TPCedservicesrecommendations

7/31/2019 TPCedservicesrecommendations

1/49

Policy Recommendations

for the Transition PlanningCommissiona thoughtful platform that represents the input of

our diverse community, the experiences of

parents, students, and teachers, and researched

best practicesStand for Children

4/9/2012

We show up. We speak up. We reach out. We vote.


2/49

ContentsWho We Are .............................................................................................................................................. 1

The Put Education First Campaign ............................................................................................................ 4What We Stand For ................................................................................................................................... 5

Every Child Ready for School .................................................................................................................... 6

Effective Instructional Leaders: .............................................................................................................. 11

Effective Teachers ................................................................................................................................... 16

Rigorous Implementation of Standards .................................................................................................. 18

Tailored Interventions and Supports ...................................................................................................... 22

Quality and Accessible Choices ............................................................................................................... 27

Engaged Parents and Students ............................................................................................................... 31

Culture and Climate of High Expectations .............................................................................................. 34

Every student ready for success in college and career ........................................................................... 37

Supportive community members and partners...................................................................................... 39

Cradle to Career Civic Infrastructure: ......................................................................................................... 39

Resources ................................................................................................................................................ 41

Who We Are


3/49

Vision

We believe ALL children deserve an equal opportunity to succeed in life. Education is the key that

unlocks the door to success but far too many children, through no fault of their own, arent getting theeducation they need to make it in life. We at Stand are passionately committed to righting this wrong,

so that all children, regardless of their background, can graduate from high school prepared for, and

with access to, a college education.

Mission

Our mission is to ensure that all children, regardless of their background, graduate from high school

prepared for, and with access to, a college education. To make that happen, we:

- Educate and empower parents, teachers, and community members to demand excellent schools.

- Advocate for effective local, state and national education policies and investments.

- Ensure the policies and funding we advocate for reach classrooms and help students.

- Elect courageous leaders who will stand up for our priorities.

Values

Values are the foundation of our culture. They shape how our staff, members, key stakeholders, and the

community experience Stand for Children. Stands values guide our decision-making; they inform what

we do and how we do it.

Results for All Children

We believe that all children deserve an equal opportunity to succeed in life, but that far too many

children are growing up with the deck unfairly stacked against them because of poverty and other

challenges. Our mission is to ensure that all children, regardless of their background, graduate from

high school prepared for, and with access to, a college education, and we continually push ourselves to

innovate and improve in order to accomplish more for children who urgently need our help.

Bold Independence


4/49

In a political arena dominated by parties and adult-focused special interest groups, were non-partisan

and child-focused. We fearlessly and unapologetically challenge the status quo in pursuit of solutions

that help more children graduate high school prepared for, and with access to, a college education. For

the sake of children, were willing to take difficult stands because our priority is to help children whose

lives are at stake.

Empowerment

People standing up for children make all the difference. Thats why were relentless in our drive to

empower parents, educators, Stand volunteers, and staff to do whats needed to help children get an

excellent education. We dont do for others what they can do for themselves. Wherever we work, we

stay true to who we are, what we believe, and to hold the good of the children we serve above all else.

Diversity

Diversity is our strength. The more varied our perspectives and the more we reflect and partner with

the communities we serve, the more effective well become at advocating foran equitable education

system.

Being the Change We Seek

We show up. We speak up. We reach out. We vote. Active participation makes Stand work, and it

enables us to make our democracy work for children. We ask ourselves: If not us, who? If not now,

when? We meet people where they are and engage them in this struggle in ways that work for them.

In this time of rapid change and great uncertainty, were steadfast in our commitment to listen, learn,

and lead.

Direct and Respectful Communication

The magnitude of the progress we seek for students requires teamwork. Direct and respectful

communication is the cornerstone to long-lasting and trusting relationships. We assume the best

intentions. We strive to collaborate and build, not blame. We approach this work with thoughtfulness

and humility.


5/49

The Put Education First Campaign

Stand for Children has been leading a campaign called Put Education First as an effort to demand a

plan for the consolidation of Memphis and Shelby County Schools that will comprehensively improve

education and student outcomes in Shelby County and ensure that the needs of all students remain at

the forefront of the political process.

Stand for Childrens goal for the Put Education First campaign is to serve as a vehicle through which

parents, teachers, and community residents hopes and concerns about consolidation will be heard and

addressed throughout the schools merger planning and transition process; that the community is

educated around the work of the Transition Planning Commission and the Shelby County School Board;

a comprehensive plan to raise college and career readiness and student achievement is adopted; and

school board members are elected in August 2012, who support and advocate for the plan, and will

ensure its implementation.

This work has been driven by a committee of Stand for Children volunteer leaders who have dedicated

significant time to the research and discussion of ideas and policies that we believe will make a

difference for all students. The following is the result of this committees work.

The Put Education First committee has taken the accepted priorities of the Transition Planning

Commission and filled in background information, research, and has made policy recommendations in

each priority.


6/49

What We Stand For


7/49


8/49

Yet despite this evidence, many children who need high-quality pre-k experiences still are not getting

them. Publicly funded pre-k programs, such as state pre-k and Head Start, have grown over the past

decade, but still serve only 40 percent of 4-year-olds and less than 15 percent of 3-year-olds. Only two-

thirds of the poorest 4-year-olds and one-third of the poorest 3-year-olds attend prekindergarten

programs, compared to 90 percent and 70 percent, respectively, of children from affluent families.

Children from low-to-moderate-income families are even less likely to attend pre-k, even though many

children in this group also face challenges in school. Latino students, a growing percentage of the

population, are less likely than children from other ethnic and racial backgrounds to attend pre-Kand

there is some evidence that Latino families may have less access to quality pre-k programs due to a

combination of economic, demographic, and other factors.

Even when children do attend pre-k, many pre-k programs are not providing the high-quality early

learning experiences necessary to prepare children to succeed in school. A 2005 study of state-funded

pre-K in 11 states found that 57 percent of classrooms ranked in the lowest level of instructional qualityand none ranked in the highest level. A California study that include Head Start, state pre-k, and private

preschool classrooms found that 16 percent fail to meet even adequate standards of quality, meaning

they may be actively harming child development. Only 22 percent were classified as good, and low-

income and minority children were less likely than others to be in such classrooms.

In Shelby County, 32% of all children live in poverty and 90% of those children reside within the

Memphis City limits. This is 20% higher than the national child poverty rate. We also have a significant

enrollment gap between those who qualify for services and those that have access to them.

-8000-9000 students in each year of age from 0-5 qualify for at risk early childhood services

-3800 students enrolled in head start

-200+ enrolled in Early Head Start

-3,520 enrolled in Pre-K in 176 classrooms; 1280 of these attend classrooms combined pre-k/head start

program

There is clear evidence that the learning that occurs in childrens early years has long-term impacts on

their educational and life outcomes, and that investments in early learning programs can yield long-term

benefitsparticularly for low-income students. To yield greatest benefit, early childhood programs must

be of high-quality: they must provide adequate resources, employ highly skilled teachers who know howto promote young childrens learning and development, emphasize content that predicts school

readiness, utilize appropriate instructional techniques, foster high-quality interactions between teachers

and children, and utilize ongoing assessment to monitor childrens progress and target resources and

strategies accordingly. To sustain and maximize early learning gains, quality pre-k or early learning

programs must also be linked with quality kindergarten and elementary programs that ensure an

aligned, high-quality Prek-3rd learning experience for young children. There are a variety of ways in


9/49

which states or communities can improve access to and quality of early learning experiences for young

children, and the most effective approach for a given state or community will vary based on community

demographics and needs; available resources; and existing infrastructure, capacity, and community

resources. State or district policy makers must carefully consider both their own context and the body of

existing research to identify the strategies that are most likely to result in improved early learning

outcomes.

Policy recommendations

-The TPC should make a recommendation for a comprehensive early childhood investment strategy for

Shelby County that would offer a range of interventions in order to reach children most at-risk. This

agenda should also be linked between municipal, county, and state government and private entities

through a comprehensive data sharing system, emphasizing both program evaluations and related

assessments of child outcomes.

-Examples include:

Bostons Thrive in Five Initiative http://thrivein5boston.org/

Bostons Mayor Thomas M. Menino and the United Way of Massachusetts Bay and Merrimack Valley

launched Thrive in 5 in 2008 with the goal of ensuring universal school readiness for all of Bostons

children. Designed through a year-long community planning process involving a diverse team of 65

professionals and 35 parents,Bostons School Readiness Roadmapoutlines the vision and strategies that

drive Thrive in 5s work.

Their approach is illustrated by Bostons School Readiness Equation, recognizing that a childs successrelies on the concerted effort of everyone involved in their lives.

Annual Report: http://issuu.com/thrivein5/docs/ti5_year_2_annual_report

JumpStart Tulsahttp://www.jumpstarttulsa.com/

Tulsa's partnership is part of a statewide network of community partnerships under the Smart Start

Oklahoma umbrella. Smart Start Oklahoma is a grassroots initiative with a shared vision that all

Oklahoma children will be safe, healthy, eager to learn, and ready to succeed by the time they enter

school. http://www.smartstartoklahoma.org/

Smart Start increases awareness of the developmental needs of young children, connects existing

programs for young children, and marshals community resources to focus on early care and education.

Smart Start reaches out to support families who want to give their children a good start in life.

Oklahoma currently has eighteen Smart Start communities, including Tulsa. Tulsa Smart Start is also

known as JumpStart. Publications:http://www.smartstartoklahoma.org/publications
http://thrivein5boston.org/http://thrivein5boston.org/http://thrivein5boston.org/bostonuniver/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/TN5_Full_Report.pdfhttp://thrivein5boston.org/bostonuniver/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/TN5_Full_Report.pdfhttp://thrivein5boston.org/bostonuniver/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/TN5_Full_Report.pdfhttp://issuu.com/thrivein5/docs/ti5_year_2_annual_reporthttp://issuu.com/thrivein5/docs/ti5_year_2_annual_reporthttp://www.jumpstarttulsa.com/http://www.jumpstarttulsa.com/http://www.jumpstarttulsa.com/http://www.smartstartoklahoma.org/http://www.smartstartoklahoma.org/http://www.smartstartoklahoma.org/publicationshttp://www.smartstartoklahoma.org/publicationshttp://www.smartstartoklahoma.org/publicationshttp://www.smartstartoklahoma.org/publicationshttp://www.smartstartoklahoma.org/http://www.jumpstarttulsa.com/http://issuu.com/thrivein5/docs/ti5_year_2_annual_reporthttp://thrivein5boston.org/bostonuniver/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/TN5_Full_Report.pdfhttp://thrivein5boston.org/


10/49

To accomplish this the TPC should recommended in its plan to:

- provide universal Pre-K with Head Start partnerships where feasible within Shelby County Schools and

classrooms.

- Expand early education teacher support, recruitment, and compensation, through inclusion of early

educators within a Teacher Effectiveness Initiative program expansion.

-After reviewing return on investments of k-12 intervention programs, reallocate funding from less

effective programs towards early childhood investments with higher return on investment.

- develop through a strategic partnership with the state of TN, Shelby County, the City of Memphis, and

other public and private entities to provide universal access to Pre-K, Head Start, Early Head Start, Home

Visitation Programs ( ex.Home Nurse Partnership), and Centering Programs to ensure school readiness.

The earlier we intervene in early childhood, the better.

Additional Case Studies:

As stated above, several state pre-k programs have demonstrated effectiveness in improving student

learning outcomes. Pre-k programs can be delivered in a variety of settings, including community-based

child care, Head Start programs, and public schools. There is no evidence that a specific type of pre-k

provider is better or more effective than another. Three examples illustrate that, with well-designed

programs and supports, pre-k programs can improve childrens learning in a variety of contexts and

settings:

New Jerseys Abbott Pre-K program provides universal pre-k to more than 40,000 3- and 4-year-olds in31 high-poverty school districts. Structural features of Abbott include teachers with a bachelors degree

and PreK-3rd certification, small class sizes and low adult-child ratios, and mandated use of state-

approved, developmentally appropriate and research-based curriculum. Abbott ensures quality across

diverse school- and community based providers through the use of quality guidelines, observational

quality measures (ECERS) in all programs, trained master teachers who provide professional

development, and collection of a variety of types of data to inform ongoing improvement. High-quality

evaluations find that children participating in Abbott pre-k make significant gains in language, early

literacy, and math skills, and that these gains persist through the end of second grade. Although Abbott

spends more per-pupil than typical state pre-k programs, the strategies and data it uses to drive ongoing

program improvement can be replicated in programs with fewer resources.

AppleTree Early Learning Public Charter School, in Washington, D.C., provides high-quality, full-day pre-kto 3- and 4-year-olds. AppleTrees educational model includes qualified teachers and a low adult-child

ratio (each 20-student classroom has 3 adults, two of whom have bachelors degrees), ongoing teacher

professional development, regular monitoring of childrens performance, tiered instruction, and a

evidence-based curriculum designed to develop childrens language, emergent literacy, cognitive, and

social-emotional skills. Children attending AppleTree make statistically significant gains in language,

mathematics, and literacy skills closing the achievement gap for children entering the program with

significant deficits in early language, literacy, and math skills. AppleTree is currently developing a set of


11/49

curriculum and professional development resources, Every Child Ready, that will allow other programs,

including those with fewer resources, to replicate core components of its educational model.

Both AppleTree Early Learning Public Charter School and Abbott Pre-k benefit from high levels of

funding and resources. But less resource-intensive programs, working in existing child care and early

education settings, can also produce positive results:

Texas School Ready! is a quality improvement strategy that works across all three sectors of programs

serving Texas preschoolers, state funded pre-k (delivered mostly in public schools), Head Start, and

center-based child care. TSR has four core elements: a research-based curriculum and materials;

professional development; coaching and mentoring; and progress monitoring. Research shows that

participation in TSRs training produces meaningful improvement in the quality of early learning

experiences that teachers are providing to young children. Children whose teachers participated in all

four TSR components made gains in vocabulary, letter knowledge, print awareness, and phonological

awareness that were significantly greater than those for children in a control group. TEEM leverages

existing resources by working in Head Start and child care classrooms. The TEEM intervention costsapproximately $23,000 per classroom over four-years, with roughly half the costs occurring in the first

year and phasing out over time. After four-years the only cost to sustain TEEM is a $200-300 licensing

fee for progress monitoring software.


12/49

Effective Instructional Leaders:

Effective principals are critical to developing and ensuring effective teaching, improving studentachievement, and turning around low-performing schools. Researchers find that about 60% of a

schools impact on student learning is attributable to educators: 25% to principals and 33% to teachers.

These figures actually understate principals role, because principals are responsible for hiring,

developing, and retaining effective teachers. While an individual effective teacher can boost student

learning in any given year, only the principal can ensure effective teaching in every classroom. Unless

students have multiple effective teachers in a row, nearly all the gains they make in one effective

teachers classroom are erased in two years with less effective teachers.

While all schools need effective principals, strong principal leadership is particularly important for low-

performing schools in need of rapid improvementand may be the deciding factor between successand failure. Researchers have not found a single example of a turnaround school without an effective

principal at the helm.

Principal succeed by focusing attention in three key areas: learning and teaching; creating an effective,

aligned staff; and school culture. Undergirding these three areas must be strong personal leadership

and systems that support the end goal of student achievement.

To improve principal effectiveness and thus student achievement, districts need to make three major

changes: overhaul principal preparation program, improve development for existing principals, and

revamp the current practices and rules that impede principal autonomy. The following paragraphs

explain the current need in each area, give examples of organizations or districts that are showing

progress, and provide several recommendations for what states and districts can do to improve in these

areas.

1. Principal Preparation: Overhauling principal preparation is a critical step to building acadre of principals prepared to improve student achievement.

An improved principal preparation pipeline starts with strategic, aggressive recruitment and selection.

While most districts wait for principal to self-select, high performing districts recruit internally and

externally. High-performing districts are also crystal clear on their definition of a strong principal

candidate, so their entire recruitment staff knows what attributes, knowledge, and skills principal

candidates need to have or need to be able to rapidly develop. Recruitment must be matched with a

rigorous selection process, including intensive candidate interviews.

Rigorous principal training programs look very different from the traditional, classroom-based

preparation program that currently train almost all school leaders. Rigorous programs focus on

experiential learning and development based on the original definitions of what an effective principal


13/49

has to look like. Course content focuses on personal leadership, systems and operations, teaching and

learning, ensuring an aligned staff, and school culture (the areas in which principals must excel).

Content must be applied and allow principals to develop their skills through simulations and role

playing. In addition, through district or school partnerships, future principals apprentice in a school for

at least 6 months to practice their learning on the ground and to be mentored by an experienced

principal.

New Leaders, a non-profit organization, is an example of a strong principal preparation program. New

Leaders focuses on recruiting and training high quality principals for low income districts, from New York

to the Bay Area to Memphis and Charlotte. By implementing rigorous recruitment, interview, training,

and support system, New Leaders has seen results. An external evaluation found that students in

elementary and middle schools led by a New Leaders-trained principal perform significantly better than

students in a control school. These results exist only when the principal has been in the school for three

or more years.

Gwinnett County Public Schools in Georgia has seen impressive student achievement gains in recent

years, in part due to of a sustained focus on principal effectiveness. Gwinnett provides examples of how

to improve the preparation andthe ongoing development of principals. There is a district-wide

acceptance of the importance of quality principals on student achievement, and an unrelenting focus on

driving improvements in the major areas that lead to improved principal quality: improved principal

recruitment and preparation, ongoing support, and autonomy. The best example of Gwinnetts

commitment to leadership is their Quality Plus Leader Academy Aspiring Principals Program. The

academy, taught by senior administrators in the district, is aligned to the districts goals and needs and

required for individuals planning to become principals in the district. The academys residency modelensures participants have real-life experience and mentoring prior to assuming control of a school, and

each principal academy student, receives support from a team comprised of fellow administratorsi.

Once principals are in their jobs, Gwinnett also support two years of mentoring from fellow principals

(who must have a proven track record of success and a commitment to growing others and to the vision

and mission of Gwinnett PS). Gwinnett also hosts a yearly summer leadership academy for all principals

and administrators to share new research and information, develop skills, and set goals for the coming

year.

The North Carolina Principal Fellows Program (PFP) provides a competitive, merit-based scholarship

loan to individuals of exceptional academic ability who have teaching or relevant experience and who

desire to enter school administration in a North Carolina public school. Fellows have the opportunity to

attend school on a full-time basis and earn an MSA degree in two years.

The Principal Fellows Program, which is offered at eleven campuses of the University of North Carolina,

provides one year of full-time academic study and a one year full-time internship in a North Carolina

public school. Fellows also participate in enrichment experiences designed to enhance their preparation


14/49

for a career as a principal or assistant principal. The Principal Fellows Program was created in 1993 by

the North Carolina General Assembly. Over1100 Principal Fellows have completed the Program.

Fellows are required to maintain employment as a principal or assistant principal in a public school inNorth Carolina for four years to repay the scholarship loan. Financial need is not a criterion for selection

as a Principal Fellow.

2. Principal Development: Once principals are on the job, districts and CMOs must ensureongoing support and comprehensive evaluations for all leaders.

Currently, on-the-job support and development for principals is weak. A survey of almost 1,000

principals cites that more than half of them believe they would be more effective if they had better

ongoing development (specifically more facilitated networks of fellow principals as opposed to lectures).

Current principal evaluations also leave much room for improvement: many principals are not evaluated

regularly, and many evaluations are out-of-date, not aligned around a principals core competencies,

and do not include information on student learning.

The nonprofit School Leaders Network builds networks of principals who, with a skilled facilitator,

engage in action research, determine ways to improve outcomes at their schools, and hold each other

mutually accountable for results. 86% of principals participating in the SLN program showed

improvements in student academic achievement.

On the evaluation side of development, principal evaluations should strive to measure the principals

impact on improving teaching and learning; building an aligned, effective, staff; and fostering a healthy,

equitable, and high-standard school culture. But measuring these components can be difficult.ii One

promising evaluation tool out of Vanderbilt University is the VAL-Ed model, which includes six major

components: high standards for student learning, rigorous curriculum, quality instruction, culture of

learning and professional behavior, connections to external communities, and performance

accountability. The evaluation tool lays out key processes to break down how the leader does (or

doesnt) achieve those competencies. The tool has proven to accurately identify learning-centered

leadership and accurately differentiate principals based on strength.iii States like Illinois, Louisiana, and

Georgia are also experimenting with implementing improved evaluation systems that include measures

of student progress.

Districts and state can do several things to improve ongoing principal development. First, more districts

need to implement professional development programs to ensure principals receive relevant support

and learning. These programs can be led by outside organizations, like School Leaders, or by the district

itself, like in Gwinnett. Second, districts must collect and analyze data on how principals perform over

time. Principals should know what expectations are for them and how they measure up. Third, districts

and states must ensure that the standards used by administrators responsible for evaluating principals

are aligned with and complement standards and competencies for principals. Districts must also ensure


15/49

that the positions with responsibility for overseeing and evaluating principals are staffed with high-

capacity individuals who understand the districts vision and goals for effective school leadership.

3. Autonomy: for principals to fulfill their obligations to improve teaching and learning,hire and support an excellent teaching staff, and establish a health school culture, they

must be in empowered to make the basic school-based decisions.

Currently, many principals lack the autonomy to make key decisions or to reallocate resources to

improve student performance. In many districts principals are forced to hire teachers they dont want,

are forbidden from using student achievement data in a formal teacher evaluation, and are basically

unable to fire low performing teachers. Professional development programs are often run by the

district, limiting principals ability to provide development opportunities matched to school goals and

needs. All of these factors limit principals ability to be successful. It follows then, that the principals

most committed to being successful are forced to be deviant and to break the rules to get the outcomes

they want for their kids.

The Charlotte Mecklenburg School district has taken steps to give principals greater support, flexibility,

and autonomy. In 2008 the district implemented a strategic staffing initiatives in their lowest

performing schools. They identified strong principals (who were eligible only if they had shown

significant gains in student achievement in previous schools) and encouraged them to apply to lead one

of the districts lowest-performing schools. Part of the offer included a raise, as well as autonomy over

staffing and the flexibility to try new, instruction-related practices they think might work in their school.

The principals were able to hire 2-3 fellow administrators and 5 proven teachers. They were supported

by the district through informal principal mentoring programs as well as a formal training program to

teach them turnaround strategies and to give them context about their new school. The superintendent

met with the principals every other month, and the principals felt supported in their (often difficult)

choices. Early data shows the schools within this strategic staffing initiative making significant

improvements in student achievement.

To improve school autonomy and to enable principals to be successful, districts and states need to make

several key changes. On the most basic level, effective principals need the autonomy to hire, evaluate,

train, and fire their teaching staff. Its difficult to hold principals accountable when they do not have

control of who works in the schools they lead. Moving to a more autonomous principal model will

require changes in many districts teachers contracts, including changes to hiring, transfer, anddismissal provisions, as well as shifting district-level human resources policy and practices to better

support principals.

Lastly, districts must invest in data collection and evaluation to build the knowledge base about how to

ensure effective school leadership in all three of these key areas. The research is very clear about the

importance of principals, but the overall body of research on the subjectparticularly related to policy


16/49

interventionshas many gaps. By collecting more data (such as data on variations in principal

effectiveness across preparation programs and districts) districts and preparation programs can help to

create a more robust knowledge base to support effective principal preparation and supervision to

scale.

Policy Recommendations:

Stand recommends

-the continuation of MCSs current partnership with New Leaders and the expansion of strategy four in

the TEI work to ensure effective leaders in every school through the Leadership Effectiveness Initiative

(LEI).

-Actively recruit talented individuals and organizations nationwide to lead innovative new schools in the

new district. (See the Denver Public SchoolsCall for New Quality Schools.)

-Forge constructive relationships with the leaders of alternatively-led schools (e.g., charter schools, ASD

schools, etc.), beginning with the establishing of a compact along the lines of those signed by cities like

Nashville, New Orleans, Baltimore, Boston, etc. (Hopes, Fears & Reality, Chapter 2, Lake and Gross)
http://osri.dpsk12.org/the_callhttp://osri.dpsk12.org/the_callhttp://osri.dpsk12.org/the_callhttp://www.crpe.org/cs/crpe/download/csr_files/pub_crpe_HFR11_Jan12.pdfhttp://www.crpe.org/cs/crpe/download/csr_files/pub_crpe_HFR11_Jan12.pdfhttp://www.crpe.org/cs/crpe/download/csr_files/pub_crpe_HFR11_Jan12.pdfhttp://www.crpe.org/cs/crpe/download/csr_files/pub_crpe_HFR11_Jan12.pdfhttp://osri.dpsk12.org/the_call


17/49

Effective Teachers

It is oft cited, that teachers are the most important in-school variable in student success andachievement. Yet the how, in terms of getting a great teacher in every classroom, every year, remains

an elusive policy question nation-wide.

What does the existing evidence suggest for individuals or groups wishing to know what are the right

set of teacher policies to promote? Unfortunately, academic research rarely yields findings that are so

definitive as to provide specific policy guidance, but does suggest some broad implications.

First, it is clear that improvements to the quality of the teacher workforce have the potential to radically

improve the performance of Americas schools. While we cannot easily predict which teachers will be

successful with students based on teacher credentials, we do know that there is significant variation

between teachers and that the differences in teacher effectiveness have educationally meaningful

effects on students.

Secondly, and closely related to the point above, state-regulated licensure systems do not, in general,

appear to be an effective means of screening for teacher quality. There is definitive evidence that there

is far greater variation in the effectiveness of teachers who hold similar pre-service credentials (e.g. the

pathway into the classroom, the college from which teachers graduated, certifications held, etc.) than

between the average teachers with different credentials.

Third, existing research suggests that investments in changing incumbent teachers through better

professional development, mentoring, or incentives, have not resulted in significant improvements inteacher effectiveness. But it is important to understand that this is not necessarily how things would

play out in a radically different educational context.

It is conceivable, for instance, that the effectiveness of a professional development program might be

quite different if teachers had a more direct incentive (i.e. if rewarded for performance in some way)

when making professional development decisions and receiving professional development training.

Likewise, it is possible that incentives could make a difference if teachers were provided with higher

quality professional development options. The bottom line here is that reforms are unlikely to produce

big workforce productivity gains unless these reforms are based in a coherent theory of action around

teacher evaluation, recruitment, support, and compensation.


18/49

We believe this coherent theory of change has begun in Memphis through the Teacher Effectiveness

Initiative and must be continued as a critical component in the new district. The initiative should be

expanded in a collaborative way that sustains progress to date and incorporates best practices and

successes from current Shelby County Schools and Memphis City Schools practices. This expansion

must be focused on the four key strategies to:

1. Create a common, agreed-upon definition of effective teaching;

2. Enable smarter decisions about who teaches students;

3. Better support, utilize and compensate teachers; and,

4. Improve the surrounding context for effective teaching

To accomplish this expansion the TPC should help ensure there is:

A thorough Needs Assessment across the two school systems to determine the fundingrequirements as part of the new Proposal

A separate document to be developed as an addendum to the current TEI strategy, addressingVision, Strategy, Implementation and Milestones for the new work

Identification of additional funding sources, including other local and national philanthropiesand business organizations

Resources: All Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Resources, publications, and policies can be found here

http://www.mcstei.com/resources
http://www.mcstei.com/resourceshttp://www.mcstei.com/resourceshttp://www.mcstei.com/resources


19/49

Rigorous Implementation of Standards

Rigorous Standards have the potential to improve the quality of instruction and outcomes for ShelbyCounty studentsbut their impact will ultimately depend on the quality of state and local level

implementation. We believe the consolidation provides us an opportunity to start afresh and to design

significantly improved systems to support student achievement. The state of Tennessee has moved in

the right direction through Race to The Top to assure that TN will offer the most rigorous standards. In

March of 2010, Tennessee became one of two states to win the first round of the federal Race to the

Top (RTTT) competitive grant program, receiving more than $500M over a four year period. The

program required that states entering the program submit plans to address several core areas related to

standards:

- Adopting standards and assessments that prepare students for college and workplace- Building data systems to measure student academic growth and guide instructionalimprovement

- STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics)The RTTT Assessment Program incorporates the vision of an integrated system of assessments adopted

by a consortium of states. Summative, interim and formative assessments will be carefully and

thoughtfully aligned to college- and career-readiness standards. Also, the reporting systems will be

designed and implemented to provide students, parents and educators with a more complete picture of

the progress to date, current needs and future trajectory of each student.

However, even such systems of assessments cannot be optimized for all purposes. Districts will need tomake clear, thoughtful choices with their constituencies about the priorities within the system.

To ensure we have the best local level implementation of rigorous standards we believe we need a

system designed by recommendation from the TPC to ensure rigorous implementation of standards that

could be modeled after one of the following four Next Generation Assessment Models:

An Internationally Comparable Balanced Assessment System that Supports High-Quality Learning

This policy brief is based on a paper presented by Linda DarlingHammond and Ray Pecheone, Stanford

University, with Ann Jacquith, Susan Schultz, Leah Walker, and Ruth Chung Wei, at the National

Conference on Next Generation K 12 Assessment Systems, March 2010.

http://www.k12center.org/publications.html.

This model proposes a balanced assessment system that integrates curriculum and assessments, both

formative and summative, and is designed to support higherquality, more coherent instruction. It

would be implemented by consortia of states committed to developing curriculum frameworks based on

the Common Core Standards and learning progressions. The components of the assessment systemall
http://www.k12center.org/publications.htmlhttp://www.k12center.org/publications.htmlhttp://www.k12center.org/publications.html


20/49

designed to go beyond recall of facts and show students abilities to evaluate evidence, problem solve,

and understand contextsinclude analytic selectedresponse items, short and extended constructed

response items, and standardized performance tasks in each grade level tested. The results of on

demand tests (which include the first two types of items) combined with weighted results of reliably

scored curriculumembedded performance tasks would provide student achievement data that could be

compared across schools, districts, and states (summative assessments). The system also would be able

to show student growth along multiple dimensions. Technology would be used to deliver tests, collect

student work for teacher/scorer use and for training scorers, manage the scoring/reporting processes,

and eventually help teachers to manage classroom practice. Technology would also support computer

adaptive testing and computer scoring of some openended items. This system, properly implemented,

would provide a more performancebased and useful assessment system at potentially no more cost

than the present less rich and less helpful systems in use.

An Assessment System based on the National Center on Education and the Economys StateConsortium for Board Examination Systems

This policy brief is based on a paper presented by Marc Tucker, National Center on Education and the

Economy, at the National Conference on Next Generation K 12 Assessment Systems, March 2010.


The model that underlies the National Center on Education and the Economys State Consortium for

Board Examination Systems is based on exams in countries with the bestperforming education systems,

the model consists of highschool programs of study covering the whole core curriculum. Each course

has a wellconstructed syllabus with matching instructional materials, high quality examinations, andhighquality training for the teachers of the courses. The National Center on Education and the Economy

(NCEE) has identified the worlds best board examination systems available in English for use in the

United States and negotiated the alignment with the Common Core Standards.

The states in the consortium will pilot the use of these exams in their high schools. NCEE will set the pass

points for the lower division exams to the level of literacy required to be successful in the initial credit

bearing courses in open admissions colleges. Students who pass their lower division exams by the end of

their sophomore year will be certified for a special diploma and enrollment in an open admissions

college without having to take remedial courses. Or they can stay in high school to take an upper

division program designed to get them into a selective college. Students who do not pass will receivehelp in those areas in which they did not do well on the exam. The aim is for virtually all students to be

ready to pass their exams and therefore ready to succeed in programs leading to industry qualifications

or in 4year colleges.
http://www.k12center.org/publications.htmlhttp://www.k12center.org/publications.htmlhttp://www.k12center.org/publications.html


21/49

High-Level Model for an assessment of Common Standards

This policy brief is based on a paper presented by Stephen Lazer, Educational Testing Service, at the

National Conference on Next Generation K12 Assessment Systems, March 2010.


This model proposes an integrated assessment system, not a single test, and focuses on the technical

details of a summative system for elementary and middle schools. Using the Common Core Standards, it

calls for endofyear tests for Grades 38, which could be used to measure student growth if the

standards cohere across grade levels. The summative/accountability components of the integrated

assessment system might also include periodic classroom tests and collections of student work, which

will be easier to implement if the common standards lead to a common sequence of learning objectives.

Summative tests also could be used to provide information to subsequent diagnostic and formativeassessments, particularly for students performing above or below grade level. The endofyear and

periodic components of the assessment should be computerbased. An assessment system for high

schools would contain some of the same elements as the K8 system. However, rather than choosing a

specific approach, the paper offers policymakers two models: endofdomain assessment or endof

course assessment.

Educators generally agree on the need for improved assessment systems, but there is far less consensus

on the priorities for uses of the new assessments. It is impossible for one assessment or even one

assessment system to fulfill everyones goals, but there are some goals that are shared by various

stakeholders. Other goals will require choices; an assessment system cannot do everything equally well.

An American Examination System

This policy brief is based on a paper presented by Lauren Resnick, University of Pittsburgh, and Larry

Berger, Wireless Generation, with Brian Junker, Carnegie Mellon University, at the National Conference

on Next Generation K 12 Assessment Systems, March 2010.


This model focuses on designing an assessment system that works to improve instruction. The model

reflects key aspects of the substantive, cognitively demanding European systems, while maintaining

standards of psychometric rigor necessary to support Americas accountability, comparability, and

equity agendas.

The model aligns standards, assessment, and curriculum through three principal innovations: distributed

accountability exams that have a high degree of content and instructional validity; a system of mass

personalized formative assessments that become an integral part of each teachers instructional

routine; and a technology platform with broad uses, especially to help teachers manage the assessment
http://www.k12center.org/publications.htmlhttp://www.k12center.org/publications.htmlhttp://www.k12center.org/publications.htmlhttp://www.k12center.org/publications.htmlhttp://www.k12center.org/publications.htmlhttp://www.k12center.org/publications.html


22/49

process and have ready access to insights from the assessment data. A major aspect of the technology is

the creation of a honeycomb, or interactive map, that visually explains the instruction and assessment

goals in each grade as well as across grades, tracking the progress of individual students, classes,

schools, and districts. A substantial amount of work has already been done to develop the content and

tools needed to implement the American Examination System.


The work to ensure there is a rigorous implementation of quality standards will require the TPC to make

recommendations that build a coherent system of assessment, support, and accountability linked to a

set of common standards. Stand recommends that the TPC take advantage of the progress already

made through RTTT and work with researchers to design a local system of implementation to fulfill the

desired outcome of this guiding principle.

Resources

Linda Darling-Hammond and Ray Pecheone, Stanford University "Developing an Internationally

Comparable Balanced Assessment System That Supports High-Quality Learning"

http://www.k12center.org/rsc/pdf/Darling-HammondPechoneSystemModelBrief.pdf

Marc Tucker, National Center on Education and the Economy "An Assessment System For the United

States: Why Not Build on the Best?"

http://www.k12center.org/rsc/pdf/TuckerSystemModelBrief.pdf

Stephen Lazer, Educational Testing Service "High-Level Model for an Assessment of Common Standards"http://www.k12center.org/rsc/pdf/LazerSystemModelBrief.pdf

Lauren Resnick, University of Pittsburgh, and Larry Berger, Wireless Generation "An American

Examination System"http://www.k12center.org/rsc/pdf/ResnickBergerSystemModelBrief.pdf
http://www.k12center.org/rsc/pdf/Darling-HammondPechoneSystemModelBrief.pdfhttp://www.k12center.org/rsc/pdf/Darling-HammondPechoneSystemModelBrief.pdfhttp://www.k12center.org/rsc/pdf/TuckerSystemModelBrief.pdfhttp://www.k12center.org/rsc/pdf/TuckerSystemModelBrief.pdfhttp://www.k12center.org/rsc/pdf/LazerSystemModelBrief.pdfhttp://www.k12center.org/rsc/pdf/LazerSystemModelBrief.pdfhttp://www.k12center.org/rsc/pdf/ResnickBergerSystemModelBrief.pdfhttp://www.k12center.org/rsc/pdf/ResnickBergerSystemModelBrief.pdfhttp://www.k12center.org/rsc/pdf/ResnickBergerSystemModelBrief.pdfhttp://www.k12center.org/rsc/pdf/ResnickBergerSystemModelBrief.pdfhttp://www.k12center.org/rsc/pdf/LazerSystemModelBrief.pdfhttp://www.k12center.org/rsc/pdf/TuckerSystemModelBrief.pdfhttp://www.k12center.org/rsc/pdf/Darling-HammondPechoneSystemModelBrief.pdf


23/49

Tailored Interventions and Supports

Though current policy debates on school reform and improvement focus primarily on academicstandards, a broader focus on supporting student success is necessary to give all students an equal

chance to succeed. This is particularly important for schools serving students living in poverty, a

disproportionate number of whom are also students of color, English Language Learners (EELs), and

students with disabilities. The impact of poverty and student characteristics on achievement has been

well-documented. However, these are not insurmountable problems. Research on high-performing

schools serving these children finds that these schools take direct action to support student success and

proactively address barriers to student achievement. These interventions should be focused around

promising strategies that work.

EELs

Tennessee has experienced a 200 percent ELL population growth rate in the last decade. As ELL

students are increasingly common even in communities that have not traditionally been home to

immigrant groups, it is clear that all schools need to be capable of effectively serving this population of

students.

The rate at which the ELL student population is growing within U.S. schools is reason enough for

educators and policymakers to better understand the educational needs of such students. But a greater

concern is the staggering achievement gap between ELL students and their English-proficient peers. As

the number of ELL students grow, these gaps represent a tremendous missed opportunity that

undermines both these students futures and American competitivenessand that education policy

must address.

Increasing opportunities to develop vocabulary and literacy skills, marrying English language

development with content-area instruction, and expanded learning time are promising strategies for

improving academic achievement among ELLs. Policy changes that encourage consistent ELL

identification and reclassification practices among states and districts can help provide a more

transparent picture of ELLs educational progress. Finally, high-quality academic assessments for ELLs

are in high demand. Most states are not equipped to validly and reliably assess ELL students. Developing

appropriate assessments for the diverse ELL population should be a priority as states move toward the

Common Core standards.

Students with disabilities

Educating students with disabilities is more similar than dissimilar to educating all students; high quality

instruction leads to student learning. But, effectively educating students with disabilities requires that

practitioners have high expectations and a deep understanding of how to teach and support students

with a diverse array of needs and that administrators and policy makers understand how to navigate the


24/49

complex web of rules and regulations crafted to protect students rights to public education. While

challenging and resource intensive, our collective commitment to all students reflects our deep

conviction regarding the meaning of civil rights and equal opportunity. Furthermore, investments in

special education provide individual as well as broader social and economic benefits. Decades of

research have provided us a solid understanding of how to best educate students with disabilities.

Emerging brain research coupled with emerging technologies holds the promise to not only grow but

hopefully dramatically accelerate our knowledge and ability to minimize the impact of disabilities on

individuals choices.

All children have academic, personal and developmental needs that must be addressed to enable them

to succeed in and out of school. While the main purpose of a school is to provide academic enrichment,

the reality is that some children need much more is order to be prepared for success in college, careers,

and life. Strategies that implement positive behavior systems, support social and emotional learning

and extend learning time can address critical student needs, and there are models with demonstratedeffectiveness. An individual program may not be necessary or effective in all schools, so school and

district leaders must carefully consider their students needs and identify the programs that best

address those needs. Given overlap between these three areas, and the demonstrated effectiveness of

comprehensive programs over fragmented efforts, schools may incorporate aspects of each of these

three areas into an overall school system. Effective implementation and program evaluation is also

critical to both assure students are appropriately served and that investments are well used.


Stand recommends targeted interventions that meet the needs of individual students and schools, these

should include:

Promising strategies for teaching students to read

Support readers effectively in the early grades, including:o Integrating literacy in prekindergarten programs,o Identifying struggling readers early and provide additional, proven supportso Spending additional time on reading in the early grades

Support readers effectively in adolescence, including:o Providing effective professional development for upper-grade teachers, including content-

area teachers on strategies to teach reading,

o Developing collaborative teacher teams to reinforce literacy strategies across the content,


25/49

o Instructing students in explicit reading strategies on content-specific materials in uppergrades,

o Supporting struggling readers in upper grades with supplemental instruction from aspecialist,

o Ensuring engaging and motivating texts, discussion, and writing, ando Coordination between teachers in different subject areas to reinforce key literacy concepts

across subject areas

Prepare teachers to teach key components of reading during teacher preparation programs Ensure access to high-quality formative and summative reading assessments and useful data-

systems

Invest adequately in developing and implementing comprehensive, systemic approaches toimproving literacy

Promising strategies for encouraging science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)

Adopt fewer, deeper, well-sequenced standards for mathematics education, aligned assessments,and professional development aligned to standards (like Common Core)

Diversify participation in STEM coursework, with a special emphasis on students of color and girls Increase the number of students who complete Algebra II by high school graduation so they will be

prepared for college-level math

Teach direct instruction and problem solving strategies together Recruit and retain STEM teachers with college degrees in STEM subject areas Provide equity in access to teachers with college degrees in STEM for students of color and low-

income students

Promising strategies for students designated as Special Education

Monitor and respond to over-representation of students of color in special education Increase federal reimbursements for IDEA costs Intervene early into the education of students with disabilities


26/49

Implement response to intervention programs to prevent students from falling behind and endingup in special education

Implement Universal Design for Learning, an effective strategy for mainstreaming special educationstudents while designing instruction that benefits the whole class

Ensure special education students are included in state/federal accountability systems Integrate special education teachers with regular education teachers in colleges of education to

develop a culture of working together and to learn from each other

Use technology effectively to individualize instruction Provide adequate financial resources targeted at the most effective practices for improving learning

for special education students

Promising strategies for students learning English

Provide students learning English access to quality preschool, bilingual or English immersion Ensure education for students learning English is guided by teachers who have received specialized

training to meet students unique needs

Dedicate time explicitly to learning English vocabulary and time explicitly dedicated to learningacademic content

Implement sheltered English instructional strategies Assess and properly identify the academic levels of students learning English, including:

o Native language assessments and plain English assessments to make sure assessmentresults are capturing actual knowledge, not language ability;

o Additional time for assessments;o Allowed use of a dictionary or glossary; ando

Multiple sources of information about student abilities.

Track outcomes for students learning English after they have been reclassified to ensure studentslearning English as successful as native English speakers

Provide additional learning time to students learning English


27/49

Implement technology in way that supports teaching and learning

Create a task force that works to continually research and pilot cutting-edge instructionaltechnology that can be used by schools (as they see fit) to allow for highly differentiated learning

for every student.

Extend the School Day and Year

Target extended day and year policies, and, these policies should follow the following bestpractices:

o Making every minute count or maximizing added time;o Prioritizing increased hours that are tailored to the school and their students;o Individualizing the added time for each student based on diverse needs;o Building a positive school culture of high expectations and mutual accountability;o Providing new experiences for students that make their education more well-rounded;o Preparing students for the future by encouraging college readiness and career goals;o Strengthening instruction by providing increased time for teacher professional

development; and

o Evaluating how well goals are met by assessing and analyzing data. Funding for these interventions can be leveraged from funding streams for expanded learning time

from local, state, and federal sources.

Local examples like Campus School, KIPP, and Soulsville Academy and national examples likeMassachusetts 2020, LAs BEST, and The Young Scholars Program all provide great examples of howthese policies can be implemented.


28/49

Quality and Accessible Choices

Government agencies implementing choice programs whether they are districts overseeing intra-district choice programs or innovation zones, charter school authorizers overseeing a collection of

charter schools, or local agencies overseeing inter-district choice programs need to take responsibility

for ensuring that students have access to a portfolio of high quality choices through high quality screens,

rigorous accountability, and strategic efforts to build the supply of high quality schools.

Successful choice programs require thoughtful public oversight. Agencies hoping to build high quality

public school choice need to design the programs to target the students with the greatest need, build

screens and accountability systems that allow for diverse school options but filter out low quality

schools, actively build the supply of schools when needed, create the information and support systems

that families need to make good choices, and invest in the transportation systems that allow them toaccess these choices. Finally, they need to be ever-vigilant to ensure that schools that receive public

school students and public resources are playing by the rules, serving students equitably, and

maintaining high quality standards for our students.

Under the proposed multiple-pathways model approved by the TPC we believe that the system must

be designed to ensure quality and allow both autonomy and accountability. The plan should include the

following elements:

1. Universal High Standards: Every school, regardless of location or educational model, is held to the

same high standards.

2. Site-Based Decisions: Schools have the autonomy to make decisions that best meet the needs of their

students.

3. Equitable Access to Quality: All students have the opportunity to attend a high quality school, ideally

in their own neighborhoods, but outside of them if their parents deem other options preferable.

4. Good Availability of Information: Data is collected from all schools and is used to allow both the

central office and parents to critically assess a schools performance.

5. Continuous Improvement: The system is designed to measure success, close poor performers, and

open promising ones. This includes both traditional district schools and alternatively-governed schools(e.g., charter schools, ASD schools, etc.). The same rewards and consequences for success or failure

apply to every school.

We also recommend that the plan take into consideration the 7 Components of a Portfolio Strategy

highlighted by Center on Reinventing Public Education at the University of Washington:


29/49

The portfolio strategy is a performance management model for districts that aims to create dramatic

student achievement gains at scale. It centers on creating more high-quality schools regardless of

provider, giving schools autonomy over staff and funding, and holding all schools accountable for

performance. The portfolio strategy is built on 7 key components.

Good Options and Choices for all Families

-Opening of new schools based on parent/student/neighborhood need

-Opening of new schools with outside operators (e.g. charters)

-School choice for all families

-Coordination of enrollment and school information for families across sectors

-Aggressive recruitment of new school providers

-Equity and access to charter and non-traditional schools for special education students and

English Language Learners

School Autonomy (for those granted autonomy)

-Universal autonomy: all schools control staff selection, pay, assignment, and budget

-New models of teaching and organization (e.g. hybrid learning models)

Pupil-Based Funding for All Schools

-Pupil-based funding

-Sharing of facilities and other select resources with non-district run schools

Talent-Seeking Strategy

-Recruitment of new principals and teachers to the district

-Policies in place for using alternative pipelines to find/develop talent

-Performance-based teacher retention

-Performance-based teacher pay

Sources of Support for Schools

-Schools free to choose support from diverse independent providers


30/49

Performance-Based Accountability for Schools

-Data systems that allow measurement of annual student growth

-Accountability systems that compare schools on student growth, climate and improvement

-Rich information systems to guide school self-assessment and planning

-Common student performance standards for all schools

-Publication of a school report card

-Closure of persistently low performing district and charter schools

Extensive Public Engagement

Additional policy Recommendations/concerns:

-Communication plan to convey information about reform strategy and progress (including need for

school closures)

-Feedback loop for parents and community members to ensure that district administrators are

empowered with the ability to measure success, close poor performing schools, and open promising

ones. This includes both traditional district schools and alternatively-governed schools (e.g., charter

schools, ASD schools, etc.). The same rewards and consequences for success or failure should apply to

every school.

-Create new magnet school options focused on various themes (e.g., STEM, performing arts, Montessori,

etc.) to provide more diverse and innovative academic choices to a more racially and socioeconomically

diverse student body. Seek input from the community on what themes are desired. (Reviving Magnet

Schools: Strengthening a Successful Choice Option, Siegel-Hawley and Frankenburg, February 2012; See

alsoCharlotte-Mecklenburg Schools magnet program specs.)

-Devise a fair enrollment system that ensures that all students have the opportunity to attend a high

quality school, ideally in their own neighborhoods, but outside of them if their parents deem other

options preferable. (Hopes, Fears & Reality, Chapter 3, Lake and Gross)

-Critical attention should also be given to establishing a widely available, outstanding Career and

Technical Education (CTE) program throughout the district. Many studies have shown that CTE

programs are extremely effective in preparing high school students for success in post-secondary

education and careers, especially in the context of an increasingly technology-driven, globalized

marketplace (see, e.g., "Pathways to Prosperity: Meeting the Challenge of Preparing Young Americans

for the 21st Century,"

http://www.gse.harvard.edu/news_events/features/2011/Pathways_to_Prosperity_Feb2011.pdf
http://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/integration-and-diversity/reviving-magnet-schools-strengthening-a-successful-choice-option/MSAPbrief-02-02-12.pdfhttp://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/integration-and-diversity/reviving-magnet-schools-strengthening-a-successful-choice-option/MSAPbrief-02-02-12.pdfhttp://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/integration-and-diversity/reviving-magnet-schools-strengthening-a-successful-choice-option/MSAPbrief-02-02-12.pdfhttp://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/integration-and-diversity/reviving-magnet-schools-strengthening-a-successful-choice-option/MSAPbrief-02-02-12.pdfhttp://www.cms.k12.nc.us/cmsdepartments/ci/MagnetPrograms/Pages/default.aspxhttp://www.cms.k12.nc.us/cmsdepartments/ci/MagnetPrograms/Pages/default.aspxhttp://www.cms.k12.nc.us/cmsdepartments/ci/MagnetPrograms/Pages/default.aspxhttp://www.cms.k12.nc.us/cmsdepartments/ci/MagnetPrograms/Pages/default.aspxhttp://www.crpe.org/cs/crpe/download/csr_files/pub_crpe_HFR11_Jan12.pdfhttp://www.crpe.org/cs/crpe/download/csr_files/pub_crpe_HFR11_Jan12.pdfhttp://www.crpe.org/cs/crpe/download/csr_files/pub_crpe_HFR11_Jan12.pdfhttp://www.gse.harvard.edu/news_events/features/2011/Pathways_to_Prosperity_Feb2011.pdfhttp://www.gse.harvard.edu/news_events/features/2011/Pathways_to_Prosperity_Feb2011.pdfhttp://www.gse.harvard.edu/news_events/features/2011/Pathways_to_Prosperity_Feb2011.pdfhttp://www.crpe.org/cs/crpe/download/csr_files/pub_crpe_HFR11_Jan12.pdfhttp://www.cms.k12.nc.us/cmsdepartments/ci/MagnetPrograms/Pages/default.aspxhttp://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/integration-and-diversity/reviving-magnet-schools-strengthening-a-successful-choice-option/MSAPbrief-02-02-12.pdfhttp://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/integration-and-diversity/reviving-magnet-schools-strengthening-a-successful-choice-option/MSAPbrief-02-02-12.pdf


31/49

Despite a sustained period of high unemployment, news stories still frequently report of U.S. employers

being unable to fill highly skilled jobs because the supply of workers with the necessary training is simplytoo low (see, e.g., "Skilled workers needed to run high-tech CNC machines,"

http://www.marketplace.org/topics/tech/skilled-workers-needed-run-high-tech-cnc-machines). For

some students, high school CTE may lead to certification, to a 2 or 4 year college degree or beyond. For

others, CTE may lead directly to a career or to a job after high school graduation that may finance and

otherwise enable additional formal education.

We believe the broad outline for an outstanding CTE program in the new district should include:

21st century CTE curriculums and programs that match our high-tech, globalized economy, as well as

our local economy's needs;

increased CTE funding to support these important, timely programs;

wider availability throughout the district for high school students to participate in CTE; and

cooperation and collaboration among educators, local government officials and locally-based

employers and trades to find opportunities for mutually beneficial public-private CTE partnerships and

programs (e.g., matching education and student experiences with area employer and trade needs;

apprenticeships, internships and pathways to entry-level employment opportunities).
http://www.marketplace.org/topics/tech/skilled-workers-needed-run-high-tech-cnc-machineshttp://www.marketplace.org/topics/tech/skilled-workers-needed-run-high-tech-cnc-machineshttp://www.marketplace.org/topics/tech/skilled-workers-needed-run-high-tech-cnc-machines


32/49

Engaged Parents and Students

Children whose families who are involved in their education are much more likely to succeed in schooland life. Specifically, children from engaged families are more likely to earn higher grades and test

scores, enroll in higher level programs, graduate high school and go onto college, and have better social

skills. They are also less likely to have behavioral problems and more likely to easily adapt to school.

The relationship between family involvement and improved achievement prevails across differences in

family income or racial/ethnic background and appears to be particularly important for low income

students and African American or Hispanic students.

In light of this evidence, strategies that engage families to support their students learning are an

important lever for improving student achievement. Unfortunately, efforts to strengthen family

engagement that supports student achievement have been undermined by confusion about thedefinition of effective family engagement, a lack of high-quality evidence regarding effective parental

engagement strategies, and the prevalence of scattershot and low-impact strategies, such as fundraisers

and generic newsletters. Family engagement is often seen as a feel-good extra, not as a crucial piece

of a larger initiative to close the achievement gap and improve student outcomes. To effectively

leverage the power of parent engagement to improve student learning, educators and policymakers

must prioritize family engagement as a core function of public schools, focus energy on the highest-

impact forms of parent engagement, and demand evidence of results from parent engagement efforts.

States, districts, schools, and nonprofits need to demand more from family engagement programs. The

new Obama ESEA proposal plans to have districts set aside 2% of their Title 1 funding for proven family

engagement programs, and districts need to leverage those funds. New programs should be based on

best practice and an outcome-oriented definition of family engagement. Institutes that fund or

implement engagement must have high expectations for these programs and commit to measuring their

impacts, both through formal evaluation and by tracking student achievement data for children whose

parents participate in these programs. Policymakers can aid in the process by ensuring data systems

track the appropriate student data, so organizations can access data to assess their programs.

Research on the benefits of Effective Family Engagement (Flamboyan Foundation)

Students do better in school and in life when their families are engaged. A strong body of evidence is

clear that family engagement, from birth through adolescence, contributes to a range of positivestudent outcomes:

Family engagement is associated with reduced drop-out rates and higher graduation rates. In a study

of high school dropouts, 71% of diverse teenagers interviewed said that more communication between

parents and schools might have prevented them from dropping out of school.1 Another study found

that students were more likely to stay in school when their families were more engaged in their

education.2 Evaluations of the Parent Institute for Quality Education (PIQE), a nine-week program that


33/49

builds immigrant parents skills and knowledge abouthow to support their childs education, found that

children of program participants were more likely to go on to college than similarly matched students. 3

Family engagement leads to increased student achievement. Meta-analyses of over 40 studiesinvestigating the impact of family engagement have found that there is a significant and large

association between family engagement and the academic achievement of urban elementary and

middle school students. These findings also suggest that certain forms of family engagement, such as

having high expectations and helping a child make real-world connections to their learning, are the

strongest predictors of achievement. 4 In a study of Title I schools, growth in reading test scores was

50% higher for students whose teachers and schools reported high levels of parental outreach versus

those that reported low levels.

Family engagement can reduce absenteeism. Researchers examining family engagement practices at 18

schools found that communications with families and family workshops helped both chronically and

occasionally absent students. Home visits, particularly those that can "humanize" school policies around

absences, also improved chronic absence rates.5 Studies of schools instituting high-quality family

engagement programs also show that these schools have higher attendance rates than similarly

matched schools without such programs.6

Family engagement encourages students to have better attitudes towards learning. Research on the

federal Head Start program shows that children with parents who were more involved at home or at

school were more motivated and had higher attention and persistence. 7 A randomized study of low-

income, African American parents also demonstrated that children of parents receiving home-based

family engagement programs displayed significantly more positive academic self-concept than students

whose parents did not receive this additional support at home.8

Family engagement leads to better social skills and less conduct problems. A review of 13 empirically

tested family-strengthening programs found that robust family engagement interventions can lead to

improved socio-emotional competence in children.9 For example, evaluations from over ten randomized

trials demonstrate that youth whose parents participated in the Families and Schools (FAST) program

were less likely to be referred to special education services, had less anxiety, were less aggressive, had

more social skills, and had more self-confidence than non-participating students. 10

Schools benefit from family engagement. Emerging evidence suggests that family engagement can have

important benefits for the inner-functioning of schools:

Family engagement is associated with higher expectations. Teachers expectations for students are

affected by their beliefs about and interactions with families. A study of at-risk first-graders found that

teachers self-reported relationship quality with parents impacts their perceptions of student ability, and

that teachers report their relationship to be better with white (and, to a lesser extent, Hispanic) parents

than they do with African American parents.11 A study of Latino middle and high-schoolers found that


34/49

parent-reported family engagement efforts were also associated with teacher perceptions of student

aptitude.12

Family engagement can lead to better student-teacher relationships. A national longitudinal studyfound that school-based family involvement from kindergarten through fifth grade was associated with

improved student-teacher relationships among low-income families and their children. When parents

increased their involvement their child's relationships with their teacher improved and when they

decreased their involvement this relationship decreased in quality.13

Family engagement helps improve trust in schools. When researchers studying the characteristics of

high-performing schools in Chicago compared the 30 schools with the least amount of improvement to

the 30 schools with the highest rate of improvement, they found that teachers in high-performing

schools reported higher levels of trust and respect with one another andwith parents.14

Family engagement leads to more cultural competence. Research on decentralized decision-making

shows that teachers report more cultural and community awareness and more school-wide efforts to

involve parents when their schools have governing bodies that include parents who are representative

of the community. In turn, teacher awareness of the culture and community of their students translated

into a 9.6 percentage point increase in reading scores and a 24.1 percentage point increase in math

scores.15


-Create a Parent Coordinator position at every school to ensure that there is someone in each school

who is directly responsible for supporting families. (See example in New York City school system.)

-Provide training for Teachers and Principals to effectively improve Family Engagement

-The new school district should enter into meaningful partnerships with outside organizations such as

non-profits, churches and community associations organizations to reach parents who are otherwise

difficult to engage.

-Provide clear, easy-to-understand and accessible information about schools and enrollment procedures

so that all parents are equipped to make good decisions for their children. Consider a collaboration with

a third-party organization for the dissemination of information and educating parents on options.

(Hopes, Fears & Reality, Chapter 7, Lake and Gross. SeeIndy School ChooserorNew Orleans Parent

Organizing Networkas examples.)

-View parents as partners in the education process and provide them opportunities for meaningfulinput

into what is happening in their schools, such as positions on Site-Based Decision Making Councils that

have legitimate decision-making authority. There should also be a system of checks and balances to see

that the decided-upon structure and process for parent engagement is actually working
http://schools.nyc.gov/Offices/OFEA/SupportforFamilies/ParentCoordinators/default.htmhttp://schools.nyc.gov/Offices/OFEA/SupportforFamilies/ParentCoordinators/default.htmhttp://schools.nyc.gov/Offices/OFEA/SupportforFamilies/ParentCoordinators/default.htmhttp://www.crpe.org/cs/crpe/download/csr_files/pub_crpe_HFR11_Jan12.pdfhttp://www.crpe.org/cs/crpe/download/csr_files/pub_crpe_HFR11_Jan12.pdfhttp://www.crpe.org/cs/crpe/download/csr_files/pub_crpe_HFR11_Jan12.pdfhttp://stand.org/2012-2013-indianapolis-school-chooser-guidehttp://stand.org/2012-2013-indianapolis-school-chooser-guidehttp://stand.org/2012-2013-indianapolis-school-chooser-guidehttp://www.nolapon.org/http://www.nolapon.org/http://www.nolapon.org/http://www.nolapon.org/http://www.nolapon.org/http://www.nolapon.org/http://stand.org/2012-2013-indianapolis-school-chooser-guidehttp://www.crpe.org/cs/crpe/download/csr_files/pub_crpe_HFR11_Jan12.pdfhttp://schools.nyc.gov/Offices/OFEA/SupportforFamilies/ParentCoordinators/default.htm


35/49

Culture and Climate of High Expectations

Every SCS employee, regardless of position, should strive to help make every student ready for collegeand career and should be held accountable for transparently striving toward fulfillment of the

mission.

Throughout the system, from the classroom, throughout the school and all supporting departments,

there is an academic press for achievement, a safe and positive school environment, focus on social and

emotional learning, a climate of high expectations, support for teacher influence and a well defined

structure with clear student goals and strong classroom management.

A safe and positive school environment

Student academic success must begin with a physically and emotionally safe environment in which

students can learn. Experts refer to this as school climate, which The National School Climate Center

(NSCC) describes as the patterns of school life experiences and reflects norms, goals, values,

interpersonal relationships, teaching, learning and leadership practices, and organizational structures.

They conclude that A sustainable, positive school climate fosters youth development and learning

necessary for a productive, contributing and satisfying life in a democratic society. Research has

identified a strong relationship between a negative school climate and the academic and discipline

problems that are all too prevalent in schools serving disadvantaged students. Thus, it is imperative that

schools and districts with a high percentage of disadvantaged students take action to create positive

school climates. While there are different programs implemented by schools to support a safe school

environment, positive behavior systems are a holistic approach to create a positive school climate.

Best practices of positive behavior systems

Several key conditions can help support effective implementation of positive behavior systems. Schools

start with a shared belief that the schools needs to be an environment in which all children thrive.

Therefore the school must focus on creating and encouraging community, respect and care between all

members of the school. Schools that successfully implement behavior systems clearly outline values

and expectations to staff and students alike. Staff buy-in and leadership is also critical for success, and

can be facilitated by engaging staff in identifying the key messages and outcomes the school will work

towards by implementing the positive behavior system. Staff must also have training to implement the

system and create a consistent message throughout the school. Once students and staff understand

and internalize the messages, values, and goals of the school and the positive behavior system, specific

strategies can then be implemented to handle issues among students.

Positive behavior systems often involve students in active roles, including practicing conflict resolution

and acting as pe

Documents

TPCedservicesrecommendations