDistrict to bring an action for injunctive relief onlyin a court of competent jurisdiction against theDouglas County School District, and if successful,

to recover from the District all reasonableattorneys fees and costs in pursuing claims forviolation(s) of this Policy HB. To the maximumextent permitted by law, and for purposes of thisPolicy HB only, the Board of Education herebywaives any and all legal and equitable defenses,including any defense of sovereign immunity, toan action brought by a resident under this PolicyHB.

Nothing in this Policy HB shall be construed

to, or is intended to prohibit or discourage anyemployee of the school district from membershipor aliation in or with a labor union or laborunion-aliated organization, or from serving asan ocer, director, employee, representative, oragent of such an organization on the employeesown time and at his or her sole expense.

Nothing in this Policy HB shall be construedto, or is intended to, prohibit or discourage anyemployee from voluntarily choosing, and making

independent nancial arrangements, to paydues or other fees to any private organizationas to which any employee desires to maintainmembership, including without limitation a laborunion or labor union-aliated organization....

This Policy HB shall not apply to, and shall besubject to, any contracts or agreements currently

in eect for the 2012-2013 school year.


28/32



Notes

1. The results are consistent across two recent nationalpolls. See Michael Henderson and Paul E. Peterson, The2013 Education Next Survey, http://educationnext.org/the-2013-education-next-survey/; William J.Bushaw and Shane J. Lopez, Which way do we go?,

PDK International / Gallup Poll of the Publics AttitudeToward Public Schools, p. 20, http://pdkintl.org/noindex/2013_PDKGallup.pdf.

2. Organisation for Economic Co-operation andDevelopment, PISA 2009 Results: Executive Summary,Figure I. Comparing Countries and EconomiesPerformance, p. 8, http://www.oecd.org/pisa/46643496.pdf.

3. America Achieves, Middle Class or Middle of thePack?, April 2013, p. 7, http://www.americaachieves.org/docs/OECD/Middle-Class-Or-Middle-Of-Pack.pdf.See also Paul E. Peterson, Middle Class Students TrailPeers Abroad, Education Next 13, no. 3 (Summer 2013),http://educationnext.org/middle-class-students-trail-peers-abroad/.

4. U.S. Census Bureau data, American Fact Finder, http://factnder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml.

5. Colorado Department of Education (CDE), Public SchoolFinance, http://www.cde.state.co.us/cde nance.

6. Ibid.; CDE, Colorado Education Statistics, http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdereval.

7. The 4 percent reserve translates to about $17 millionin scal year 2012. See Douglas County School DistrictComprehensive Annual Financial Report for the YearEnding June 30, 2012, https://www.dcsdk12.org/cs/groups/public/@webb$/documents/webcontent/dcs1158990.pdf. Any reserve below 1.92 percent isidentied as an indicator of potential nancial stress.See Colorado Oce of the State Auditor, Fiscal Health

Analysis of Colorado School Districts, July 2013, p.7, http://www.leg.state.co.us/OSA/coauditor1.nsf/All/1DA6099D5CFA418E87257BA5007CD72B/$FILE/2127%20Fiscal%20Health%20Sch%20Dist%20

June%202013%20REPORT.pdf.8. Yesenia Robles, Douglas County bond ratings still

high, Denver Post, February 10, 2012, http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_19938946 ; Business Wire,Fitch Rates Douglas Co. School District RE1, COs GOsAA+; Outlook Stable, January 28, 2013, http://www.

businesswire.com/news/home/20130128006044/en/Fitch-Rates-Douglas-School-District-RE1-COs.

9. Douglas County School District, Leadership Analysis(November 2012).

10. Both the author and the Education Policy Center directorPamela Benigno served on the School Choice Task Force.

11. For a full description and extensive listing of onlineresourcesincluding audio, video, news stories, andlegal documentsconcerning the Douglas CountyChoice Scholarship Program, see the web page created

by the Independence Institutes Education Policy Center,http://education.i2i.org/douglas-county-vouchers/.

12. Colorado League of Charter Schools, http://www.coloradoleague.org/colorado-charter-schools/school-nder.php.

13. Nelson Garcia, Douglas County signs unique charterschool deal, 9News Denver, March 6, 2013, http://www.9news.com/news/article/321642/222/Douglas-County-Schools-signs-unique-charter-school-deal.

14. https://www.dcsdk12.org/schools/index.htm .15. DCSD Board Policy JCA/JFB-R, Assignment of Studen

to Schools, School Choice, and Open Enrollment; CDE,

Pupil Membership for 2012 District Data, http://wwwcde.state.co.us/cdereval/pupilcurrentdistrict/.16. http://edcsd.org/.17. https://www.dcsdk12.org/HomeEducationPartnership

/HomeEdResources/index.htm.18. http://ColoradoSchoolGrades.com.19. CDE, Assessment Unit, http://www.cde.state.co.us/

assessment.20. College Board, AP Five-Year School Score Summary

data, provided by Douglas County School District. Of thdistricts nine comprehensive high schools, only Pomonregistered a decline in the number of AP students.

21. CDE, http://www.schoolview.org.22. Colorado Department of Higher Education, 2012

Remedial Education Report, http://highered.colorado.

gov/Academics/remedial/default.html; DCSD, Two-Year Update on the Strategic Plan, May 7, 2013, https:/eboardsecure.dcsdk12.org/attachments/80e7bbc0-b490411a-a82e-bc3f78b1e5ed.pdf.

23. CDE, http://www.schoolview.org. The term catchingup is a term used to identify students who started o

below prociency in a certain tested subject area but,with at least two years of testing history, either havereached prociency in the current year or are on track toreach prociency within the next three years or by 10thgrade, whichever comes rst.

24. http://globalreportcard.org. 2009 PISA results: Singapois 2nd, Finland 6th, USA 32nd.

25. For a brief overview, see Douglas County SchoolDistrict, 21st Century Skills, https://www.dcsdk12.org/

curriculum/21stcenturyskills/index.htm. To explorequestions and concerns surrounding the districtsconstructivist approach to curriculum, see William J.Bennett, A Model for the Nation? School Reform inDouglas County, Colorado, pp. 15-17, http://www.

billbennett.com/wp-content/uploads/Bennett_DCSD_WhitePaper2.pdf.

26. Carolyn Jeerson-Jenkins, Chief Academic Ocer,telephone conversation with the author, April 3, 2013.

27. Todd Engdahl, Colorado signs on to commonstandards, Ed News Colorado, August 2, 2010, http://www.ednewscolorado.org/news/capitol-news/colorado-signs-on-to-common-standards.

28. Dana Strothers, Chief Academic Ocer, telephoneconversation with the author, April 3, 2013.

29. Jeerson-Jenkins, April 3 telephone conversation;GVC 2.0, presentation to DCSD Board, August6, 2013, https://eboardsecure.dcsdk12.org/attachments/729a2102-28ba-4b1f-822a-2b3434e3798c.pdf

30. Douglas County Board of Education passes resolutionon Common Core, July 16, 2013, https://www.dcsdk12org/communityrelations/Newsroom/Article/index.htm?cID=DCS1242452.

31. Dr. Syna Morgan, meeting with the author, February 27,2013.
http://educationnext.org/the-2013-education-next-survey/http://educationnext.org/the-2013-education-next-survey/http://educationnext.org/the-2013-education-next-survey/http://educationnext.org/the-2013-education-next-survey/http://pdkintl.org/noindex/2013_PDKGallup.pdfhttp://pdkintl.org/noindex/2013_PDKGallup.pdfhttp://pdkintl.org/noindex/2013_PDKGallup.pdfhttp://pdkintl.org/noindex/2013_PDKGallup.pdfhttp://www.oecd.org/pisa/46643496.pdfhttp://www.oecd.org/pisa/46643496.pdfhttp://www.oecd.org/pisa/46643496.pdfhttp://www.oecd.org/pisa/46643496.pdfhttp://www.americaachieves.org/docs/OECD/Middle-Class-Or-Middle-Of-Pack.pdfhttp://www.americaachieves.org/docs/OECD/Middle-Class-Or-Middle-Of-Pack.pdfhttp://www.americaachieves.org/docs/OECD/Middle-Class-Or-Middle-Of-Pack.pdfhttp://www.americaachieves.org/docs/OECD/Middle-Class-Or-Middle-Of-Pack.pdfhttp://educationnext.org/middle-class-students-trail-peers-abroad/http://educationnext.org/middle-class-students-trail-peers-abroad/http://educationnext.org/middle-class-students-trail-peers-abroad/http://educationnext.org/middle-class-students-trail-peers-abroad/http://educationnext.org/middle-class-students-trail-peers-abroad/http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtmlhttp://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtmlhttp://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtmlhttp://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtmlhttp://www.cde.state.co.us/cdefinancehttp://www.cde.state.co.us/cdefinancehttp://www.cde.state.co.us/cderevalhttp://www.cde.state.co.us/cderevalhttp://www.cde.state.co.us/cderevalhttp://www.cde.state.co.us/cderevalhttp://www.cde.state.co.us/cderevalhttps://www.dcsdk12.org/cs/groups/public/@webb$/documents/webcontent/dcs1158990.pdfhttps://www.dcsdk12.org/cs/groups/public/@webb$/documents/webcontent/dcs1158990.pdfhttps://www.dcsdk12.org/cs/groups/public/@webb$/documents/webcontent/dcs1158990.pdfhttps://www.dcsdk12.org/cs/groups/public/@webb$/documents/webcontent/dcs1158990.pdfhttps://www.dcsdk12.org/cs/groups/public/@webb$/documents/webcontent/dcs1158990.pdfhttp://www.leg.state.co.us/OSA/coauditor1.nsf/All/1DA6099D5CFA418E87257BA5007CD72B/$FILE/2127%20Fiscal%20Health%20Sch%20Dist%20June%202013%20REPORT.pdfhttp://www.leg.state.co.us/OSA/coauditor1.nsf/All/1DA6099D5CFA418E87257BA5007CD72B/$FILE/2127%20Fiscal%20Health%20Sch%20Dist%20June%202013%20REPORT.pdfhttp://www.leg.state.co.us/OSA/coauditor1.nsf/All/1DA6099D5CFA418E87257BA5007CD72B/$FILE/2127%20Fiscal%20Health%20Sch%20Dist%20June%202013%20REPORT.pdfhttp://www.leg.state.co.us/OSA/coauditor1.nsf/All/1DA6099D5CFA418E87257BA5007CD72B/$FILE/2127%20Fiscal%20Health%20Sch%20Dist%20June%202013%20REPORT.pdfhttp://www.leg.state.co.us/OSA/coauditor1.nsf/All/1DA6099D5CFA418E87257BA5007CD72B/$FILE/2127%20Fiscal%20Health%20Sch%20Dist%20June%202013%20REPORT.pdfhttp://www.leg.state.co.us/OSA/coauditor1.nsf/All/1DA6099D5CFA418E87257BA5007CD72B/$FILE/2127%20Fiscal%20Health%20Sch%20Dist%20June%202013%20REPORT.pdfhttp://www.leg.state.co.us/OSA/coauditor1.nsf/All/1DA6099D5CFA418E87257BA5007CD72B/$FILE/2127%20Fiscal%20Health%20Sch%20Dist%20June%202013%20REPORT.pdfhttp://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_19938946http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_19938946http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_19938946http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_19938946http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_19938946http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_19938946http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20130128006044/en/Fitch-Rates-Douglas-School-District-RE1-COshttp://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20130128006044/en/Fitch-Rates-Douglas-School-District-RE1-COshttp://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20130128006044/en/Fitch-Rates-Douglas-School-District-RE1-COshttp://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20130128006044/en/Fitch-Rates-Douglas-School-District-RE1-COshttp://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20130128006044/en/Fitch-Rates-Douglas-School-District-RE1-COshttp://education.i2i.org/douglas-county-vouchers/http://education.i2i.org/douglas-county-vouchers/http://www.coloradoleague.org/colorado-charter-schools/school-finder.phphttp://education.i2i.org/douglas-county-vouchers/http://www.coloradoleague.org/colorado-charter-schools/school-finder.phphttp://www.coloradoleague.org/colorado-charter-schools/school-finder.phphttp://www.coloradoleague.org/colorado-charter-schools/school-finder.phphttp://www.coloradoleague.org/colorado-charter-schools/school-finder.phphttp://www.9news.com/news/article/321642/222/Douglas-County-Schools-signs-unique-charter-school-dealhttp://www.9news.com/news/article/321642/222/Douglas-County-Schools-signs-unique-charter-school-dealhttp://www.9news.com/news/article/321642/222/Douglas-County-Schools-signs-unique-charter-school-dealhttp://www.9news.com/news/article/321642/222/Douglas-County-Schools-signs-unique-charter-school-dealhttps://www.dcsdk12.org/schools/index.htmhttp://www.9news.com/news/article/321642/222/Douglas-County-Schools-signs-unique-charter-school-dealhttps://www.dcsdk12.org/schools/index.htmhttp://www.cde.state.co.us/cdereval/pupilcurrentdistrict/http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdereval/pupilcurrentdistrict/http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdereval/pupilcurrentdistrict/http://edcsd.org/http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdereval/pupilcurrentdistrict/https://www.dcsdk12.org/HomeEducationPartnerships/HomeEdResources/index.htmhttps://www.dcsdk12.org/HomeEducationPartnerships/HomeEdResources/index.htmhttps://www.dcsdk12.org/HomeEducationPartnerships/HomeEdResources/index.htmhttp://coloradoschoolgrades.com/http://coloradoschoolgrades.com/http://coloradoschoolgrades.com/http://www.cde.state.co.us/assessmenthttp://www.cde.state.co.us/assessmenthttp://www.cde.state.co.us/assessmenthttp://www.cde.state.co.us/assessmenthttp://www.cde.state.co.us/assessmenthttp://www.schoolview.org/http://www.schoolview.org/http://highered.colorado.gov/Academics/remedial/default.htmlhttp://highered.colorado.gov/Academics/remedial/default.htmlhttp://highered.colorado.gov/Academics/remedial/default.htmlhttp://highered.colorado.gov/Academics/remedial/default.htmlhttps://eboardsecure.dcsdk12.org/attachments/80e7bbc0-b490-411a-a82e-bc3f78b1e5ed.pdfhttps://eboardsecure.dcsdk12.org/attachments/80e7bbc0-b490-411a-a82e-bc3f78b1e5ed.pdfhttps://eboardsecure.dcsdk12.org/attachments/80e7bbc0-b490-411a-a82e-bc3f78b1e5ed.pdfhttps://eboardsecure.dcsdk12.org/attachments/80e7bbc0-b490-411a-a82e-bc3f78b1e5ed.pdfhttps://eboardsecure.dcsdk12.org/attachments/80e7bbc0-b490-411a-a82e-bc3f78b1e5ed.pdfhttp://www.schoolview.org/http://www.schoolview.org/http://www.schoolview.org/http://globalreportcard.org/http://globalreportcard.org/https://www.dcsdk12.org/curriculum/21stcenturyskills/index.htmhttps://www.dcsdk12.org/curriculum/21stcenturyskills/index.htmhttps://www.dcsdk12.org/curriculum/21stcenturyskills/index.htmhttps://www.dcsdk12.org/curriculum/21stcenturyskills/index.htmhttp://www.billbennett.com/wp-content/uploads/Bennett_DCSD_WhitePaper2.pdfhttp://www.billbennett.com/wp-content/uploads/Bennett_DCSD_WhitePaper2.pdfhttp://www.billbennett.com/wp-content/uploads/Bennett_DCSD_WhitePaper2.pdfhttp://www.billbennett.com/wp-content/uploads/Bennett_DCSD_WhitePaper2.pdfhttp://www.billbennett.com/wp-content/uploads/Bennett_DCSD_WhitePaper2.pdfhttp://www.ednewscolorado.org/news/capitol-news/colorado-signs-on-to-common-standardshttp://www.ednewscolorado.org/news/capitol-news/colorado-signs-on-to-common-standardshttp://www.ednewscolorado.org/news/capitol-news/colorado-signs-on-to-common-standardshttp://www.ednewscolorado.org/news/capitol-news/colorado-signs-on-to-common-standardshttps://eboardsecure.dcsdk12.org/attachments/729a2102-28ba-4b1f-822a-2b3434e3798c.pdfhttps://eboardsecure.dcsdk12.org/attachments/729a2102-28ba-4b1f-822a-2b3434e3798c.pdfhttps://eboardsecure.dcsdk12.org/attachments/729a2102-28ba-4b1f-822a-2b3434e3798c.pdfhttps://eboardsecure.dcsdk12.org/attachments/729a2102-28ba-4b1f-822a-2b3434e3798c.pdfhttps://www.dcsdk12.org/communityrelations/Newsroom/Article/index.htm?cID=DCS1242452https://www.dcsdk12.org/communityrelations/Newsroom/Article/index.htm?cID=DCS1242452https://www.dcsdk12.org/communityrelations/Newsroom/Article/index.htm?cID=DCS1242452https://www.dcsdk12.org/communityrelations/Newsroom/Article/index.htm?cID=DCS1242452https://www.dcsdk12.org/communityrelations/Newsroom/Article/index.htm?cID=DCS1242452https://www.dcsdk12.org/communityrelations/Newsroom/Article/index.htm?cID=DCS1242452https://www.dcsdk12.org/communityrelations/Newsroom/Article/index.htm?cID=DCS1242452https://www.dcsdk12.org/communityrelations/Newsroom/Article/index.htm?cID=DCS1242452https://eboardsecure.dcsdk12.org/attachments/729a2102-28ba-4b1f-822a-2b3434e3798c.pdfhttps://eboardsecure.dcsdk12.org/atta

Documents

Douglas County: Building a Better Education Model