Transformation in the Era of Reform Full Report Feb 2016c.ymcdn.com/sites/ · A CASE STUDY of the HIGH SCHOOL REDESIGN INITIATIVE ... , Dr. Allene Magill ... Agnieszka D. Zak-Moskal,

Transformation in the Era of Reform: A Case Study of PAGE’s High School Redesign Initiative

FULL REPORT

Mark J. Garrison, Ph.D. Agnieszka D. Zak-Moskal, Ed.D.

Copyright © Professional Association of Georgia Educators P.O. Box 942270 Atlanta, GA 31141-2270 www.pageinc.org

770-216-8555 (Metro Atlanta) 800-334-6861 (Outside Atlanta)

A CASE STUDY of the HIGH SCHOOL REDESIGN INITIATIVE | ! 2�

Acknowledgements Wecouldnothavecompletedthisworkwithouttheexceptionalguidance,professionalism,andcollaborativeandkindspiritofDavidReynolds.Thisworkisaresultofhisvisionandcommitmenttoassessmentasanessentialfeatureoflearning.Hiscommitmenttoexaminethe inAluenceofPAGEon theeducational lifeof thosePAGEserves is tobe lauded; it isashininglightinanotherwisedarktunnelcloudedbymisunderstandingsofwhatcountsasevidenceinourquesttounderstandwhatcausesschoolstoimprove.

WealsoextendthankstoPAGE’sExecutiveDirector,Dr.AlleneMagill,forherwillingnessto fund our efforts to produce this report, but even more, we applaud her vision andcommitment toserveGeorgiaeducatorsand itsmostvulnerablestudentsand families. Itwasinfactourmorethantwo-hourinterviewwithDr.Magillthatinspiredthetitleofthisreport, a title emerging from her witty remarks regarding “reform” and her uncommonclarityregardingtransformationasabasisfortherenewalofpubliceducationinthe21stcentury. We also wish to extend our deep appreciation to HSRI staff, namely RickyClemmons,Dr.JudyHenry,Dr.BillMcCown,andMartaWalker,aswellasformerShawHighSchoolprincipalDr.JimArnold,fortakingtheirtimetosharetheirexperiencesandinsightswithus.

WeareofcoursemostgratefulandappreciativeofthestaffandleadershipofShawHighSchool and Sonoraville High School, who warmly welcomed us into their buildings andproved tobeboth gracioushosts andprofessional inspirations.We cannot thankenoughthe administrative teams, teachers, parents and students for sharing their time andthoughtswithus,makingourworkeasierandmostengaging.Wedowish to speciAicallythankprincipalsBrucePotts andMichaelBarden, alongwithAmyStewart,MarkWaters,AllenBowenandAngieJacobson.

MarkJ.Garrison,Ph.D.AgnieszkaD.Zak-Moskal,Ed.D.NewEdu,LLC

April2015

� http://neweduconsulting.com


Table of Contents

Acknowledgements 2 ..............................................................................................

Executive Summary 4 .............................................................................................Overview of the Study’s Design 4 ....................................................................................

Findings 5 ..............................................................................................................................

School Transformation: The HSRI Effect 6 ...................................................................

Conclusion 7 .........................................................................................................................

Introduction 8 ...........................................................................................................

Why a Case Study? 10 .............................................................................................Method and Design 11 .........................................................................................................

Selecting the Units of Analysis 11 .....................................................................................

Research Questions and Propositions 14 ......................................................................

Data Sources 16 ....................................................................................................................

Data Collection 16 ................................................................................................................

Analysis of Data 17 ...............................................................................................................

Findings 19 ..................................................................................................................Research Question 1 19 .......................................................................................................

Research Question 2 24 .....................................................................................................

Research Question 3 28 .....................................................................................................

Research Question 4 31 ......................................................................................................

School Transformation: The HSRI Effect 34 .................................................

Discussion and Recommendations 36 .............................................................

Appendix A 39 ............................................................................................................

Appendix B 60 ............................................................................................................

Appendix C 73............................................................................................................


Executive Summary Thisreportpresentstheresultsofaten-monthlongcasestudyoftwoGeorgiahighschoolsthatparticipatedintheHighSchoolRedesignInitiative(HSRI),atransformationaleffortofthe Professional Association of Georgia Educators (PAGE) that grew out of its work topromotethedevelopmentofteacherleadershipandschoolsaslearningorganizations.Theresults of this study conAirm positive change at both high schools and demonstrate thatsubstantialportionsof thischangecanbe linkeddirectly toeachschool’sadoptionof theHSRIframework.

Overview of the Study’s Design InordertoinvestigatetheeffectofHSRIonschools,weconductedacasestudyofHSRI,

whichincludedtwohighschoolswhojoinedtheinitiativewhenitwasAirstlaunched.Casestudymethod is thepreferredresearchstrategywhenstudyinghowandwhychangehasoccurredincomplexorganizations.ThesetwoschoolswererecommendedforinclusioninthestudybyPAGEstaffbecausetheywerethoughttoexemplifythebeneAitsofHSRI.Thetwoschoolsalsohadsimilarlyrobust levelsofparticipationinHSRIprofessional learningopportunities, but existed in notably different policy contexts, especially in terms of therelative emphasis on standardized tests. This combination of very similar levels ofparticipation with different policy contexts allowed us to more clearly differentiate theeffects of HSRI from the effects of factors such as poverty level or how a school’s hostdistrictresponds tostateand federalmandates.Thisanalysis, in turn,helpsestablish thedegreetowhichaschoolorschooldistrictmightexpectitsadoptionofHSRItoyieldsimilaroutcomes.

Thestudyfocusedonchangesinschoolculture(e.g.,whatteachersandadministratorsbelieveandvalue)andschoolstructure(e.g.,howtheschoolstructurestherolesofteachersand administrators), andwas organized around four research questions. The Airst set ofquestionsfocusedondocumentingculturalandstructuralchangeateachschool,whilethesecond set of questions focused on documenting the cause of cultural and structuralchange. To answer these questions, we conducted a total of seven interviews, 11 focusgroups and reviewed more than 400 documents. Focus groups and interviews weredesignedtoelicitparticipants'experienceofculturalandstructuralchangeateachschool,andincludededucatorsnewtoeachschoolandthosewhohadbeenattheschoolsincethebeginningoftheschool’sinvolvementwithHSRI.WeinterviewedfourPAGEstaffmembersfamiliarwithHSRI,andPAGE’sexecutivedirector,Dr.AlleneMagill.Allinterviewsandfocusgroups were audio recorded. Interviews, focus groups and documents were analyzed todetermine the degree to which they provided evidence in support of or counter to 33propositions — statements representing the outcomes predicted by HSRI. Propositions


wereorganizedintoculturalorstructuralthemes;12propositionspredictedthatpositivecultural and structural changewas caused by the school’s participation in HSRI. Resultsweresummarized in tablesandgraphical form.Wecomparedtheresults foreachschool,nottoevaluatewhichschoolis“better,” butrathertodiscerntheeffectofHSRIrelativetothatofitspolicycontext.

Findings To succinctly convey results, schools are distinguished by keywords that best

represented the way each school adapted HSRI to their context. Thus, we have dubbedthemSuccessSchoolandEngagementSchool.

Question1focusedonculturalcharacteristicsoftheschoolandhowtheyhavechangedsince joining HSRI. It included three sub-themes: “beliefs and values,” “meaning andcommitments” and “lore and tradition.” These sub-themes included communication,collaboration, school purpose, and views about students and teachers. The most robustchangeatbothschoolsdocumentedbythestudyoccurredinthe“beliefsandvalues” sub-theme.We found clear and extensive evidence at both schools indicating that consistentcommunication about the school’s purpose exists, that teachers and administrators arecollaborative and focused on student engagement and/or success, and that students andparents are respected and viewed as key agents in successful education. Slightly morerobust and consistent evidence of this change was evident at Engagement School incomparisontoSuccessSchool,avarianceattributedtodifferencesinpolicycontext.Policycontextalsoaffectedconceptionsofengagementateachschool.SuccessSchool tendedtofoster engagement using extrinsic motivators such as grades, while Engagement Schooltendedtofosterengagementusingintrinsicmotivators,suchastheinherentvaluestudentsfoundintheworkbeingassigned.

Question2focusedonstructuralchangesincejoiningHSRI,andexaminedtheworkofteachers, students, administrators andparents. Three sub-themes comprisedQuestion2:“roles,”“rulesandnorms” and“relationships.” ThesecondmostrobustAindingdocumentedby the case study was in the “relationships” theme. Key to the HSRI framework is theimportance of relationships. Strong relationships with students and their communityenabled teachers at each school to designmeaningful lessons for students that engagedthem, fostering learning and commitment to schoolwork. A clear focus on relationship-building developed at both schools, evidenced by how both schools see students andfamiliesastheircustomers,witheducatorsseeingthemselvesasresponsiblefordesigninglearningexperiences thatmeeteachcustomer’sneeds.This Aindingwasequallystrongatboth schools.Trustwasanalyzedasespecially importantatboth schools forestablishingthe strong relationships between teachers and students, among teachers, and betweenteachersandadministrators.Thus,HSRI’semphasisonteachersas leadersandprincipals


as leadersof leadersbothrequiresandgivesrise to trustingrelationshipsthatcreatetheconditionsfortransformationandeffectiveadaptation.TheseresultssuggestthattrustingrelationshipsarekeyforsolvingsomeoftheproblemsidentiAiedbyadvocatesoftest-basedaccountability,suchasfosteringteachingexcellenceanddeeplearning.

Question 3 examined causes of identiAied cultural change at each school; sub-themesmirroredthoseusedtoorganizeQuestion1.AswasthecasewiththeresultsreportedforQuestion1,HSRIhad the largest effect on “beliefs andvalues” of each school.AndwhileSuccessSchoolhadslightlylessrobustevidenceinsupportofpropositionsforthistheme,wefoundverysimilarlevelsofevidenceatbothschoolsthattheirrelationshipwithPAGEthroughHSRI caused a substantial portionof the changesdocumentedby the results forQuestion1.

Question4examinedcausesofidentiAiedstructuralchangeateachschool;sub-themesmirroredthoseusedtoorganizeQuestion2. ThemostsigniAicantresultswerefoundwithrespect to the sub theme of “roles” for both schools. Both schools had similar levels ofsupportforpropositionsinthe“roles” theme,withEngagementSchoolhavingslightlymoremanifest evidence than Success School; virtually no evidence contrary to this theme’spropositionswasfound.Again,thefocuswasondeterminingthedegreetowhichstructuralfactors— suchastheformationofteamsofteacherleaderstodesignengaginglessons— couldbe tracedback toHSRI.Whilemoreevidence thatparentsandstudentsnoticeandappreciate the focus on student engagement was found at Engagement School, SuccessSchoolproduced slightlymore evidence that the emergenceof teacher leadersorDesignTeamscanbetracedtoPAGE.

School Transformation: The HSRI Effect ThereisnodoubtthatHSRIbroughtaboutqualitativechangeatbothhighschools.But

what is more important is the relative importance of policy context in determining theextentandnatureoftransformation,andtheabilityofHSRI’sframeworktohaveanaffectindifAicultcontexts.

This study revealed that the difference in the amount of evidence demonstratingculturalandstructuralchangeateachschoolisgreaterthanthedifferenceintheamountofevidencedemonstratingthatHSRIcausedthesedocumentedchangesateachschool.ThisissigniAicant for at least two reasons. First, it suggests that the different effect sizes are aresult of the different policy contexts in which each school operated. As each schoolparticipatedinverysimilarwaysinasingleinitiative(HSRI),wedetermineddifferencesinoutcomesweremost likely related to difference between school contexts, and not someother school-level factor, such as student demographics or teacher characteristics. AndwhiletherewaslessevidenceofchangeatSuccessSchoolcomparedtoevidenceofchangeatEngagementSchool, a greaterportionofdocumentedchangeat SuccessSchool canbe


attributedtoHSRIthanisthecasewithEngagementSchool.Thisdifferenceindicatesthatwhileitmaytake“moreHSRI” toachievesimilarresultsinlesshospitablepolicycontexts,transformationcanoccuracrossanarrayofcontexts.

OtherAindingsarenoteworthy.WhiletheevidencethatdocumentedchangewasacauseofHSRItendstobemoreevenlydistributedbetweentheculturalandstructuraldomains,evidence of change at both schools isweighted to the cultural domain. Therewasmorechange in termsof the “beliefsandvalues” than therewaschange in termsof “roles” forbothschools.ThissuggeststhatbeliefsandvaluesmaybeeasiertochangethanstructuralfeaturessuchastherolesofteachersandthatpolicycontextsmayhaveagreaterinAluenceonstructuralelementssuchasrolesthantheydoonbeliefsystems.

Asingleword—trust—maysignifywhyHSRIhadthepositiveeffectsthatitdid.WebelievethatoneofthekeybeneAitsofHSRIforschoolsisthedevelopmentoftrustasakeyfeaturethatenablestheschooltoworkontransformation inachallengingpolicycontext,guardingagainstthedamagetoschoolcultureandstructurethatcanresultfrompunitiveandsimple-mindedpolicies.Inthissense,trustisnotaboutbeing“touchy-feely”butrathera distinctive feature of the organization. Trust, we observed, was required for collectiveproblemsolvingand fostering the initiativeandaccountabilityof individuals andgroups,includingstudents,andthusthedevelopmentofatruelearningorganization.Ourresearchsuggeststhattrustatbothschoolsformedthekernelofpositiveorganizationalfunctioningintheformofrelationshipswithstudentsandtheirfamilies,amongteachersandbetweenteachers and administrators. Trust is central to relationships. We observed the secondlargestchangeintherelationshipscategory;thesechangeswerefosteredandreinforcedbychangesinbeliefsandvaluesregardingengagementandschoolpurpose.Thus,weconcludethat these trusting relationships are anecessary condition for teachers to collaborativelydesignmeaningfulandengagingworkforstudents,andforstudentstobewillingandabletodemonstratewhat theyhavebeenexpected to learn inways that arebothmeaningfulandmotivatingtothem,thatinturncausethemtobetrulypreparedfortheirmanyadultroles.

Conclusion WeofferthisreportasinitialbutsubstantialandveriAiableevidencethatHSRIcanlead

to school transformation that ultimately leads to students being ready to assume theirmyriad responsibilities in the 21st century. Our Aindings provide support for expandingHSRI in some form, and suggest the effect of the frameworkmay be greater if adopteddistrict wide, from the beginning. The HSRI framework should be given seriousconsideration by educators and policy makers as an alternative to faltering efforts toimprove public education in Georgia and across the United States through test-basedaccountabilityregimes.


Introduction Whetheroneisaneducator,schoolboardmember,parentorcommunityleader,questionsregarding the future of public education cannot be ignored. We collectively face thedilemmasofdecidingthedirectionofpubliceducationandthemethodsbywhichwewilldetermineifweareindeedheadedontherightpath.Thesetwokeydilemmasaredeeplyconnected:themeanswechoosefordeterminingifweare“makingadifference”cannotbeseparatedfromthe“differences”weseektomake.Eachstandardwesetpresumesagoal,and each goal demands a standard Ait to its ends. If we continue on the path of school“reform”— tired, decades oldmodels and silver-bullet programs—we risk choosing avision of education rooted in the past. In thewords of a 2008brochure advertising the1

HighSchoolRedesignInitiative(HSRI):

[S]chools have tried and discarded program after program as they have diligently sought toaddress the dropout problem, student achievement, and apathy toward learning. This [highschoolredesign]initiativeisdesignedtohelpschoolsusetheirownschoolandcommunitydatatodeterminewhatchangesneedtotakeplaceanddeterminethecorebusinessoftheirschools.Using this as a foundation, the capacity of the facultymust be developed to create engagingworkforstudents.

HSRIemergedoutofavisionofteachersasleadersanddesignersofengagingworkforstudents, and it has been continuously elaborated by PAGE as a framework fororganizational transformation since it was introduced in 2006. As a Aive-year initiative,HSRI is conceptualized as having phases, but this does notmean PAGE staff conceive ofHSRIinarigid,lock-stepmanner.

Asthequotedpamphlettextsuggests,PAGEemphasizesthatHSRIisnotaprogrambutinstead a framework. PAGE’s Executive Director, Dr. AlleneMagill, told us she repeatedlyemphasized this point during the course of this work. As this difference is key tounderstandingHSRI,abriefoutlineofthetwoapproachesiswarranted.Whileaprogramisprescriptive and compliance based, a framework is conceptual and requires activeengagement of participants; whereas programs insist on standardization and deny thesigniAicantroleofcontext,frameworkscallforcustomizationandapplicationofconceptsonthe basis of a deep understanding of those concepts and the practice setting; andwhile

Thehistoryofpubliceducationis,insomeways,ahistoryofreformandbyalmostallaccounts,effortspast1

and present have failed to provide high quality education for all students.While it is not our purpose toreview this voluminous literature,we dowish tomention the following: David B. Tyack and Larry Cuban,Tinkering Toward Utopia: A Century of Public School Reform (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press,1995); DianeRavitch,Reign of Error: TheHoax of the PrivatizationMovement and theDanger to America’sPublicSchools,(NewYork :AlfredA.Knopf,2013).

A CASE STUDY of the HIGH SCHOOL REDESIGN INITIATIVE | ! 9

�

programs focus on individual staff training, frameworks identify the development andtransformationoforganizationsaskey. 2

BasedonourworksinceApril2014toexaminewhataffect theHighSchoolRedesignInitiative (HSRI) has had on two Georgia high schools, we report here solid evidencedemonstrating that there is a viable alternative to our inherited ways of teaching andlearning.Thatalternativeisrenewingpubliceducationonthebasisoftransformingschoolsintolearningorganizations.Butbyadvancingatransformationalvisionandframeworkanda set of professional learning experiences and school supports designed to realize thatvision,PAGEfacedanewchallenge.InthewordsofPAGE’sdirectorofTheImpactProject,DavidReynolds,“howwillwebefoundguiltyofmakingadifference?”DavidReynoldsandPAGE staff understand that the typical means for demonstrating success — that is,standardizedtestscores—arerootedinoldwaysofthinkingaboutteachingandlearning(largelybehavioristinnature)andthereforeunabletoassessthekindofchangeHSRIseeksto bring about. Because standardized tests of academic achievement systematicallyconfound effects of schoolswith those of the school’s context, these tools are unable to3

provideaccuratefeedbacktoPAGEabouttheaffectHSRIishavingonparticipatingschools.ThisisevenmoreofproblemgiventhedrasticchangesincurriculumandfederalandstatepolicythathaveoccurredsinceHSRI’sinception. 4

Whatthusbecameincreasinglyapparentoverthelastyearisthatonekeyrequirementofschooltransformationisthesimultaneoustransformationofthepubliclyacceptedmeansforevaluatingeducationalorganizationsandanyinitiativestheseorganizationstakeuptobetterservethestudentswhoareentrustedtothem.Iftestscoresdon’ttellusallweneedtoknowaboutschooltransformation,thenwhatwill?Thus,becauseHSRIiscomprisedofprofessional learningexperiencesdesigned to lead to transformation,newmethodsmustbe developed and used to determine if schools are truly engaged in work that leads totransformation.

While the two schools examined here ofAicially began their redesign journey in 2008, the public2

announcement, justiAication and recruitment period for HSRI dates back to 2006 (see Doc.PAGE.02). SeeDoc.PAGE.03forthe2008HSRIbrochure.Alsoseetwopublicationsonteachersas leaders,authoredbyDr.Allene Magill, Executive Director, PAGE (Doc.PAGE.01a and 01b) (see Appendix A, Table 5 for documentcitationcodes;thedocumentdatabasewasprovidedtoDavidReynoldsoncompletionofthisstudy).Atabledescribingthedifferencebetweenaprogramandframework,andanoutlineofInitiative’s“phases,”canbothbefoundininAppendixC,entitled“HSRIAt-A-Glance.”

DavidC.Berliner,“EffectsofInequalityandPovertyvs.TeachersandSchoolingonAmerica’sYouth,”Teachers3

CollegeRecord,116(2014).

This tendency is especially apparentwhen signiAicant social consequences are attached to the results of4

standardizedtests;seeSharonL.NicholsandDavidC.Berliner,CollateralDamage:HowHigh-StakesTestingCorruptsAmerica’sSchools(Cambridge,Mass.:HarvardEducationPress,2007).


�

Why a Case Study? Ithaslongbeenestablishedthatpublicschoolsareunique,situatedamidstadizzyingarrayof sometimes-competing interests and demands from nearly every political, social,economic and cultural constituency. Schools, it has been established, cannot be trulyunderstoodwithoutunderstandingthecommunitiesinwhichtheyreside,andthestudentsand families they are charged to serve. Public schools have been shown to be especiallysubjecttotheinAluenceofnon-educators,whichcontributestoalong-standingtendencytoinappropriatelyadoptpracticesusedbycommercialenterprisesorotherinstitutions,suchaswarehouses,hospitalsorprisons. ThisunAittingmimicryhasstalledthedevelopmentof5

advancedmethodsuniquelytailoredtomeetingthesocialresponsibilitiesassociatedwithpubliceducation.IthasalsocontributedtoaninabilitytoseewhenmethodsandpracticesfromotherAieldscanhelpimproveschools. 6

Thesefactssuggestthatanyefforttoexaminetheeffectsofaschool,schoolsystemortransformationalinitiativesuchasHSRI,mustbeableto(1)methodologicallycontendwithalackofclearboundariesbetweentheschoolorinitiativeanditscontext(s),(2)objectivelyanalyze social phenomena as they occur in practice (i.e., not in a laboratory or artiAicialsetting), and (3) be able to systematically collect, organize, verify and analyze multiplesources of quantitative andqualitative data over time. Such amethodmust also have anarrayof designs suited todetermining if andhowchangehasoccurred, and towhat anydocumentedchangescanbeattributed.Casestudymethodanddesignequipsresearcherstohandlethesechallenges. 7

SeePhillipC. Schlechty,Leading forLearning:How toTransformSchools intoLearningOrganizations (San5

Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass, 2009) aswell as his Shaking up the Schoolhouse: How to Support and SustainEducational Innovation (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2001). For study and discussion of the increasingemphasis on compliance resulting from public school privatization, see Kenneth J. Saltman and DavidGabbard,EducationasEnforcement:TheMilitarizationandCorporatizationofSchools (NewYork:RoutledgeFalmer,2003).

For a useful discussion of the difference between public education and for-proAit enterprises, See Larry6

Cuban, The Blackboard and the Bottom Line: Why Schools Can’t Be Businesses (Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity Press, 2004); for a classic study of the misapplication of efAiciency schemes to education, seeRaymondE.Callahan,Educationand theCultofEfNiciency:AStudyof theSocialForces thathaveShaped theAdministration of Public Schools (Chicago: TheUniversity of Chicago Press, 1962); for an understanding ofwhatschoolscanlearnfrombusinessandacustomer-centeredapproachtoeducation,seePhillipC.Schlechty,Shaking up the Schoolhouse: How to Support and Sustain Educational Innovation, 1st ed, The Jossey-BassEducationSeries(SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass,2001).

Casestudymethodanddesignisoftenconfusedwith(1)thecasestudymethodofinstruction,commonin7

medicalandbusinessschools,and(2)misrepresentedasnecessarilyqualitativeinnature.Casestudymethodallowsforthecollectionofbothquantitativeandqualitativedata,employingbothqualitativeandquantitativedataanalysestechniques,interpretiveorstatistical.Thedistinguishingfeatureofacasestudyisthatitfocuseson a “how” or “why” question, and seeks to understand or test theories in contexts that have thecharacteristics described above. See Robert K. Yin, Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 4th ed.(ThousandOaks,Calif.:SagePublications,2009).


�

Method and Design Theaimofthisresearchprojectwastostudy,retrospectively,theaffectofHSRIontwo

participating high schools. Key to the case studymethod is to clearly establishwhat theactualcasebeingstudiedis—inthisinstance,thecaseisinfacttheHSRIisarelationshipwithschools.Inotherwords,theaimofthestudyistoexaminetheinAluenceofHSRI,whichcanbeunderstoodasapartnershipbetweeneachparticipatingschoolandPAGE. Itmust8

be emphasized that the aim here is not to evaluate the participating schools, but to seewhat,ifany,affectHSRIhadonthem,andtoidentifyinparticularwhatwasresponsibleforidentiAiedchanges.Thus,wechoseasingle-casedesign(astudyofHSRIasthecase)withtwoinstancesofthisrelationship,ortwo“embeddedunitsofanalysis.”Eachhighschoolinthestudyisthusanembeddedunitofanalysisinasinglecasestudy.

Selecting the Units of Analysis While there aremore than 45 schools that are or have participated inHSRI since its

inception, Sonoraville and Shaw high schools were identiAied by PAGE staff as good9

examples of ongoing school transformation resulting from each school’s participation inHSRI.SonoravilleandShawweretwooffourinitialschoolstojoinHSRI,accordingtobothinterviews with PAGE staff and a review of internal PAGE documents. Both schools10

participated inHSRI for the full Aive years originally envisioned by the initiative. In fact,both schools currently beneAit from “continuation funds” established byHSRI staffwhenthese schools neared their Aifth year. Each school sent between 45-47 different staffmembers toprofessional learningeventsrelatedtoHSRIbetween2008and2012,withatotalof70 registrants fromeach schoolover thisperiod,when individualswhoattendedmorethanoneeventareincluded.Eachschoolemployedabout90certiAiedstaffmembersduring this period, indicating a 50% participation rate in off-site professional learning(PAGEstaffsuggestamuchhigherlevelofonsiteparticipation,astheseattendeesworkedtocollaboratewithstaffat theschool followingtheiroff-siteprofessional learning).PAGEprovided an estimated $92,500 per high school over the Aive-year period, not includingcontinuationfunds. Thus,ShawHighSchoolandSonoravilleHighSchooleachrepresenta11

completeandverysimilar instanceofpartneringwithPAGEontheredesign journey,and

See Doc.PAGE.04 for a recent example of how PAGE presents the HSRI partnership to prospective and8

participatingschools.Thisdocumentrepresentssubstantialchangefromtheoriginalapplicationprocess.SeeDoc.PAGE.05

SeeDoc.PAGE.08.9

SeeDoc.PAGE.04andDoc.PAGE.05.10

Continuation fundswere relatively small sumsmadeavailable toparticipating schools following the last11

ofAicial year of HSRI. The idea of continuation funds is recognition by PAGE staff that redesign efforts areongoing,andbeneAitfromcontinuedsupport.


�

thereforeeachwarrants inclusion inthestudyasakeyandcomparable instanceofHSRI.Each school evidences consistent staffparticipation inHSRI-relatedprofessional learningactivities, regular communication with HSRI staff, and identiAies HSRI-related initiativesandideasinitsschoolimprovementplansovertheAive-yearperiod. 12

Figure1depicts thedesignof thestudy.ThegraphicemphasizesthatPAGE,HSRIandparticipating schools are situated in a dynamic policy context that inAluences schools inmanyways.PolicycontextrefersnotonlytothenumerousandspeciAicdemandsemanatingfromfederal(e.g.,theNoChildLeftBehindActandtheRacetotheTopinitiative)andstategovernments(e.g.,newteacherevaluationpolicies,newcurriculummandates),butalsotoAiscal and economic contexts, such as decreases in state funds for public education andincreases in thenumberof school-age children living inpoverty. The case studydesign13

adopted here enables us to differentiate the affect of HSRI from the affect of the policy

VerysimilarlevelsofstaffparticipationinHSRIrelatedprofessionallearningareevidentinDoc.PAGE.06;12

alsoseeDoc.PAGE.07.ArchivesofemailcommunicationbetweenHSRIstaffandeachhighschoolcanbefundin the following twodocument collections:Doc.Shaw.01andDoc.Sonoraville.01. School improvementplansarefoundinthesecollections:Doc.Shaw.03andDoc.Sonoraville.02.

According to analyses of U.S. Bureau of Statistics data by kidscount.org, Georgia has the fourth highest13

povertyrateamongall50states.GordonCounty(Sonoraville)hadanincreaseinthechildpovertyratefrom18.5% in2008 to26.0% in2012.MuscogeeCounty (Shaw)hadan increase in the childpoverty rate from26.2%in2008to28.1%in2012.

SINGLE-CASEDESIGNWITHTWOEMBEDDEDUNITSOFANALYSIS

FIGURE1.GraphicalrepresentaAonofthedesignoftheHighSchoolRedesignIniAaAvecasestudy.AdaptedfromRobertK.Yin,CaseStudyResearch:DesignandMethods,4thed.(ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublicaAons,2009,p.46).

PAGE’SHIGHSCHOOLREDESIGNINITIATIVE

SONORAVILLEHighSchool

SHAW HighSchool

POLICYCONTEXT

http://kidscount.org


�

context by comparing how two different schools in two different school systems servingtwodifferentcommunitiesrespondedtothesameinitiative. Itshouldbepointedoutthatthese schools primarily worked with the same PAGE representatives over the Aive-yearperiod,experiencingequalAinancialsupportandprofessionallearningopportunities.Whilewe will discuss this point in more detail below, the design allows us to isolatecommonalities across and differences between each school and to discern how thesesimilarities and differences reAlect unique features of each school, the inAluence of HSRI,andthepolicycontext.

While we maintain that each school was similarly exposed to and participated at asimilarlevelinHSRIprofessionallearningandsupports,importantdifferencesbetweentheschools are evident. We present here basic demographic information about each schoolalong with important differences in each school’s policy context. The racial/ethnic14

composition of Shaw High School was considerably different from that of Sonoravillebetween the 2007-2008 and 2011-2012 Aiscal years (the Aive years spanning HSRI). Forexample,morethan50%ofShaw’sstudentswereclassiAiedasBlackoverthistimeperiod,while Sonoravillehadanaverageofonly1%of its students classiAiedasBlack.Over thistime period, Sonoraville had an average of 91%of its students classiAied asWhitewhileShaw had an average of 34% of its students classiAied asWhite. During this same timeperiod, thenumberofstudentsreceiving freeorreducedpricemeals (a typicalproxy forthelevelofpovertyaffectingthecommunityofstudentstheschoolserves)wassimilarateachschool,witheachschoolshowinganincreaseinthiscategoryofenrolledstudents.AtShaw,thepercentofstudentsreceivingfreeandreducedpricemealsaveraged45%,withalowof37%in2008andahighof51%in2012.Sonoravillehadaslightlyhighernumberofstudents in this category: thepercentof students receiving freeand reducedpricemealsaveraged 49%, with a low of 40% in 2008 and a high of 53% in 2012. Per-pupilexpenditures,however,differedbetweentheschools.Theaverageper-pupilexpenditureforShawwas about $5,500while it was $6,800 for Sonoraville, between the years studied.While funding dipped but then reached 2008 levels for Shaw, Sonoraville had an overalldeclineof$1,200inper-pupilrevenueduringtheAiveyearsstudied.Additionally,whilewedo not have data on the number of students classiAied as homeless at Sonoraville, Shawreported44suchstudentsin2011,anincreasefrom1in2009.WealsosuspectthatShawhasmorestudenttransiencythanSonoraville. 15

Thereare importantdifferencestonotebetweenthepolicycontextsofeachschoolaswell. Muscogee County, Shaw High School’s district, joined President Obama’s signature

Unlessotherwisenoted,informationandterminologyforthissectioncomesdirectlyfromDoc.Sonoraville.14

03andDoc.Shaw.04.

SeeDoc.Shaw.02,p.29.15


�

educationreforminitiativeasaRacetotheTopdistrict.ThisbroughtcontroversialreformstrategiestoinAluenceShawHighSchool,includingaheightenedemphasisonstandardizedtests. ThisfollowsShawHighSchool’srepeateddesignationasaschoolthatdidnotmeet16

“AdequateYearlyProgress”(AYP)undertheNoChildLeftBehindAct(NCLB),provisionsofwhich were subsequently waived when Muscogee County won a Race to the Top grant.Sonoraville’s Gordon County did not choose to participate in this initiative, and it hasalwaysmetAYPrequirementsunderNCLB.

AnotherkeyfeatureaffectingShawthatisfarlessanissueforSonoravilleisthemagnetsystemoperatingforallninehighschoolsinMuscogeeCounty.Thischoicesystemcreatescompetitionbetweencountyhighschoolsforstudents,andaddstothepressureemanatingfrom federal and state policies to focus on test scores. This competitive system and itspolicycontextencouragesparentstousetheresultsofstandardizedtestsasasolemeasureof school quality. While there is some rivalry between the two high schools in GordonCounty,Sonoravillebeingone,thelevelofcompetitivepressurethatShawexperiencesdoesnotexistforSonoraville.Further,theparentswiththestudentswhotendtoscorewellonstandardizedteststendtochooseschoolswithsimilartestscoreproAiles,andasallmagnetprograms are criterion based, a de facto academic tracking and ranking system exists inMuscogee.WebelievethisisasigniAicantdifferenceandwearguethispolicycontextplaysan important role in creating the differences in how HSRI affected each school. 17

Additionally, Shaw High School has had two principals, led by at least three differentsuperintendentssince2008,whileSonoravilleHighSchoolhashadthesameprincipalsincethebeginningofHSRIandenjoyedarelativelystablesuperintendency. 18

Research Questions and Propositions Theoverarchingquestionguidingthisstudywas:howandwhyhaseachhighschool’s

connection to and work with and through PAGE contributed to changing each school’scultureandstructure?Onthebasisofthisquestion,weestablishedfourspeciAicresearchquestionswith eachquestion corresponding to a seriesofpropositions (seeAppendixA,Tables 1-4). These questions can be summarized into two themes, reAlecting the study’sfocusonhowandwhyculturalandstructuralchangeoccurredateachparticipatingschool.Theseare: (1)howhavecultural andstructural elements changedsince thebeginningoftheHigh School Redesign Initiative? (questions 1 and 2) and (2)why did these changes

SeeDoc.Shaw.08.16

TheprincipalofShawHighSchoolhighlightedthispointatseveraltimesduringourinterviewwithhim.17

TheimportanceofadministrativeturnoverwasconAirmedbybothteachersandtheprincipalofShawHigh18

school.Further, interviewswithPAGEstaffanddiscussionwithSonoravilleHighSchool’sprincipal conAirmtherelativestabilityofleadershipofGordonCountyschools.


�

occurastheydid?Inparticular,weaimedtoidentifythedegreetowhichpositive(desired)changecanbeattributedtoHSRI(questions3and4).

FromApriluntilJuly2014,draftresearchquestionsweredevelopedfromexaminingtheexpectations embedded in an original HSRI application and discussion with DavidReynolds,PAGE’sdirectorofTheImpactProject. ThesewerepilotedduringaSonoraville19

HighSchoolsummerretreatinJuly,2014,whichincludedteacherleadersandtheschool’sadministrative team. Along with David Reynolds, we observed the vast majority of thisretreat,andsubsequentlyrevisedourresearchquestionsasaresult.Keyrevisionsincludedagreaterfocusonteacherleaders,thethemesoftrustandcollaboration,andtheadoptionof a more systematic framework for crafting propositions on the basis of cultural orstructuralcharacteristics. 20

Casestudypropositionsdirect theresearcher’sattention towhatshouldbeexaminedwithin the scope of study. In order to concretize cultural and structural change, weestablished33propositions,eachreAlectingeithera cultural theme—beliefsandvalues,meanings and commitments, and lore and tradition — or a structural theme — roles,normsandrelationships.Thesepropositionslinkthe“theoryofaction”ofHSRItoevidencein the form of interviews, focus groups and documents (e.g., discipline rates, schoolimprovement plans, samples of student work). PAGE theorizes that a school will betransformedinspeciAicwaysbyparticipatinginitsprofessionallearningopportunities,andfromitsprofessionalsupportandguidance.Forexample,asaresultofHSRI,PAGEexpectstoseeevidencethat,“Theschool’spurposeisfocusedonengagingstudentsinmeaningfulwork, serving each student’s academic, social and psychological needs” (Question 1,Proposition2). Thus,expectedoutcomes,derived fromthetheoryofactionassumedby21

HSRI,arestatedhereaspropositions.Eachproposition isapredictionofwhatshouldbeevidentintheschoolasittransformsintoalearningorganization.Further,thepropositionsforquestions3and4 (the “why”questions)aredesigned tocapture thedegree towhichHSRIandPAGEcausedanychangedocumented intheevidencegatheredforthe Airst twoquestions (the “how” questions). Finally, we explicitly looked for examples of evidencecontrary to each proposition in all three data sources (interviews, focus groups anddocuments),asameanstoincreasethevalidityofourAindings.

SeeDoc.PAGE.05.19

Whilewedidgatherandarchivedatafromthisretreat,itwasnotourintenttoincludeitinthecasestudy20

databaseforanalysis.

ThesethemesarederivedfromPhilSchlechty’swork.21


�

Data Sources For this case study, we collected three sources of data over ten months: seven

interviews,11focusgroupsandmorethan400documents(seeAppendixBforthelistofrequesteddocumentsandthefocusgroupsandinterviewsscheduledforeachschool).Wecollected all three types of evidence from both Sonoraville High School and Shaw HighSchool. We interviewed four PAGE staff members familiar with HSRI, PAGE’s executivedirector,andweobtainedavarietyofdocuments(25intotal)aboutPAGEandthehistoryof HSRI from PAGE staff. Many of the documents obtained from PAGE (e.g., emailcorrespondence)arewithrespecttoShawHighSchoolorSonoravilleHighSchool,andthusareincludedineachschool’ssectionofthecasestudydatabase(seeAppendixA,Table5foralistingofalldocumentscitedinthisreport).Allinterviewsandfocusgroupsweresemi-structuredinnature(seeAppendixBforinterviewandfocusgroupprotocols).Inallcases,DavidReynoldsservedasaliaisonbetweenus,eachschool,andotherPAGEstaff.

Data Collection While the gathering of documents and other relevant artifacts was ongoing between

April 2014 and February 2015, focus groups and interviewswith school personnel tookplace on October 23, 2014 (ShawHigh School), and October 24, 2014 (Sonoraville HighSchool).Thesevisitswerenotouronlyvisitstoeachschoolhowever.Asisrecommendedpractice, we began our work with PAGE by visiting both schools in April to better22

understand the nature of the relationship between PAGE and each school, to assess theviabilityof including theschool in thestudy, tobuildrapportwithPAGEandschoolstaff,and tobegin toassesswhatpossibilitiesexisted for thestudy’sdesign.While thesevisitsshapedourunderstandingoftheschools,PAGEandHSRI,theinformationtakenandnotesgatheredatthattimewerenotintendedtobeincludedintheAinalcasestudydatabase.Wehave, however, relied on that early visit in the case of Sonoraville High School, sincewewereunabletointerviewtheprincipalduringourOctobervisit.

School-based interviews and focus groups lasted between 30 and 45 minutes. Allparticipantswereinformedaboutthepurposeoftheintervieworfocusgroup,andassuredthatitscontentswouldhavenobearingontheevaluationofschoolpersonnelorstudents,and thatall contentwouldremainconAidential; ifquoted,contentwouldbede-identiAied,except in the case of interviews with a school’s principal. Interviews with PAGE staffaveragedabouttwohoursinlength;eachwasinformedaboutthenatureoftheinterviewandconAidentialitywasassured.Allparticipantsweregiventhechancetorequestthattheynotberecorded.Recordingofbothinterviewsandfocusgroupswasaccomplishedusinganote-takingsoftwareprogramthatenables theresearcher to indicatekeypointsduringa

SeeYin,CaseStudyResearch,2009.22


�

recording,whichcanbequicklyaccessedlater.Duringfocusgroupsorinschoolinterviews,eachofustooknotesandmadeobservations,asdidDavidReynolds,whenhewaspresent.

Wecraftedarequestoutliningwhatdocumentswewishedtoobtainfromeachschool,alongwith a list of types of individuals (teachers, administrators, etc.)wewould like tointerview,orengagewithinfocusgroups,alongwiththecriteriaforselectingparticipantsanddocuments. These requestswere sent to each school’s administrative teambyDavidReynolds,whonegotiateddocumentcollectionanddetailsoftheinterviewandfocusgroupscheduleateachschool.Whilenotallofourrequestsweremet,bothschoolsmadegoodfaitheffortstoaccommodateourneeds. 23

Analysis of Data As we sought to investigate not only how Shaw and Sonoraville high schools have

changed, we sought to demonstrate why they have changed. In particular, we sought todetermine towhatdegree, if any, thepredicteddocumented changeswere causedby theschool’sparticipation inHSRI.Assuch, this isacausalcasestudy,as itseekstoexploreacausal relationshipbetweenan independent variable, schoolparticipation inHSRI, andarangeofdependentvariables(thethreeculturalandthreestructuralthemesthatorganizedthe study’s researchquestions andpropositions).As thepropositionswerederived fromthe theory of action guiding HSRI, they constitute the expected outcomes. Thus, dataanalysiswas guided by the idea of “patternmatching”: the degree towhich theoreticallypredicted outcomesmatch empirical outcomes. In particular, by having two embedded24

units of analysis, each being an instance of the “treatment” of HSRI, this design isexperimental in principle. Unlike a true controlled experiment with a representativesample,however, theresultsof thisstudyarenotgeneralizable toanypopulationofhighschools, but rather constitute a means for analytic generalization (test of a theory’sefAicacy).Aseachschoolreceivednearlythesame“treatment”anydifferencesinoutcomes

SeeAppendixBfortherequestssenttoeachschool.SonoravilleHighSchooldidnotorganizeteacherfocus23

groups on the basis of “design teams” and “rank and Aile” teachers aswe had requested, complicating ourability to clearly differentiate between these two groups of teachers during data analysis. Further, whileSonoraville High School students clearly represented a range of students in terms of academic, social andemotional characteristics,whoobviously receivedno coaching (student comments indicated theywerenotawareof thenatureof the focusgroupprior to thebeginningof each session), ShawHighSchool studentswereinformed“thatthiswaspartofacasestudyofShaw'sinvolvementwiththePAGEHighSchoolRedesignInitiative which includes how to better engage students” and the informing administrator “stressed that[students] had to talk and be honest.” This focus groupwas exceptionally deferential and responsive. OneShawparticipant’smotherwasa teacherat the school, and that student reAlecteda characteristicallyadultmindset when speaking about the school's administration. It also appeared that many participants hadexperienceintheschool’smagnetprogramclasses,acriterionadmissionsprogramrepresentingonlyaboutaquarterofallstudentsatShaw).Werealizethatweshouldhaveprovidedamoreexplicitprotocol foreachschooltousewhileinvitingstudentandstafftoparticipate.

SeeYin,CaseStudyResearch,pp.136-141).24


�

betweenthetwoschoolscanbeexaminedasoriginatinginoneofthefollowing:(1)uniquefeaturesoftheschoolpriortoorduringthecourseofHSRI(includingtheexistenceofotherprograms,changeinadministration,etc.)or(2)differences inthepolicycontext inwhichtheschoolexists.Similarities,whenlogicandevidencepermit,canthusbeattributedtotheaffectofHSRI.

Oneofthekeychallengesofthedataanalysiswastodocumentactualchangeovertime.While several focus group and interview questions probed respondents to evaluate thischange (see Appendix B for the interview and focus group protocols), andwhilewe didcollect evidence in the form of documents across multiple years, the documentation ofevidence in favor of a proposition was easier than demonstrating actual change from aprevious state. Neither school provided us with all requested documents, furthercontributing to this challenge. In the case of Sonoraville High School, we are relativelyconAident about school characteristics emerging with the arrival of HSRI as Sonoravilleopenedin2006,whichwasdescribedbyteacherswhobeganworkingattheschoolwhenitopenedas“cold”and“rigid.”Thefollowingyearitsnew(andstillcurrent)principalBrucePottstoldusduringourintroductorymeetingwithhiminApril2014thathewas“lookingfor something” to bring the school together, and decided to focus on HSRI (he attendedPAGEsponsoredeventsthatmorphedintoHSRIbeginningin2006).AsShawhasbeeninexistence for decades, some school characteristics that alignwith outcomespredictedbyHSRImayhavebeenafeatureoftheschoolpriortoHSRI.Ourmainmeansofsortingthisoutwasthe“designteam”teacherfocusgroupatShaw.Itsparticipantsallbeganteachingattheschoolin2003,andspokeopenlyaboutitscharacteristicsthenandsinceHSRI.

All school-based focus groups and interviews were coded for manifest and latentevidenceinsupportorincontradictiontothestudy’spropositions(seeAppendixA,Tables6-9). Coding took place in three passes, which consisted of the Airst author initiallyextracting key text elements from recordings and assigning initial codes; subsequently,extracted text was jointly recoded by both authors. In cases where codes differed,discussionandfurtherexplorationofthemewaspursuedbygoingbacktothefocusgroupor interview recordingor reviewof relateddocuments, orboth.Datawere thenput intotablesandinitialtrendswereidentiAied.Thesetrendsspurredanadditionalpassatcoding,which led to minor coding changes and subsequent recalculation of table subtotals andtotals. Finally, coding patterns were compared to patterns observed by David Reynolds,fromhisnotesduringthefocusgroupsinwhichhewaspresent.Whilehisinterpretationsgenerally aligned with our Ainal coding efforts, some differences were evident, mainlybecausehedidnotcodeforcounterevidence. 25

Weasked thatDavidReynoldsnotbepresentduring the interviewwith the school’sprincipalordesign25

teams,asthesegroupsweremostlikelytobeinAluencedbyhis(PAGE’s)presence,beingthebeneAiciariesofprofessionallearningopportunitiesprovidedbyPAGE.


�

FollowingtheidentiAicationofmanifestandlatentevidenceinsupportofandcountertothecasestudypropositions,documentswerereviewedforsupportingorcontraryevidenceaswell.Asitwasexpectedthatthenature,scopeandextentofdocumentsvariedgreatlybyschool, documents were not coded, but instead used to support, challenge or bettercomprehendthenatureofidentiAiedtrends.

Finally, data visualizations were created to represent Aindings, based on the themesubtotals presented in Tables 6-9. Thesewill be discussed in the Aindings section below.Quotesfrominterviewsorfocusgroups,alongwithevidenceobtainedfromdocuments,areusedtoprovidenuanceandexamplesofmajorAindingsaswellastopointtodifAicultiesindataanalysisandinterpretation.

Findings Inthissection,wereportthemajorAindingsfromeachresearchquestion,intheordertheyappearinTables1-4(fortheresultssection,itisnowassumedreadersknowthatalltablesreferenced are to be found inAppendixA).Whilewe introduce someof ourpreliminaryanalysisoftheseAindingshere,wesavethemajorityofthediscussionofthesigniAicanceofAindingsforthediscussionsection.Butakeyconclusionthatishelpfultonotehereisthis:there is no question that HSRI had a substantial affect on each school in the desireddirection.WethinkafarmoreinterestingquestiontokeepinmindwhenexploringtheseAindings is what they reveal about how HSRI interacted with key aspects of the policycontext of each school and the relative amount of cultural to structural change thatoccurredandpossiblereasonsfordifferentoutcomesbythemes.Finally,allquotationsthatarereferencedintheAindingsbelowaretakenfromeitherfocusgroupsorinterviewsthatoccurredduringtheOctobervisits,unlessotherwisenoted(seeTables10and11).

Research Question 1 The Airst research question asked: How have the following cultural elements

(concretizedas13propositions)changedsincethebeginningoftheHighSchoolRedesignInitiative at Shaw and Sonoraville high schools? Figure 2 summarizes our Aindings for26

Question1.

Visualizations for questions 1-4were developed on the same scale. Thismeans that relative circle size26

across the fourquestions isameaningfuldepictionof therelativeamountofevidence foreach theme. It isalsoimportanttonotethatvisualizationsarebasedonevidenceobtainedfromfocusgroupsandinterviewsonly.Documentswereused to verifyobservedpatterns.There are important caseswhere focus groupandinterview data did not produce evidence of patterns that nonetheless appeared in documents and wereobservedbyusduringschoolvisits.TheseAindingsareaddressedinthenarrative,butcannotbeusedinthecreationofvisualizations,asneithertheobservationsnorthedocumentswerecomparableinnature.


�

Figure 2 indicates that, by far, most documented cultural change at both schoolsoccurredinthe“beliefsandvalues”category. Thereisclearevidenceatbothschoolsthat27

consistent communication about the school’s purpose exists where teachers andadministrators are focused on student engagement and success and that students andparents are respected and viewed as key agents in successful education. This was aconsistentAindingfromallfocusgroupsandinterviewsatbothschools.Thesetrendsweresupported (orat leastnot contradicted)bymanyof thedocumentsweanalyzed, suchassamplesofstudentwork,coursesyllabi,andschool-createdprofessionallearningactivitiesandprotocols. 28

DuringthefocusgroupsatShaw,teachersindicatedtheheartoftheschoolwasstudentsuccess,whichincludedthe intellectual,socialandpersonaldevelopmentofstudentsandnot just test scores (Shaw’s principal referred to this as “full option graduation”).Whenaskedwhat wewould see if we shadowed teachers at Shaw, teachers indicated that we

Circlesizeforevidenceinsupportofpropositionsisnotcalculatedbysubtractingcontraryevidence.The27

logichereissimilartothatofacourt,wherethejuryispresentedwithandmustweighallevidencebeforemakingadecision.Thismethodofvisualizationallowsthereadertoseesummariesthatincludeevidenceinsupportandcontrarytopropositions,simultaneously.

SeeDoc.Shaw.05-Doc.Shaw.07andDoc.Sonoraville.04-Doc.Sonoraville.06.28

SonoravilleHighSchool

BELIEFS&VALUES

MEANINGS&COMMITMENTS

LORE&TRADITION

ShawHighSchool

FIGURE2.VisualsummaryofevidenceforResearchQuesAon1,byschoolandtheme.Outercirclesizerepresentstheamountofevidenceinsupportofatheme’sproposiAons.DarkershadesrepresentagreaterproporAonofmanifestevidence.WhitecirclesindicateproporAonofevidencecountertoatheme’sproposiAons.


�

wouldseerealworldapplicationsofstudentwork.CounselorsatShawalsoperceivedanengagement focus. Parents indicated the value of hands-on learning for engaging theirchildrenatschool,andappreciatedtheschool’scommitmenttostudentsuccess.Studentsindicatedthatsomethingintereststhemeveryday,althoughthisadmittedlyvariesbytheirinterestintheparticularsubject(seeTable10,Ref.Nos.:1,6-7,9,12,21,24,30).

Focus group evidenced very consistent patterns at Sonoraville. Engagement was a29

clear focusof theschool,andconsistentlycommunicatedbyadministrationand teachers.This focuswasnoticedandappreciatedbyparentsaswell.Teachers repeatedly talkedof“engagement”and“inquirybased”methods,“realworld”connections,workingtomeettheneedsof“diverselearners”andtheneedtobuildstrongrelationshipswithstudentsandthecommunity.Duringonefocusgroup,teachersspontaneouslychanted,withconviction,theschool’s mission: “We are a learning community actively pursuing a higher standard ofexcellence.”Theengagementfocusoftheschoolwasclearlyunderstoodasameanstohelpstudentsdevelopintellectually,sociallyandpersonally,andconsistentlycommunicatedbyteachersandadministrators(seeTable11,Ref.No.:10).

While the amount of evidence in each category is similar, it is also clear that theevidence for Sonoravillewas stronger for two of the three themes, andmore consistent,wherealmostnoevidencecontrarytothepropositionswasfound.Agreaterproportionofthe evidence from Sonoraville was also classiAied as manifest in nature. As “lore andtradition” are considered to be secondary effects of cultural change, it is not unexpectedthattheleastamountofevidenceappearsinthiscategory.WhileweAindthatbothschoolsdevelopedimportant“loreandtraditions”thatcanbetracedback,atleastinpart,toHSRI,thatAindingisnotdiscussedhere.WenowfocusourattentiononanalyzingnuancesoftheAindingsforthetwodominantthemes.

Beliefs and Values While compelling evidence at both schools exists showing that teachers and

administratorsarefocusedonstudentengagement—akeygoalofHSRI—theparticularmeaninggiventoengagementandthepracticesusedtofosteritdiddifferbetweenthetwoschools. These differences correspond, we argue, to the slightly less robust evidence insupport of propositions for the “beliefs and values” theme for Shaw High School. It isimportant to emphasize again that we focus on these differences, not to declare whichschoolwe think isbetter,but tomorecarefullyunderstandhowschoolcontextandHSRIinteracted,adiscussionwegiveemphasistothroughouttherestofthisreport.

WhilewewereunabletointerviewtheprincipalofSonoravilleduringourOctobervisit,ourmeetingsand29

andobservationsofhimduringourAprilandJulyvisitspresentedclearevidenceforpropositionsrelatedtoallthreethemesforQuestion1.


�

The subtotals resulting from the addition of all instances of manifest and latentevidenceforthe“beliefsandvalues”themewereinasimilarrangeforbothschools(Shaw,n=88;Sonoraville,n=111,seeTables6,7).Approximately16%offocusgroupandinterviewevidencewasclassiAiedascontrarytothepropositionsinthe“beliefsandvalues”themeforShaw High School, where no contrary evidence was found at Sonoraville High School.ExamplesofevidencecontrarytoQuestion1propositionsarefoundinTable10(Ref.Nos.:6-7,10).

Tohelpclarifyhoweachschoolunderstandstheconceptofstudentengagement,howitintendedtofosterengagement,andmoregenerally,howtheschoolframeditspurpose,wehavedubbedShawthe“success”schoolandSonoravillethe“engagement”school.

WefoundShawtobekeenlyfocusedonensuringstudentsweresuccessful.Whenaskedabout the focus of the school, student successwas themost frequently given answer byparticipants (see Table 10). By success, the school’s principal, teachers and studentsenlistedcommon indicators includinggraduation fromhigh school, increased test scores,academicdecathlontrophies,collegeadmissionandwell-payingjobs.UnlikeatSonoraville,parentsatShawexpressedviewssuggesting that theremaybeanunhealthypressureonstudents to perform, to get into the best college, to choose careers too early in life (seeTable 10, Ref. No.: 25). During the student focus group, for example, one participantindicatedhisgoalwasto“getintoagoodcollege,likeHarvard”.ItwasclearthatShawasawholehadhitchedstudentengagement to thedistrict’snotionof “full-optiongraduation”andtheprincipal’svisionofraisingtheprestigeoftheschoolintheeyesofthecommunity.Whilesuccesswasbroadlyunderstoodattheschool,therewassometensionarisingfromanincreasedfocusontestscores,withforexample,theintroductionof“datateams”duringteacher planning time. Teacherswere very conscious of and spoke to this pressure, andtheir comments suggested they understood that this pressure originated in the largerpolicycontext(seeTable10,Ref.Nos.:3-4,10-11).

Thisnotionof successwas,webelieve, connected toanotionofengagement fosteredmore by extrinsicmotivators like food and other rewards than intrinsic interest and thepersonal satisfactionderived from learning.WhileHSRIpromotes theview that studentsshould be provided challenging work, Shaw’s principal and some teachers emphasizedengagement as ameans to encourage students to takeup the challengeof doingwell ontasks thatmaynot be inherently interesting, suchasworksheets (seeTable10,Ref.No.:28).Andwhilestudentsgavenumerousexamplesofteacherassignedworkthattheyfound


�

interestingassuch,wealsodocumentedpatternsthatsuggestedritualengagement. This30

formofengagementmightalsoreAlecttheinAluenceofamilitaryculturefamiliartomanystudents. Forexample,duringthestudentfocusgroup,onestudentrosefromhisseatand31

stoodat attentionbeforeanswering the Airstquestion.Weshouldacknowledge,however,thatsometensionoverthemeaningofengagementwasevidentininterviewswithboththepastandpresentprincipal,teacherfocusgroups,aswellasPAGEstaff familiarwithShaw(seeTable10,Ref.No.:16).Someteacherleadersexpressedayearningforthedayswhenengaging lessonsweremoreaboutdrawingoutastudent’snative interest,butagain, it isalso important to note how these teachers linked this change directly to the school’scurrentpolicycontext(seeTable10,Ref.No.:10).

We thus believe that Shaw’s strategic focus on community reputation and successoriented engagement has its origin in the context in which Shaw exists, and that theschool’s participation in HSRI equipped it to effectively contend with an increasinglychallenging situation in terms of funding, central ofAice turnover, competitionwith otherhighschools,andespecially thedistrict’scommitmentsunderRacetotheTop.Shawthusappliedengagementtohelpitadapttoitsoperationalcontext,whichinturn,broughtaboutits“success”focus.

AtSonoraville,thereexistedamoreuniversalagreementaboutwhatengagementmeantandapatternofconsistentcommunicationaboutengagementasacorepurposeuntoitself.Sonoraville evidenced an understanding of engagement that focused less on extrinsicrewards, less on formalmeasures of student success (such as test scores) andmore ondesigning work students would Aind intrinsically meaningful, fulAilling and relevant. Theschools administrative team often said that if the students are engaged in challenging,meaningful and carefully designed work, “the test scores would take care ofthemselves”(seeTable11,Ref.No.:11).

Meanings and Commitments Bothschoolsevidencednearlyequalchangeintermsofthepropositionsestablishedfor

the “meanings and commitments” theme. Tables 6 and 7 present data for Shaw andSonoravilleandrevealthatmostofthisevidencewasfoundwithrespecttotwogroupings

Ritual engagement refers to a formof studentmotivation focusedonmeeting thedemandsof respected30

authorityAiguresandoutcomesthoseAiguresemphasize,suchascollegeadmission;thisformofengagementisnotderivedfromtheinherentqualitiesoftheworkdesignedforstudents.SeePhillipC.Schlechty,ShakinguptheSchoolhouse,p.65.Schlechty’s laterworkusesthephrasestrategiccompliance toconveythistypeofstudentmotivation.Asboth schools in this studywere inAluencedbySchlechty’sSchoolhouse text,wehaveoptedtokeeptheolderlanguage.SeePhillipC.Schlechty,EngagingStudents:TheNextLevelofWorkingontheWork(JohnWiley&Sons,2011).

ShawHighSchoolisabout20milesfromFortBenning,andtheschool’sadministrationreportsthatabout31

11%ofstudentsarefromactivemilitaryfamilies.


�

ofpropositions,1.6and1.7,whichrelatetoteachercollaboration,and1.9and1.10,whichrelate tomultiple opportunities for students to be successful and the valuing of studentfeedback.BothShawandSonoravilleevidencedarelativelystrongcommitmentandsetofaccompanying practices to ensure students are successful, with Shaw revealing anemphasisonacademicsuccessandgraduationfromhighschool(seeTable7,andTable10,Ref.Nos.:20-21,27).WhilewefoundmoreevidenceofcollaborationatShaw(proposition1.6), Sonoraville revealed more evidence that planning time was devoted to designingengagingworkforstudents(proposition1.7;seeTable7). 32

BasedonourobservationofSonoraville’splanningretreatinJuly,2014,wesuspectthatteacherfocusgroupresultstendedtounderestimatetheamountofcollaborationbetweenteachers and the inAluence of teachers on administration. Teacher and administratorcollaboration at this retreat — which about a Aifth of Sonoraville teachers voluntaryattended following the 4th of July weekend — was exceptionally high and consistentlyevidentoverthetwodaysofwork.BecausefocusgroupsatSonoravilletendedtobeabout10-15minutesshorterthanatShaw,collaborationmayhavebeenunderrepresented.Asaresult of this limited time, we tended to move through the focus group protocol morequickly than planned, sometimes skipping prompts that may have yielded additionalevidenceofcollaboration.

Lackofevidencefor1.7forShawislikelyrelatedtorecenteffortstousesometeachercollaboration timetoanalyze testdata,and thedistrict’snewschedule,whichapparentlyfurther reduced collaboration time. During the July visit to Sonoraville, we learned thatschedule difAiculties also limited teacher collaboration time. Additionally, we also foundslightly more evidence at Sonoraville indicating that student and parent feedback waswelcome.Finally,whiletherewereveryfewmentionsbyparticipantsofhowresourcesateachschoolarespent,weexpectedthisoutcome:thisknowledgeistypicallyonlyavailableto a few key personnel (we discuss the role of PAGE in fostering themes related to thisprovisioninpresentationoftheAindingsforquestions3and4).

Research Question 2

Question 2 follows the logic of Question 1, but focuses on what has been termedstructural change. It asks:Howhave the following structural elements changed since theHighSchoolRedesignInitiativesatShawandSonoravillehighschools?Figure3presentsasummaryof the evidence forQuestion2. It suggests there is similarbut less evidenceof

Whencoding focusgroups,wereservedcoding for1.6 forwhentherewasevidenceofcollaboration,but32

where the nature of that collaboration was unclear or not focused on designing engaging lessons (e.g.,analyzingtestdata).Contentcodedasevidenceforproposition1.7wasreservedforinstancesofcollaborationthatwasfocusedonengagementwork;contentcodedasevidenceof1.7wasnotalsocodedasevidencefor1.6.


�

changeintermsof“rulesandnorms.”Thisisexpectedand,inpart,anunintendedoutcomeofthereonlybeingonepropositionforthistheme.Wethusturnourattentiontotheothertwothemes,whichreAlectimportantsimilaritiesanddifferencesbetweenthetwoschools.

Figure 3 reveals the relative strength of the “relationships” theme, not only whencompared to the two other themes, but also with respect to Question 1 themes. The“relationships” theme focusesonhowteachersandadministratorsunderstandandrelateto students and each other, with proposition 2.8 focusing specially on trust betweenteachersandadministrators(seeTable2).WhileHSRIandPAGEarenottheonlyactorstoemphasize the importance of relationships for effective teaching and learning, it isimportant to note that the evidence from each school is particularly alignedwithHSRI’sframeworkanditsparticulararticulationofthesigniAicanceandfunctionofstrongtrustingrelationshipsintransformingschoolsintolearningorganizations.

Relationships KeytotheHSRIframeworkanditsunderstandingofrelationshipsisanemphasisonthe

interaction between knowing your “Who” (a conception central to the “Working on theWork”orWOWprofessional learningopportunitiesPAGEprovides through theSchlechtyCenter)andbeingabletodesignmeaningfullessonsforstudentsthatengagethem,andasaresult, yield deep learning. This relationship-building process is evidenced by how both


ROLES RULES&NORMS RELATIONSHIPS

ShawHighSchool



�

schoolsseestudents(andincreasinglyfamilies)astheircustomers,withtheschoolbeingresponsibletodesignlearningexperiencesthatmeeteachcustomer’sneeds. 33

At both schools, we found strong evidence in support of propositions related to the“relationships”theme—thatis,evidencecodedasmanifestinnature,andwithlittleornocontraryevidence(seeTable10,Ref.Nos.:12,14;andTable11,Ref.Nos.:3-4).WhileShawyieldedmore evidence for proposition 2.8 (see Tables 6, 7),which focused on trust andcollaboration between teachers and administrators, we predict Sonoraville would haveshown similar levels of evidence hadwebeen able to interview the principal during theOctobervisit.ThisassertionisbasedonourdiscussionswithandobservationsofhimandhisadministrativeteamduringourAprilandJulyvisits.

Thus, an essential element of relationships at both schools that emerged as animportantAindingwastrust.WeAirstbecamesensitivetotheimportanceoftrustforbothschools during the Sonoraville retreat in July 2014, during which we piloted our initialresearchquestions(proposition2.8inparticularemergedoutofthatpilot).Atthatretreat,wewatchedadministratorsandteachersworktosolvetwokeyproblemsconfrontedbytheschool: theadditionoftheeighthgradeintothehighschoolandthenewGeorgiateacherevaluation system. Instead of serving to instigate confrontation between teachers andadministrators, we observed how these groups worked together to adjust to thesechallenges. Theway inwhich the administrative team involved teachers in analyzing thenewevaluationsystem—easilyinterpretedasathreattoteacherprofessionalism—couldnothaveoccurrediftrustbetweenteachersandadministratorshadnotbeenestablished.Together, teachers and administrators examined how they could comply with the newmandateswhileadvancingtheirschool’sengagementfocus.

During focus groups at both schools, teachers indicated in various ways that theirrespectiveadministrativeteamsprotectedthem,supportedthem,allowedthemtotrynewthings, and involved them in important decisions.Administrative support for teachers asprofessionalswas also evident at each school, but particularly strong at Sonoraville (seeTable11,Ref.Nos.:2,8-9).Thus,HSRI’semphasisonteachersasleadersandprincipalsasleadersof leadersboth requires andgives rise to trusting relationshipswhich create theconditions for transformationandeffective adaptation.While thiswill bediscussed later,we believe trusting relationships are key for solving some of the problems identiAied byadvocatesoftest-basedaccountability.

Additionally, both schools evidenced strong relationships among teachers,with focusgroupevidencesuggestingnotonlycollaboration,butstrongfeelingsoftrustandsupport

Justasthecallforengagementifoftenmisunderstoodasacallforteacherstobeentertainers,thenotionof33

student as customer can be confused with the idea that students and families are buying grades or thatteachersandadministratorsshouldpandertostudents.AnuancedunderstandingofthecustomerconceptasadoptedbyHSRIcanbefoundinSchlechty,ShakinguptheSchoolhouse,pp.89-90.


�

fromcolleagues.Thiswasevidencedincommentsabouttherebeingfewcliques(seeTable11,Ref.No.:2)andextensivementoring(seeTable10,Ref.No.:5).

Roles Figure3revealsmoredifferencebetweenthetwoschoolsintermsofthe“roles”theme.

Thisdifference isevident intheamountofevidenceateachschool insupportof thefourpropositions comprising the “roles” theme, in terms of the relative degree of manifestevidence, and in the degree of evidence counter to the theme’s propositions.While bothschoolsrevealedsimilarlevelsofemphasisregardingteachersascollaborativedesignersofengaging lessons (proposition 2.1), we did Aind more evidence in support of thisproposition at Sonoraville, andmore of it wasmanifest in nature (see Tables 6, 7). ButTables 6 and 7 show that the biggest difference between the schools is with respect toproposition 2.3, which predicts schools will understand the role of students as activelearnerswhocandisplaytheirlearninginauthenticways.

This difference in evidence for proposition 2.3 accounts for most of the contrastbetweenthetwoschools,forthistheme.Becauseweknowthatbothschoolshaveequallystrong levelsofevidence for the“relationships” theme,weofferagain that thisparticulardifference is a reAlection of the different policy contexts in which each school exists.SonoravilleappearstofacelessoutsidepressuretofocusonstudenttestscoresthanShaw,forallthereasonsdescribedearlier.Theemphasisontestscores,webelieve,bringswithita passive view of students and works against teachers as collaborators in designingengaging work for students, directing them to instead spend more time analyzing testscoresand tweaking lessons toboost those scores, effort thatdoesnotnecessarilybooststudent interestorhelpthemmakereal-worldconnections.Thisapproachalso limits thespaceforauthentic(non-standardized)demonstrationsofstudentlearning.

Ourconclusionissupportedbyfocusgroupevidence,whereteachersatShawindicatedthatbecauseofthenewcurriculardemandsattachedtothenewCommonCoretests,thereislessspaceforinquirybasedlearning,whichsimplyrequiresmoretime(seeTable10,Ref.No.:10).While some teachersatSonoravilleexpressedsimilar concerns, thepressureonthem appears to be less intense than at Shaw. Again, we believe this is a result GordonCountynotbeingaRacetotheTopdistrict,norfacingintensecompetitionfromotherhighschools, a competition which results in an uneven distribution of high- and low-scoringstudents, leading to the concern regarding reputation. When we take into account thepositivechangesdocumentedatShaw,suchasthetrustingrelationshipsandcollaborationthat exists between teachers and administration, the affect of the policy context is, webelieve,morestrikinglyrevealed.


�

Research Question 3 Whilequestions1and2directedustoexamineculturalandstructuralchangeateach

high school since HSRI, questions 3 and 4 ask us to try and identify the cause ofdocumented change. These questions are accompanied by propositions that linkdocumented changes to the school’s participation inHSRI.We cannot emphasize enoughthe challenge this poses for researchers, and so that readers do not misinterpret thepresentationsofAindingsforthesequestions,afewnotesareinorder.

EachschoolexistsinacontextthatinAluencesitinmyriadways.ShawHighSchool,forexample,listsinitsschoolimprovementplansmanyinitiatives,programsandprofessionallearningactivities,ofwhichHSRI-relatedworkwasonlyone. Sonoravilleteachersspoke34

ofattendingother formsofprofessional learningaswell.Howarewetoseparateout theinAluenceofHSRI?Whileourmethodenablesustodoso,itshouldbeunderstoodthatthereisan inherent limitonourabilitytodocumentanHSRIeffect. It is thusexpectedthatwewill Aind less evidence thatHSRI causeddemonstratedchange thanwewill Aindevidencedemonstratingthatchangeoccurred.

An additional difAiculty indocumenting thatHSRI caused changed at each school is aresultofanotherwisepositiveattributeofhowPAGEstaffoperate.Weobservedastrongtendency of PAGE staff to downplay their role, to never insist on PAGE or HSRI beingthankedorreferencedbyname(eventhoughPAGEspentover$180,000overtheAiveyearsof HSRI participation for the two schools, and offered continuation funds after HSRIofAiciallyended). And,participating teachersoradministratorsneednotbemembersof35

PAGEtoparticipate inHSRI-relatedactivities;nordoesPAGEaskparticipantsabout theirprofessionalafAiliation.Infact, itwasveryuncommonforschoolstafftospeakofHSRIbyname.WhenPAGEstaffareworkinginaparticularschool,itwouldbeeasyforthemnottobenoticedasPAGEstaff;onlytheadministrativeteamandahandfulofteachersarereadilyawareofwhoPAGEstaffareandwhatroletheyplay.Finally,itisagoalofPAGEstaffthatHSRIparticipantsmakeHSRI-relatedideasandpracticestheirown.Whilethetendencyofteachers to talk about ideas and practices they may have learned through HSRI-relatedprofessional learningas theirownmaybeseenasasuccessbyPAGEstaff, itcomplicatestheabilityofresearcherstoAindevidenceregardingthecauseofdocumentedchange.

Ascanbeseeninthefocusgroupandinterviewprotocols,weworkedhardnotto“leadtherespondent.”WerefrainedfromaskingfocusgroupmembersdirectlyaboutPAGE,HSRIorother initiatives.Weonlyasked themgeneralquestions thatwebelievedwouldrevealHSRIeffectsiftheytrulyexisted.Takingthisunderstandingintoaccount,weAindthatthere

SeeDoc.Shaw.03.34

SeeDoc.PAGE.07.35


�

isstrongevidenceshowingthatsubstantialportionsofdocumentedchangewerecausedbyHSRI.Wenowturntothatevidence.

The logic of questions 3 and 4 followed that of questions 1 and 2, focusing Airst oncultural change, followed up by an examination of structural change. In each case,propositions direct us to see if there is evidence that changes in beliefs and values, forexample,canbetracedbacktoHSRI-relatedprofessionallearningorstaff.

Figure 4 summarizes the evidence for Question 3. It reveals that just asmost of theculturalchangetookplacewithinthe“beliefsandvalues”theme,sotoohere,thestrongestevidencethatHSRIcausedchangewaswithrespecttothistheme. 36

Figure 4 reveals that evidence of HSRI effect is more similar between schools forQuestion3 across all three themes than itwas forQuestion1.Wewill turn to thispointagain in the discussion section—wherewe present a different visualization comparingevidenceofchangetoevidencethatHSRIcauseddocumentedchange—butfornowit issufAicienttohighlightthisobservationasitpointstoacommoneffectindifferentcontexts.Putdifferently,therelativesimilarityofHSRIeffectrelativetodocumentedchangeassuchcanhelpusunderstandhowHSRIinteractedwithitscontextateachschool,andthushelpsusdemonstratenotonlythatHSRIhadaneffect,butwherethateffectwasmostrobustand

Again,visualizationsforallfourquestionsarecalibratedtothesamescale,sothatstrengthofevidencecan36

becomparedbothacrossquestionthemeandacrossquestions.


BELIEFS&VALUES

MEANINGS&COMMITTMENTS

LORE&TRADITION

ShawHighSchool



�

leastevident.ThisinturncanhelpPAGEidentifywhatitmightdodifferentlyinthefuture,andwhatshouldremainavitalaspectofanyfutureinitiative.

It is clear from the evidence that both teachers and counselors at both schoolsattributedmany of the documented changes to the “Working on theWork” professionallearning opportunities PAGEprovided through the Schlechty Center as part ofHSRI (seeTables10,11).Documents also support this Ainding,with each schoolhavinganarrayofprotocols,toolsandschool-based,teacher-leadprofessionallearningemanatingfromHSRIrelatedwork. 37

Yet,while evidence in supportofpropositions in the “beliefs andvalues” themewereverysimilar,Tables8and9revealthattherewasmoreevidenceinsupportofproposition3.3 at Sonoraville (rank and Aile teachers trace PAGE-inspired beliefs to leaders at theschool), while at Shaw, there wasmore evidence in support of proposition 3.1 (teacherleader’s beliefs were fostered by PAGE-related professional learning).We think that thisdifferencerepresentsdifferencesinhowbroadlyeachschoolhasbeentransformed,andtherelativeinAluenceofeachschool’spolicycontext.

For Sonoraville, we saw a broader and more consistent adoption of HSRI inspiredbeliefs and values among a larger number of teachers, including those quite new to theschool (seeTable11,Ref.Nos.:1-11). In fact, theclaimofmorerobust transformationatSonoraville is suggested by the almost complete absence of evidence contrary topropositions at Sonoraville across all four questions. Sonoraville also initiated a teacher-driven induction process for new teachers, explicitly premised on the HSRI framework.WhileShawdidhaveamentoringprogramfornewteachers,thefocusofthatprogramwasnotmade explicit to us. Finally, Sonoraville’s choice to not organize focus groups on thebasis of “rank and Aile” teachers and “teacher leaders”might suggest a cultural shift thatrejects such designations as ultimately unhelpful or counter to the development of alearningorganization.

Asnoted,moreevidenceexistedatShaw forproposition3.1.Thismight in factbeanartifactofShaw’sDesignTeam’sheightenedconsciousnessregardingthevalueofHSRIinapolicycontextthatisnotwhollyhospitabletoitsvisionandmethodofwork.Infact,duringthefocusgroup,theDesignTeammembers,allofwhomhadbeenattheschoolsince2003,spoke as if they no longer functioned in themanner they had in the past (indicating forexampletheyhadnotseeneachotherinsometime).Astheinitiativehadtechnicallyended,teachers,who had been at Shaw duringHSRI, lamented that teachers new to the schoolwere not beneAiting from HSRI professional learning as they themselves had. WhileteachersatShawspokemorereadilyaboutHSRIprofessionallearning,theysometimesdidso in the past tense (see Table 10, Ref. No.: 8). This type of focus group evidence was

SeeDoc.Shaw.05andDoc.Sonoraville.04.37


�

actually coded by us as both in support of and counter to some propositions. While itsuggestedthatsomeHSRI-relatedpracticesmaynotbeoccurringastheyhadinthepast,italsosuggestedtheinAluenceofHSRIonteachers’thinkingandrevealedtheirstrongdesiretocontinueontheHSRI’stransformationalpath.Insomeway,then,theevidenceofchangeatShawismorecompellingbecausefeaturesoftheHSRIeffectstill“stuck”inthemindsoftheseeducators.

Figure 4 suggests a near absence of “lore and tradition” being attributed to HSRI insomeway.Yet,weknowfromothersourcesofevidence—namelydocuments,observationsand conversations outside of focus groups and interviews— that key traditions at eachschoolwereinspiredat least inpartbyHSRI’s framework.TheteacherinductionworkatSonoravillealreadymentioned,dubbed“RiseUp”byteachers,isonesuchexample.Anotherat this school is the “Phoenix 40” (the Phoenix being the school’s mascot), a time forteachers to collaborate on engaging lessons. We know the teachers valued this as thepreviousyear’sschedulechangeandfundingcutsvirtuallyeliminateditfromtheschedule.DuringtheJulyretreat, teachersworkedonplanstoreinvigoratethesesessions.AtShaw,worktodevelopthecommunicationsacademyduringoneprofessionallearningsessionledtothe“ReeltoReal”publicationpromotingtheschool’scommunicationsmagnetprogram.Mostimportant,however,wastheRaiderstoGraduateceremony.Againgivencredencetobeingnamedthe“success”school,Shawdevelopedthisringceremonyandrelatedactivitiestohelpmovestudentsfromfreshmentoseniors,settingexpectationsandgoalsrelatedtograduationandpost-highschoolsuccessfromthemomenteachstudententersthedoor. 38

Figure4indicatesaverysimilarlevelofevidenceforthe“meaningsandcommitments”theme at each school. Having noted that, we suggest that these propositions weresomewhat Alawed.Beyond the fact thatknowledgeofhow fundsare spent is limited toafewindividuals,andcanbereadilyshownviaPAGErecords,thenexttwopropositions(3.5and3.6)proveddifAiculttocode.Wefoundthemtobebothtoosimilartoeachother,andtoobroadinnature.Forthesereasons,wewillnotspendtimeanalyzingtheseresults.

Research Question 4 Question4asked:WhyhavethefollowingstructuralelementschangedsincetheHigh

School Redesign Initiatives at Shaw and Sonoraville high schools? Whereas Question 3examinedcausesofculturalchange,Question4thusfocusedonstructuralchange.Again,aswas the case with Question 3, propositions for Question 4 predicted that importantstructuralfactorscouldbetracedbacktoHSRIandthusPAGE.

Figure5demonstratesthatmostevidencesupportspropositions inthe“roles”theme.Both schools had similar levels of support for propositions in the “roles” theme, with

SeeDoc.Shaw.05.38


�

Sonoraville having slightly more manifest evidence than Shaw (virtually no evidencecontrary to this theme’s propositions was found at either school). These propositionsfocused on the degree to which structural factors— such as the formation of teams ofteacher leaders to design engaging lessons — could be traced back to HSRI. WhileSonoravillehadmoreevidenceinsupportofproposition4.3(parentsandstudentsnoticeandappreciatetheschool’sfocusonstudentengagement),Shawhadslightlymoreevidencein support of proposition4.1 (the emergenceof teacher leaders orDesignTeams canbetracedtoPAGE)(seeTables8,9).

In terms of proposition 4.4 regarding the “rules and norms” theme, revieweddocuments suggest stronger support for this proposition than observed from evidenceobtainedviafocusgroupsandinterviews.Giventhenatureofprotocolsandrelatedtools,this is not surprising. Further, we wish to highlight our observations of the July39

Sonoraville High School retreat, noted earlier. Throughout the retreat, we observedteachers and administrators collectively employing HSRI protocols or protocols adaptedfrom HSRI professional learning. Protocols for coaching (e.g., how to ask clarifyingquestions),groupnorms(e.g.,onepersonspeaksatatime),anddesignqualitiesofstudentwork(e.g.,protectingstudentsfromadverseconsequences)weredistributed.Weobservedduring both whole group and small group discussion an adherence to these norms andrules in a non-mechanical way. Administrators, for example, were adept at removing

Doc.Shaw.05andDoc.Sonoraville.04.39


ROLES RULES&NORMS RELATIONSHIPS

ShawHighSchool



�

adverse consequences for teachers as a means to encourage their full participation.Wefoundthatdiscussionanddebatewereprofessional,focused,collegialandproductive,andsoweconcludethatHSRIaffectedtherulesandnormsatSonoravillebeyondtheevidencegainedfromfocusgroupsandinterviews.Wenotedhowtheserulesandnormssupportedstructural change.Weobserved, for example, awide rangeof leadershipemanating fromteachers,inadditiontotheadministrativeteam,asthegroupcollectivelyfocusedonsolvingdeAinite challenges, such as the state’s new teacher evaluation policy. In addition toprovidingadditionalevidenceof theeffectofHSRIontherulesandnormsof thisschool,these Aindings from the retreat highlight the importance of observation for gatheringevidenceofthisnature.Unlessdirectlyasked,teachersandadministratorswerenotlikelyto reference speciAic rules or norms governing how they conduct their work. This wascertainly our experience with teacher focus groups, where, when asked about what wewouldobserveifweshadowedthem,noneindicateddirectlythatwewouldobservethemfollowing speciAic protocols, although we know from this retreat and other sources ofevidence that they in fact do, for example, use the design qualities protocol to guide thedevelopmentoflessonsatSonoraville.

VerymuchunliketheAindingsforQuestion2,whatstrikesoneuponAirstviewingFigure5 is the fact that virtually no evidence exists in terms of the “relationships” theme; thisappearancemustalso,however,beexaminedinlightofseveralfacts.

The Airst is thenatureof the focusgroupand interviewschedule. Inbothschools,keyteacher leaders became administratorswhowere neither interviewed and, except in thecaseofoneteacheratShawHighSchool,werenotpartofteacherfocusgroups.AlsonotethatthisteacheratShawdidspeakemphaticallyregardingherrelationshipwithPAGE(seeTable10,Ref.Nos.:14-15).

Thus, the data collection methods adopted for this study under sampled from thisparticulargroupbecausekeyteacherleadersmostlikelytohavestrongrelationshipswithHSRI staff moved into administrative positions over the course of HSRI. Note that, onaccountof our limited time,we choseonly to interview the schoolprincipal, andnothisadministrative team. If we had interviewed these other administrators (who werepreviously teacher leaders) they may have offered examples of the importance of theirrelationshipwithHSRIstaff.Whileunderstandablegivenourtimelimits,itisnonethelessashortcomingofourdatacollectionmethodology.

Compounding thisdifAicultywas the inability to interviewSonoraville’sprincipalwholed the school sincebeginningHSRI. Somewhat similar is the fact that ShawHighSchoolhadtwoprincipalsoverthecourseofitsHSRIparticipation.WhiletheprincipalthatstartedShawontheHSRI journeywas interviewed,Dr. JimArnold, that interviewfocusedontheorigins and early phase of HSRI, and not how the relationship between PAGE and HSRIformedanddeveloped.


�

Finally, email records of communication between HSRI staff and teacher leaders andadministrators at both schools demonstrate regular, professional and friendly relations.EmailcorrespondencerevealedthatPAGE’sHSRIstaffweretrustedandwelcomedateachschool;HSRI staffwere regularly invited to observe andparticipate in school events andcelebrations. Correspondences from both schools also revealed that teacher leaders andadministrators regularly shared with HSRI staff how HSRI was being adopted in eachschool,sharing, forexample,sampleprofessional learningactivities,professional learningschedulesandresultsfromsurveysofprofessionallearningparticipants.

School Transformation: The HSRI Effect Wefound,presentedanddiscussedcompellingevidenceofpositiveculturalandstructurechangeatbothShawandSonoravillehighschools,anddiscussedhowobserveddifferencesbetweentheschoolsarerelatedtoeachschool’spolicycontext.ThedirectionofchangewedocumentedisconsistentwiththetransformativegoalsofHSRI,andprovidesevidencethatboth schools have developed some of the key characteristics of learning organizations,especiallywithrespecttothe“beliefsandvalues”and“relationships”themes.

Yet,theresultsasreportedintheearliersectionarelessclearregardingthedegreetowhich this change was an effect of HSRI and the work of PAGE staff. In order to betterunderstand the relationship between evidence of documented change and evidence thatparticipationinHSRIcauseddocumentedchange,wepresentFigure6.

Unlike thevisualizations for Aigures2-5,Figure6wasconstructedwithoutdistinctionbetweenmanifestandlatentevidence.Further,insteadofseparatelyrepresentingevidencecontrarytopropositions,anynegativeevidencewassimplysubtractedfromthetotalofallevidenceinsupportofaproposition,servingtoreducecircle(effect)size.Thisallowedusto craft a visualization that compared summaries of evidence for questions 1 and 2 tosummariesofevidenceforquestions3and4.Bydoingso,wearebetterabletoseenotonlytherelatively largeportionofchange thatcanbedirectlyattributed toHSRI,butalso thedegree towhich that change occurred along cultural or structural lines. Finally, we onlyincludedevidencefromtheAirstfourpropositionsforeachquestion.Wedidthistocontrolfor possible variance related to thedifferent numbers of propositions in a theme (whichrangedfrom1to7),andbecausewebelievethat thesegroupingsofpropositionsarethemost closely tied to each question’s focus on either cultural or structural change (forexample it couldbeargued that the last threepropositions forQuestion2arecultural innature,seeTable2).

Figure6revealsthatthedifferenceintheamountofevidencedemonstratingchangeateach school is greater than the difference in the amount of evidence demonstrating thatHSRI caused the documented change at each school. This is signiAicant for at least two


�

reasons. First, it further supports our earlier interpretations of Aindings that explainobserveddifferencesbyreferencetodifferencesinthepolicycontextofeachschool.Ifeachschool participated in very similar ways in a single initiative (HSRI), it is plausible thatobserved differences in outcomesmay be related to difference between school contexts.While both schools had very similar levels of students receiving free and reduced pricemeals, substantialdifferences in theethnic/racial compositionof their respectivestudentbodiescouldbeafactorcausingdocumenteddifferences.Yet,wefoundnoevidenceofthiswhenspeakingwithstudents,teachers,administratorsorparents(andallofthesegroupsexcept administrators were composed of individuals with a range of ethnic and racialidentities). In fact, parents, students and educators at each school repeatedly spoke insupportoftheirrespectivecommunities,showingrespectforstudentdiversityandadesiretohelp familieswho lived inpoverty (seeTables10 and11). Figure6 also suggests thatwhile there was less evidence of change at Shaw High School compared to evidence ofchangeatSonoravilleHighSchool,agreaterportionofdocumentedchangeatShawcanbeattributed to HSRI than is the case with Sonoraville. This difference further reveals the

CULTURA

LCHA

NGE

FIGURE6.VisualizaAonofrelaAvestrengthofevidencebyresearchquesAonthemeforShawandSonoravillehighschools.Circlesizerepresentsthestrengthofevidence.CirclelocaAonrepresentstherelaAvedistribuAonofculturalchangetostructuralchange,withthecenterdoaedlineindicaAngequalamountsofculturalandstructuralchange.

STRUCTURALCHANGE

Shaw

Sonoraville

Evidence of change at each high school

Evidence that HSRI caused documented change at each high school


�

relativeinAluenceofthepolicycontextandindicatesthatwhileitmaytake“moreHSRI”toachievesimilarresults in lesshospitablepolicycontexts, transformationcanoccuracrossanarrayofcontexts.Thus,ShawinparticularprovidesinsightintothepotentialofHSRIbydemonstratingthatitcanbringaboutchangedespitechallengingpolicycontexts.Figure6thussuggeststhatsimilarimplementationsofHSRIwillhavevaryingeffectsdependingonthecharacteristicsofaschool’spolicycontext.TailoringHSRItoapolicycontextmayyieldgreatereffect.

Figure 6 reveals other important Aindings. While the amount of evidence thatdocumentedchangewasacauseofHSRItendstobemoreevenlydistributedbetweenthecultural and structural domains, it is clear that documented evidence at both schools isweightedtotheculturaldomain,thatis,therewasmoredocumentedchangeintermsofthe“beliefsandvalues”evidentateachschoolthantherewasdocumentedchangeintermsof“roles.”Thissuggestsseveralpossibilities:(1)beliefsandvaluesareeasiertochangethanare structural characteristics of schools, such as the roles of teachers, and (2) policycontextshaveagreaterinAluenceonstructuralelementssuchasrolesthantheydoonbeliefsystems.Ofcourse,acombinationofthesetwopossibilitiesislikely.Asnoted,bothschoolsfacedcutsinstafAing,limitingcollaborationtimeforteachers.Further,Shaw’spolicycontextprobablyhadamore forceful inAluenceon teacher roles, aspressure to analyze testdataworked against time to focus on collaboratively planning engaging lessons. Yet, bothteachers and administrators at Shaw evidenced a strong commitment to engagement insomeform.Whilethereiscertainlyadynamicbetweenculturalandstructuralchange,eachreinforcingtheother,evidence frombothschoolssuggestedrobustchange in theculturaldomain,andwhereonceestablished, thesebeliefsarenoteasilyaltered in thecontextofsay,cutsinstafAingorstatemandatesincreasinglyfocusingeducatorsontestscores.

Discussion and Recommendations There is no doubt that HSRI brought about qualitative change at both high schools. Butwhat is more important is the relative importance of policy context in determining theextentandnatureoftransformation,andtheabilityofHSRI’sframeworktohaveaneffectin even difAicult contexts. We suggest then that HSRI not only constitutes a viableframeworkforschooltransformationthatshouldbeexpandedandfurtherstudied,wealsobelieve that it constitutes an effective antidote to or immunization against the negativeconsequences of the near perfect storm of cuts in funds allocated to public schools,dramaticincreasesinpovertyratesamongschool-agedchildren,andtheintensiAicationofhighstakestestingbybothfederalandstateauthorities.

Asingleword—trust—maysignifywhyHSRIhadtheeffectthatitdid,indicatingwhyHSRI isaviablealternativeto theschoolreformsthathave failedtoyieldpositiveresults


�

overmorethanfourdecades.WebelievethatoneofthekeybeneAitsofHSRIforschoolsisthedevelopmentoftrustasakeyfeaturethatenablestheschooltoworkontransformationinachallengingpolicycontext,guardingagainstthedamagetoschoolcultureandstructurethatcanresult frompunitiveandsimple-mindedpolicies. Inthissense, trust isnotaboutbeing “touchy-feely” but rather a structural feature of the organization with culturalcontent.Trust,weobserved,wasrequiredforcollectiveproblemsolvingandfosteringtheinitiative and accountability of individuals and groups, including students, and thus thedevelopmentofatruelearningorganization.Thisresearchsuggeststhattrustformedthekernelofpositiveorganizationalfunctioningintheformofrelationshipswithstudentsandtheir families, among teachers and between teachers and administrators. Relationships,centraltowhichistrust,wasthesecondbiggestdocumentedchangeobservedinthisstudy.We believe that these trusting relationships are a necessary condition for teachers tocollaborativelydesignmeaningfulandengagingwork forstudents,and forstudents tobewilling and able to demonstratewhat theyhavebeen expected to learn inways that arebothmeaningfulandmotivatingtothem.

Whatdo these Aindings suggest for futurepractice?First,webelieve that the existinglevelof trustmightbeakeyfeatureofaschool toanalyzepriortobeginningworkthere.BothschoolsinthisstudyeitherhadsigniAicantpriorlevelsoftrust(afamilyatmosphereatShaw with team teaching, was reported prior to HSRI) or a conscious effort to createtrusting, caring environment, aswas the case at Sonoraville, from almost the beginning.Second, themanner inwhichwe found each school to understand engagement suggeststhat futureworkmightbeneAit fromaheightenedeffort tosensitizeprofessional learningparticipantstothedifferencesbetweenextrinsicandintrinsicmotivation,andinparticular,consider how school-based professional learning and design team meetings might beencouraged to examine this part of the engagement puzzle more thoroughly. Becauseextrinsic forms of motivation are so deeply rooted in our culture, and because currentreformefforts are framed in termsof rewards andpunishments, heightened attention toworkonunderstandingdifferenttypesofmotivationmaybeimportant. Thismightprove40

tobeespeciallycriticalinworkinginschoolswithhighconcentrationsofstudentslivinginpoverty,becauseofthedocumentedtendencyforschoolswhoservesuchstudentstofocusmoreonextrinsicrewardsandcompliance. Thus,acultureshift to trulyengagingwork41

mightneedtobespeciAicallytailoredtoexaminethistendencyforprofessionalsworkingin

See Richard M. Ryan and Netta Weinstein, “Undermining Quality Teaching and Learning: A Self-40

DeterminationTheoryPerspectiveonHigh-StakesTesting,”TheoryandResearchinEducation7(2009):224–33.

Aclassicstudythatinspiredresearchinthisareais:JeanAnyon,“SocialClassandtheHiddenCurriculumof41

Work,”JournalofEducation162,1(1980):67-92.


�

settings likely to emphasize compliance and frame motivation in terms of rewards andpunishments.

Butpossiblythebiggestoutcomeofthisstudyistherolethepolicycontextplays.Thissuggeststhatif futureHSRI-likeendeavorsfullyoperatedatthedistrict level,someoftheaffectsof thepolicycontext—especiallyonstructuraldomainssuchasteachersroles—mightbemitigated.Districtsmightbeinapositiontoprotectteacherplanningtimebetterthan individual schools, even in the face of reduced funding. Districts might be able toorganizeschoolstocomplywithexternalmandateswithoutdirectingteachersawayfromcollaborating to designmeaningful and engaging lessons. Certainly the two schools hereprovide examples of how HSRI might help districts do just that. Districts are also in apositiontostructureoptionstofamilieswithoutunleashingunhealthyformsofcompetitionbetweenschoolsthatfosterade-factoacademicsortingsystem.

The last consideration then is this: HSRI may not reach its full potential until it isapplied system-wide. Andwhile the notion of system-wide school improvement is not42

new,theHSRIframeworkasanalternativetotest-andcompetition-basedreformisunderexploredandundertested.Theresultspresentedhereprovidesupportforthisalternativeand thus we recommend it be tried on a larger scale, in multiple contexts. We furtherrecommend that work be expanded to develop alternative means for assessing theoutcomesoftheseefforts.

ItshouldbenotedthatthebeginningofthiscasestudycoincidedwithPAGEembarkingonapilotmulti-42

districtinitiative,intentionallyengagingcross-rolegroupsintransformationalstrategicthinking,and,AindingthatAirstyeartobesuccessful,hadalreadydevelopedplanstoexpandthoseeffortspriortothisreportbeingmade available to PAGE.We, the researchers, became aware of this intention in August of 2014, learningmodestdetailsaboutthisinitiativeinFebruary2015.


�

Appendix A


�

TABLE 1Propositions and Sources of Evidence For Research Question 1

* See Appendix B for the Evidence Code Keys for Documents, Focus Groups and Interviews

Research Question 1 Propositions Sources of Evidence *

How have the following cultural elements changed since the beginning of the High School Redesign Initiative at Shaw and Sonoraville high schools?

As a result of PAGE’s efforts to transform education through sustained professional learning opportunities and coaching, the following cultural characteristics will have emerged at each school, and be different from past practice

F6-9; D8-9, 11-14, 20

Beliefs & Values 1. Communication at the school evidences a clear, shared purpose and a set of shared, educationally relevant beliefs and values

F1-5; D8-9; D15, 17-19

2. The school’s purpose is focused on engaging students in meaningful work, serving each student’s academic, social and psychological needs

F1-5; D1-9; D16-19; D23-24

3. Students are respected and viewed as collaborators by school staff in their learning of culturally relevant knowledge, skills and perspectives

F1-5; D1-9; D16-19; D21-24

4. Parents and community members are respected and viewed by school staff as collaborators in students learning culturally relevant knowledge, skills and perspectives

F1-5; D21-24

Meanings & Commitments

5. Financial resources available to the school have been used to support the development of teacher leaders and administrative teams to lead teacher leaders

F3; D8-11, 13

6. Time for teachers to actively share, collaborate and plan with one another is built into the school’s schedule

F1; 3; D8-11; 14

7. Teacher collaboration time is focused on designing engaging high-level academic work for all students that offers them meaningful choices, relationships, and means to demonstrate their acquired knowledge, skill and perspective

F1, 3; D6, 8-9, 11, 14-16, 18, 23

8. Teacher feedback on school practices is welcome, sought, and used to inform administrative decisions

F1, 3-4; D8-10

9. Students are offered multiple opportunities for academic success in each class and until graduation

F1-5; D1-10, 15-16, 18, 21-23

10. Student feedback on their courses is welcome, sought, and used by teachers to inform their instructional decisions

F1-5; D8-9, 16-17, 19, 24

11. Parent and community feedback on school practices is welcome, sought, and used by teachers and administrators to inform decision making

F1-5; D8-9, 17-18, 19, 24

Lore & Traditions 12. Stories, ceremonies, artifacts and assemblies reinforce, represent and are consistent with the school’s vision, beliefs and values

F1-5; D8-9, 17, 19, 24

13. Student work and performances are made public and acknowledged by school staff and the public

F1-5; D8-9, 17, 19, 24


�


Table 2Propositions and Sources of Evidence For Research Question 2Research Question 2 Propositions Sources of Evidence *

How have the following structural elements changed since the High School Redesign Initiatives at Shaw and Sonoraville high schools?

As a result of PAGE’s efforts to transform education through sustained professional learning opportunities and coaching, the following structural elements will have emerged at each school, and be different from past practice

F6-9; D8-9, 11-14, 20

Roles 1. Teachers are responsible for collaboratively leading the design of engaging classroom instruction and use assessment to customize and improve their instruction

F1-3, 6; D6, 8-11, 14-16, 18-19, 23

2. Administrators are responsible for leading teacher leaders and creating the conditions for them to focus on engaging students in high level academic and socially valued work

F1-4; D8-11, 14, 17-19, 20, 23

3. Students have a responsibility to be active learners, who can demonstrate their learning through the creation of products, exhibitions and performances

F1-5; D1, 3, 5-6, 16-17, 19, 21, 23-24

4. Parents and other community members have a responsibility to learn about, support and share their views with teachers and administrators about the work of the school

F1-5; D9, 17, 19, 24

Rules & Norms 5. Professional discussion, conduct and disciplined inquiry exist and are expected among teachers, administrators and in classrooms

F1-5; D6, 8-11, 14-15, 19, 22, 23

Relationships 6. Teachers and administrators know the students well and have meaningful relationships with them and the larger community of which they are a part

F1-6; D1, 8-9, 15, 17, 19, 24

7. Teachers have strong work-centered relationships with their fellow teachers

F1-5; D8-9, 11, 18

8. Teachers and administrators work together in a trusting and collaborative manner

F1, 4-5; D8-9, 15, 11


�


Table 3Propositions and Sources of Evidence for Research Question 3

Research Question 3 Propositions Sources of Evidence *Why have the following cultural elements changed since the beginning of the High School Redesign Initiative at Shaw and Sonoraville high schools?

PAGE’s framework for transforming public education through sustained professional learning opportunities, coaching and financial support will be identified, in spirit if not in name, as initiating and sustaining identified cultural change in each building

F6-9; D8-9, 11-14, 20

Beliefs & Values 1. Teacher leaders and administrators beliefs and values about education were fostered by PAGE provided professional learning experiences

F1, 3, 7-8; D8-9, 11-12, 13-15, 18-20

2. Teacher leaders and administrators put their beliefs into action on account of their relationship with HSRI staff

F1, 3, 7-8; D8-10, 14-15, 18-20

3. Rank and file teachers trace PAGE inspired beliefs, values and action to teacher leaders and administrators at their building

F2, 3, 7-8; D8-10, 15, 18-19

Meanings & Commitments

4. PAGE financial resources made available to the school have been used to support the development of teacher leaders and administrative teams to lead teacher leaders

F3, 6-9; D8-9, 13-14, 18

5. Focusing on the needs and interests of students gave rise to new energy and focus to the work of teachers

F1-5; D6, 8-9, 11, 16-18, 23

6. Focusing on the needs and interests of students helped professionalize and strengthen the relationships among and between teachers and administrators

F1-5; D8-9, 10-11, 18-19

Lore & Traditions 7. Teacher leaders/Design Teams will have generated their own unique traditions, names and identities at their school

F1-4; D8-9; 15, 19


�


Table 4Propositions and Sources of Evidence for Research Question 4Research Question 4 Propositions Sources of Evidence *

Why have the following structural elements changed since the High School Redesign Initiatives at Shaw and Sonoraville high schools?

PAGE’s framework for transforming public education through sustained professional learning opportunities, coaching, and financial support will be identified, in spirit if not in name, as initiating and sustaining identified structural change in each building

F6-9; D8-9, 11-14, 20

Roles 1. The emergence of teacher leaders or Design Teams can be traced to PAGE professional learning and coaching support

F1, 3, 7-8; D8-9, 11, 14, 18

2. The emergence of administrators as leaders of teacher leaders can be traced to PAGE professional learning and coaching support

F1, 3, 7-8; D8-9, 11, 14, 18

3. Parents and students notice and appreciate the school’s focus on student engagement and success, which in turn helps students and their families remain interested in school

F1-5, 7-8

Rules & Norms 4. Teacher leaders/Design Teams learned and adapted to their needs, rules and norms from PAGE professional learning opportunities and HSRI staff, that resulted in collaborative work that helped improve instruction and increased student engagement

F1, 3, 7-8; D8-9, 14-16, 23

Relationships 5. HSRI staff have strong relationships with teacher leaders and administrators, and identify, understand and work with each on the basis of their needs

F1, 3, 7-8; D8-9, 11, 14


�

TABLE5Listofciteddocuments,bydocumentcita;oncodeanddatabasefilename.*

DocumentcitaAoncode Documentfilenameasitappearsinthecasestudydatabase

Comments

Doc.PAGE.01aandDoc.PAGE.01b PAGEFaceofTeacherLeadership12-10-2013v3copy.pdf

TwopublicaAons:“PAGETeachersAsLeaders.pdf”(n.d)and“PAGEFaceofTeacherLeadership12-10-2013v3copy.pdf”(2013)

Doc.PAGE.02 OglethorpeHSleaer.pdf LeaertoPhillipTodd,PrincipalofOglethorpeHighSchool,fromEdieBelden,DirectorofProfessionalLearning,PAGE.

Doc.PAGE.03 2008HSRIBrochure110308-1copy.pdf

BrochureadverAsingfortheHSRIiniAaAve.

Doc.PAGE.04 GOOD--PAGEHSRICommitments-IthacaES04.15.14.docx

OutlinestherespecAvecommitmentsofPAGEandanyschoolparAcipaAnginHSRI.

Doc.PAGE.05 applicaAontextaddendumdoc.pdf ContainstwoapplicaAonsfromhighschools(2009),andcommentarybyPAGEstaffabouttheapplicaAonprocess.

Doc.Shaw.01 Folder“08” ContainsemailarchiveofPAGE/HSRIcommunicaAonwithShawHighSchool.

Doc.Sonoraville.01 Folder“08” ContainsemailarchiveofPAGE/HSRIcommunicaAonwithSonoravilleHighSchool.

Doc.Shaw.02 ShawSIPPartBAug14.pdf ProvidesavarietyofusefuldataaboutShaw,includinginformaAonregardingincreaseinstudentsclassifiedashomeless.

Doc.Shaw.03 Folder“19” Containsschoolimprovementplansandrelateddocuments,showingthevariousiniAaAvesandprogramsadoptedbytheschooloverAme.

Doc.Sonoraville.02 Folder“18” Containsschoolimprovementplansandrelateddocuments,showingthevariousiniAaAvesandprogramsadoptedbytheschooloverAme.

Doc.Sonoraville.03andDoc.Shaw.04 NicoleDataforMarkandAgnes101414.xlsx

Thisincludesdataforbothschools,includingpercentofstudentsreceivingfreeandreducedlunch,2006-2013.DatawasgatheredbyPAGEstaff.


�

*OnlydocumentsordocumentcollecAonscitedinthecasestudynarraAveappearinthistable.Seecasestudydatabaseforalldocumentscollectedforthecasestudy.

Doc.PAGE.06 ParAcipaAonliststhroughFeb2012.xlsx

ProvidesprofessionallearningaaendancedataforShawandSonoraville.

Doc.PAGE.07 PLAaendance.doc NarraAvedescripAonofHSRIfunding,schoolparAcipaAon,andvisits.

Doc.Shaw.05andDoc.Sonoraville.04 Folder“15” Containsschool-designedprotocols,PLevents,etc.,thatfocusonengagementandteacherleadership.

Doc.Shaw.06andDoc.Sonoraville.05 Folder“16” Samplingofcoursesyllabifromeachschool.

Doc.Shaw.07andDoc.Sonoraville.06 Folder“23” Samplesofstudentwork.

Doc.Shaw.08 MuscogeeCountySOW_FINAL_CORRECTED.pdf

MuscogeeCountyRacetotheTopapplicaAonExecuAveSummary

Doc.PAGE.08 SchoolDataforMarkandAgnes031315.xlsx

PresentsdataonschoolswhohaveorareparAcipaAnginHSRI

Doc.Sonoraville.09 Folder“July2014Retreat” ContainsphotosanddocumentsfromtheJulyretreat.


�

Note:SubtotalsusedindevelopmentofvisualizaAonsoffindings.

TABLE6Instancesofevidenceofhowculturalandstructurehavechangedbyproposi;onandevidencetype,fromShawHighSchoolfocusgroupsandinterviews.

Manifest(M)andLatent(L)evidenceinsupportofandcountertoproposiAons

QuesAon1Theme SupporAngEvidence CounterEvidenceSubtotals ProposiAon M L Totals M L Totals

1:1 7 11 18 2 2 41:2 25 9 34 3 4 71:3 14 7 21 0 1 11:4 10 5 15 2 0 2

Beliefs&Values 56 32 88 7 7 141:5 0 1 1 0 0 01:6 8 3 11 3 0 31:7 1 1 2 6 1 71:8 2 1 3 2 1 31:9 6 9 15 0 1 11:10 6 1 7 1 0 11:11 0 3 3 2 0 2

Meanings&Commitments 23 19 42 14 3 171:12 9 0 9 1 0 11:13 10 1 11 1 0 1

Lore&TradiAon 19 1 20 2 0 2

TOTALS 98 52 150 23 10 33 QuesAon2ThemesSubtotals

2:1 1 11 12 3 0 32:2 0 4 4 1 0 12:3 3 4 7 0 0 02:4 7 1 8 2 0 2

Roles 11 20 31 6 0 6Norms 2:5 8 4 12 0 0 0

2:6 9 4 13 0 0 02:7 7 3 10 2 1 32:8 14 8 22 2 0 2

RelaAonships 30 15 45 4 1 5

TOTALS 49 39 88 10 1 11


�

Notes:SubtotalsusedindevelopmentofvisualizaAonsoffindings.

TABLE7Instancesofevidenceofhowculturalandstructurehavechangedbyproposi;onandevidencetype,fromSonoravilleHighSchoolfocusgroupsandinterviews.


QuesAon1Themes SupporAngEvidence CounterEvidenceSubtotals ProposiAon M L Totals M L Totals

1:1 24 10 34 0 0 01:2 27 7 34 0 0 01:3 20 3 23 0 0 01:4 16 4 20 0 0 0

Beliefs&Values 87 24 111 0 0 01:5 1 0 1 0 0 01:6 2 0 2 2 0 21:7 3 2 5 0 2 21:8 1 2 3 0 0 01:9 8 6 14 0 0 01:10 4 6 10 0 0 01:11 1 2 3 0 0 0

Meanings&Commitments 20 18 38 2 2 41:12 10 2 12 0 0 01:13 11 1 12 0 0 0

Lore&TradiAon 21 3 24 0 0 0

TOTALS 128 45 173 2 2 4

QuesAon2ThemesSubtotals

2:1 11 4 15 0 0 02:2 5 1 6 0 0 02:3 9 6 15 0 0 02:4 4 4 8 0 0 0

Roles 29 15 44 0 0 0Norms 2:5 9 3 12 0 0 0

2:6 15 4 19 0 0 02:7 12 1 13 0 0 02:8 15 1 16 0 0 0

RelaAonships 42 6 48 0 0 0

TOTALS 80 24 104 0 0 0


�


TABLE8Instancesofevidenceofwhyculturalandstructuralchangeoccurredbyproposi;onandevidencetype,fromShawHighSchoolfocusgroupsandinterviews.



3:1 8 3 11 0 0 03:2 4 2 6 2 0 23:3 2 4 6 1 0 1

Beliefs&Values 14 9 23 3 0 33:4 2 1 3 0 0 03:5 3 3 6 0 1 13:6 1 2 3 0 0 0

Meanings&Commitments 6 6 12 0 1 1Lore&TradiAon 3:7 0 6 6 0 0 0


4:1 6 2 8 0 0 04:2 3 0 3 0 0 04:3 3 2 5 1 2 3

Roles 12 4 16 1 2 3Norms 4:4 2 4 6 0 0 0RelaAonships 4:5 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTALS 14 8 22 1 2 3


�


TABLE9Instancesofevidenceofwhyculturalandstructuralchangeoccurredbyproposi;onandevidencetype,fromSonoravilleHighSchoolfocusgroupsandinterviews.



3:1 7 0 7 0 0 03:2 5 0 5 0 0 03:3 9 7 16 0 0 0

Beliefs&Values 21 7 28 0 0 03:4 1 0 1 0 0 03:5 4 1 5 0 0 03:6 4 4 8 0 0 0

Meanings&Commitments 9 5 14 0 0 0Lore&TradiAon 3:7 1 0 1 0 0 0


4:1 6 0 6 0 0 04:2 2 0 2 0 0 04:3 10 1 11 0 0 0

Roles 18 1 19 0 0 0Norms 4:4 2 1 3 0 0 0RelaAonships 4:5 0 1 1 0 0 0

TOTALS 20 3 23 0 0 0


�

TABLE10Representa;vequotesfromfocusgroupsandinterviewsatShawHighSchool,bypar;cipanttype

Ref.No. Part.Type Quote

1 Teachers Phrasethatdescribestheschool:“Forme,it'sprojectbased,authenAc,”andanotherteacher,“it'sprojectbasedformeaswell,itisalsoaboutthestudent…everyonemustsucceed.”Anotherteacher:“Schoolisaboutstudentsuccess.AtShaw,possiblymorethanotherschools,successhasabroaderdefiniAon,manyteacherswhocareaboutbothacademicandpersonalandworldlysuccess,studentsasindividuals,asopposedto[just]testscores.”Anotherteacher:“Focusisonstudents.”

2 Teacher “IenjoyworkingherebecauseofthecollaboraAoninthedepartment.Verywillingtocollaborateandshare.”Tellsstoryofformerteacherwhocreatedandshared[namessubject]curriculum.“Wecollaboratedaily.”

3 Teachers “Weallhavetotakea[namestest]test,andeveryonemustsucceed.Everyonehastopassthistest.Sothat'swhatwestartwith,that'sthephraseweuse.”Anotherteacher:“With[namessubject],wehavetheendofcourse[EOC]test.Andofcourse,everyoneknowsyourEOCtestscores,acrossthedistrict,theparents,everybody.Successforstudents,thisisasign;soeveryonewillpass.”

4 Teachers “AndnowwiththiscompeAAveness[newteacherevaluaAonsystem],fromclassroomtoclassroom,you'realmostcompeAngwiththosescores,IfeellikethatisgoingtohinderourcollaboraAon,butmaybenothereatShaw,ifyoulookatourclustersofscores,atleastfor[namessubjectarea],theteachersareclustered[intermsofscores]aboutthesameplace,thatspeakstoourschoolculture,thereisnobodyuphereanddownthere.”Anotherteacher:“Weas[namessubject]teachers,we'reintheretogether,thekidsaregetngthesamething[asaresultofteamteachingandcollaboraAon]”

5 Teacher “[CollaboraAonatschool]iswhatIowemycareerasateacherto…alwayswantedtobeteacher…,cameintosituaAonthatwasteamtaught…asateamwewereabletocreatecurriculumandIhadamentor,andIalsohadthoseworkingontheworksessionsthatweaaendedthefirstyearandahalf…otherteachersImethadnosupport…weareoneofthepremierprogramsbecauseofthecollaboraAveprocessthatexistshere.

6 Teacher “Ifyouwerewithmeforamonth,youwouldseekidsworkingonsomethinghardthathadreallifeauthenAcitythatwouldservesomepurposetothempersonally.”

7 Teachers “There'sthefocusonengagement,theWOW,howwesetthatupsevenorsoyearsago.Thiskeepsthem,numberone,outoftrouble,andtheywanttocometoyourclass.”

8 Teachers “Idowishweworkedwithteachersfromotherdepartments;tendtosAckinourowndepartment.Iwanttoseewhatthe[namesdepartment]departmentisdoing…wecouldcollaboratemore.”Another:“Iwasn’tintheWOWyears,IwasauertheWOWyears.EventhoughIincorporatesomeofthetrainingI’vehadherethrough[namesteacher],Iwishtheteacherswouldcollaboratemore.”Another:“It[planning]doesn’thappenasmuchasitusedtobecauseofthenewschedule,andAmeconstraints.”

9 Teachers “Focusoftheschoolisonthecommunityimage;itisachievement,studentsuccess.”“RealworldapplicaAonofstudentwork;studentengagement;theWOWtermisauthenAc”.


�

10 Teachers Thereisnow“alotoffocusonscoresandevaluaAons.Lotsofpressure.ExpectaAonsarehighacrosstheboard,andthefocusofwheretheschoolisgoingupintheair,quesAonable…I’mareallysmallpieceofareallybigpuzzle.”Whenaskedaboutstressfurther:“Howstressaffectedmywork?Whatisrequiredforkidstoknowhasincreased,stuffweneverdidbefore,andallthetesAng,butit’sadifferentsetofstandards,notjusttests,butspecificskillsorcontent,andsomeAmesitsucksoutthefunfactor,thecreaAvitywewereallowedtodobigthings,becausethisiswhattheyneedtoknow;thisismystress,itboxedmein.”“WiththeStudentLearningObjecAvesfromthestate,thereislimitedAmetocovermaterial;limitedAmeforcreaAvestuff.TherearemoreworksheetsbecauseittakeslessAme…wecan’tdoalltheengagingthingswewant.”

11 Teachers “ForcourseswithEOCtest,wehavedatateams.Withthecommonunitassessments,wereviewthedata,toseewhereneededintervenAonis,andstrategiesforresponsetointervenAon.Thiswasveryhelpfulin[namessubject]thisyear.Theprocess[ofdataanalysis]wassimplifiedbasedonfeedback[fromteachers].Teacherstalkaboutthedata.”

12 Teachers “BuildingrelaAonshipsiskey,asstudentsaremorewillingtoworkwhenwevaluethem.GoesbacktoknowingyourWho;getafeelfromthem,whattheylike,theirability,willingness,makesthingsalotsmoother…youhavetofigureoutwhotheyare.”

13 Teachers Whathasnotchanged?“Familyatmosphere.Thathasstayedthesame.”“Teamteachingwasgoingonbeforewegothere[in2003].”

14 Teachers “Wehavehad3superintendentsin4years,butthere’soneconstant[namesperson]whohelpsus…andkeeps[administrators]grounded;[thisperson]istheonepersonwhoisfair,raAonal,evenwhen…[thisperson]istheonewhenyougetaround…,youknowyouareloved.”

15 Teacher Whenthisindividualwasasked,howdidthiscometobe:“Bynature,Iamverygiving;wanttohelp;topointtowhereIam,professionally,Iwouldn’t’beherewithouttheopportunityPAGEaffordedme.Itchangedmyteachingstyleandmydynamic.Anditwouldn’thavehappenedwithoutthesupportofallofthem[teachersintheroom]andthefamilyatmosphere.

16 Principal Speakingabouthisrole:“WhenIfirstgothere,theschoolneededtransformaAonalchange,workedonchangingtheculturefrombeingadultcenteredtoastudentcenteredenvironment,wheredecisionsweregoingtobemadebasedonwhatisbestforkidsfirst,adultssecond.Andgetngkidstounderstandtheyneedtotakeownershipoftheirownlearning,ownbehavior…AlsoweneededtoraisethelevelofexpectaAon,becausegoodistheenemyofgreat.”


�

20 Principal Focusofschool:“preparedforfullopAongraduaAon…opportunitytodowhatheorshewantstodo;techcollege,military,goingintoworkforce,business,skills,fullopAongraduaAon…alotofteachersweren’tthinkingaboutthat,justtheirclass…buttheyneedtounderstandthebiggerpicture.Andlet’stakeemoAonoutofthis,andattheendoftheday,itdoesn’tmaaerwhatouropinionsare,whatmaaersishowmuchastudenthasgrown.Andlikeitornot,underthenewsysteminGeorgia,RTTT,weareevaluatedonCCRindex.WegottomakesurewearewinningbackourcommunityandshowthemwearepreparingstudentstotheirpotenAal.WithadultsIuseaformula:A+B=C.Can’tjustgotoC.C=success;Aisadults,theeducators,Bisstudents.BeforeB,welookatus.AreweprovidingopportuniAes,creaAng,designing,forB,ourstudents,togettoC,success.Weouenblamestudents,butyouhavetolookinthemirror,itmakespeopleuncomfortable…andtheyleu;someleubecauseIwasn’tgoingtogivethemplanningperiodwhentheywanted;wasn’taboutthemanymore.”

21 Principal “Biggestchanges…Majorityofdiscussionisstudentfocusedonsuccess.Alltheindicatorsofsuccess:howareclassroomsdesigned?Aretheystandardsbased?ArewebuildingthoserelaAonships?Arewedesigningforrigor?Arewemonitoringforengagement?AreweprovidingopportuniAesformastery?LookingatretenAon.SAT/ACT.Whatcanwedodifferent?Ourteachersarerallyingaroundfacttogetstudentsacrossthatstage,eventhehardtoreachones.Before,preaymuchtheir[student’s]fault.Butwhatelsewouldyouwantmetodo?Whetheryouagree,getasmanykidsaswecan,andnotgiveuponanyone.”

22 Principal Roleofteacher:“Lifechanger.WhatImeanbylifechanger…youcreate,design,opportuniAesaroundyourcontent,forkidstobesuccessful.Theydon’thavetolikeyoursubject.Butifyoudesignit,anditsrigorous,andthey’relearningthestandards,they’llrespectyou.You’regoingtochangetheirlife.GottoAeittotherealworld,andshowthemtheycandoit….Rigorleadstoengagement.”

23 Principal “InMuscogeecounty,everyeighthgradergetschancetogotooneofeighthighschools,andwehaveafullmagnetschool.[Oneschool]likeapublic,privateschool.Theyhandpickeverykidthatcomesin.Whenkiddoesn’tperform,shiuthembacktothehomeschool.That’swhytheyarenumberoneinGeorgia.”

24 Parents Whatinterestsyourchildren?“Handson,hecan’tjustsitandjustlisten.Classesaresolong,thatisneededtokeephisinterest…handson.”Anotherparent:“I’dsayhowtheacAviAesarerelatedtowhattheyareexperiencing…theycangraspitalialemore.”Another:“AnyAmetheycanshowhowitappliestoreallife,theyaremorelikelytograspitandrunwithit…needtoseepurposeforit.Wheretheymightuseit.”Another:“With[namescourse]…hehastogooutandresearchsomethinggoingon…andwriteaboutit,andhelovesthat,andthisisakidwhohatestowrite.”Yetanotherparent:“Thisteacher,hehadfor[namescourse],somesaidhowstrictandawfulhewas…buthejusthadhighexpectaAons.Mysonrespectedthat.Itwashard.HeactuallylearnedsentenceconstrucAon.Heshowedrespectandthatallowedmysontoachievemoreinthatclass.”


�

25 Parents Comparingtopast:“Thereisacertainamountofstressnowthatisnotalwayshealthy,aboutcollege,aboutwhatyouhavetodo,seemswayoverthetopfromwhenIwasinschool,thecompeAAveness.”Anotherparent:“Getngintocollegenotatalllikeitwas,Ididn’thavetodoallthis.NowtheygradeyouonalltheoutsideacAviAes,communityservice;kidscan’tbekids.Igottobeakid.”Another:“Ididn’tworryaboutifIhadthisorthat,servicehours,ifshehasenoughsotheywantheroversomeoneelse.”Andanother:“AndcareerpathsherearefanaAc,butcan’treallyknowwhatyouwanttodowhenyou’reseventeenandhaven’tevenbeentocollege.”

26 Parents Whatweneedtoknow?“ShawpercepAonismisjudgedinthecommunity—itisgetngbeaer.”Another:“Icallitthehiddengem.TheopenhousegivesyouadifferentpercepAonofShaw.Peoplewhohavegonetoanotherschool,ItellthemIloveit;nothingbadtosay.ThepercepAonisturningaround—Icontributethattoprincipal.Therearenosaggypants…Studentheredresswithpride.Thishashelpedcleanuptheimageofschoolalot.Hehasalotofprideforthis.Fiveyearsagodidnothavethat,[what]wehavenow.”Another:“Shouldask,whatisthepublicpercepAonoftheschool.Idon’tknowwherepeoplearegetngthisstuff.Makesmeangry…mykidlookedatthetestscores,andsawthatthetestscoresareontherise.”

27 Students TalkaboutrelaAonshipwithteachers:“In[namescourse],hehelpsusout,Iwanttogettocollege,hedoesofferusalot…getsfundraisers.”Another:“theyknowwhatwefeellikeandwantustosucceed…andwerelatetothembecauseofthis.”Another:“onaquiz,yougetasecondchanceifnotdoingwell.”Another:“Withscience,youcanaskquesAonsandstayauerschool.”Another:“this,especiallywithnewschedule…fourclassesaday,nextdayisdifferent.Thismakesithardtofocus;theywantyoutohaveAmetocometothemandgetthingsstraight,andbeabletodoextrathingslikechurchorsports,andiftherearemulApleprojectswithduedatesonthesameday,teachersmightadjust[asked,howteachersknow?]oh,theyareveryopen,Ishare,orteacherstalkwitheachother…theymightnotbeablebutmightpostponeanassignment.”

28 Students InrespondingtoquesAonaboutanassignmentthattheyliked:“Inour[namescourse]class,shegaveusaworksheet,andsaid,whenyoufinish,Ihavesomebaconforyouall.”Another:“teachershaveourbacksandwegethungry,andtheyknowhowtoencourageus.”

29 Students Whenaskedwhatmakesthempersist:“It’sallaboutthatfinalgrade,Iwanttogotocollege.CountonGPA,beaercollege.Gradespushalotofpeopleandyougottogetintoagoodcollege.Andforshort-termgoals,parentsdon’tletstudentsgooutifgradesarenotgood.”

30 Counselors Focusofschool:“Studentachievement,studentsuccess[asked,hasitchanged?]NottoolongauerItransferredwestartedworkingwithPAGEand[principal],andstudentoriented,hewantedtomakesurestudentsweresuccessfulintheclassroom,thatwashiswholereasonfordoingtheWOWframework,soalwaysbeen…itjustconAnues…thefocus[now]istogetthecommunitytoknow,sharewithcommunity[thesuccess],getthewordoutaboutShaw.”“Becauseofthechoiceofotherschools,importanttogetthewordout.”


�

31 Counselors WhatwouldyoutakefromShaw?“Ilikethecurriculumcouncil—webounceideasaround,andleteveryoneknowtheyhaveavoice,youhaveavoicewithinyourgroup.Ilikethat.TheschoolIwasatbeforewasveryauthoritarian,veryscary;hereitisnotlikethat,andyoucansayhowyoufeelhere.”Another:“WehaveaveryapproachableadministraAon,andthismakesitveryeasytoworkhere;weareverycollaboraAve;gradelevels,ourstudentscometoanyofus,whotheyfeelcomfortable;wedoeverythingasateam,andmakedecisionstogether.”“DecisionsareimprovedbecauseofcollaboraAon.”

32 Counselors FavoriteacAvity:“R2G[RaidertoGraduaAon]ceremony…parentspresenttheirchildwiththering…Ilovetheicecreamparty,abouthonorrole,adminscoopsouticecreamandtheyhavesenseofhumorandplay’initup.”Another:“endofyear,thesenioracAviAes—theyareexcitedbecausetheymadeitandmorethansurvived,theyexcelled!LeaersofrecommendaAon…itisstressful,butfuntosaygreatthingsaboutstudentsandhavethemgetaccepted.Celebratorythingshelpcounterheavythings.”

33 Counselors Whatelseshouldweknow?“Shawisaverycaringatmosphere.Notgoingtobeastudentwhoslipsthroughthecracks.Transfersfromotherschoolssaythis…itisharderhere,butitisgood,notallowedtojustbe…adminsalwaysinthehall,talkingwiththem;theyknowdifferentstudentsnames.”Askedabouttheothercolleaguenotatfocusgroup:“hemovedforayear,andwantedtocomeback;likethewaythingsaredonehere.”


�

TABLE11Representa;vequotesfromfocusgroupsandinterviewsatSonoravilleHighSchool,bypar;cipanttype

Ref.No. Part.Type Quote

1 Teachers Wordorphrasethatdescribesapproachtoteachingandlearning?“Engagement,that’sthewordthat’souenthrownoutthere,togetthekidsengagedintothelesson,intheskillwe’retryingtoapproach.”Another:“Ilikeinquirybased,inscience,verymuchinquirybased.”Another:“Asdiverseaswecan,studentslearninsomanyways,wetrytohitthemall.”Otherideas:“Realworld.”“Relevant.”

2 Teachers Whenaskedabouttheirfirstimpressionoftheschooltheirfirstweek:“Ilovedtheatmospherehere[allagree],anditsnotliketheotherschools[I’veworkedat],itsdifferentatmospherethanschoolsIhavebeenat.Everybodyknowseverybody,there’snotalotofcliques.”Another:“It’safamilyandIknowpeopleoutsideofthesciencedepartment,notjuststuckwithsamegroup[othersagree].”Another:“Itransferredherefromanotherschoolfirsttwoyears,firstfacultymeeAng,didn’tworryaboutwhotositby,didn’thavetositbyanyone.Likehesaid,afamily.”Another:“AtafacultymeeAng,everyoneisjustcutngup.”Another:“reallyacommunityschool…connectedtothecommunity.”Another:“Ithinkitisparentinvolvement,itisbighere,andnowthatwe’reconnectedtohighschool,evenmoreso.”Andanother:“Ialsothinkit’sthestyleofleadership.I’mbrandnewhere,andI’msupportedbyatmospheretheyestablish,wedon’twalkinfear;theyencourageustotrytodonewthings.There’smorefreedomthere.Firstimpressionwasthatstudentsaremoreengaged;theycaremore,evenwiththenon-honorsorgiued.WhereIcamefrombefore,notlikethis…becauseofwhatisgoingonhere,kidsexpectengagement,lookingforandwanttobeengaged.WhenIwentonthelastPAGEconference…thepiecesbegantofallintoplace,Irealized,oh,theyhavebeenworkingthisway,andthisiswhytheatmosphereisthewaythatitis,andamongthekids.”

3 Teachers Schoolsfocus:“RelaAonships,andIcanrelateitsocially,academically.”Another:“We’vealwaysbeentoldstudentscomefirst.”Another:“KindaknowingyourWho.”[Manyagreewiththispoint]Another:“[Tellsastoryofastudenttellingteachertheyneedabandaid,asasks:”Yourstudentstellyouwhentheyneedthings”?[ReacAngtothisteacher’sstory]“Onawhole,that’swhatthestudentsexpectfromus,expectustobepartofthecommunity,feelateaseandtheyapproachyou.”


�

4 Teachers Wheredidthisfocuscomefrom?“Theyareourcustomers,andtobeaerservethem,weneedtoknowtheirneeds…[learned]alotfromaaendingPAGEconferences…andknowingourWHO.”[AnypartofthisthatsAcksoutaskey?]Another:“Freedomtoexperiment,andtofail…theywantustotrysomethingtohelpourstudentslearn…reliefthatitdidn’tworkandIdidn’tgetintrouble,andIcanimprove.”Another:“Engagement,somethinkofitasprofessionalfreedom,here,thisisaprofessionalexpectaAons…teacherssetthatexpectaAon,andsetbydepartmentchair.”Another:“Justspeakingfor[namessubject],Ihave[subject]coachforlastsixyears,andalwaystryingnewthings.”Another:“Today,atRiseUpevent[teacherinducAonprogram],thisishowtheywantustothink,innovaAon,Idon’thavetosAckwithsomethingifitdoesn’twork,she[departmentchair]expectsmetochangeifnotworking,andthenthenewidea,shemightcopy;theywanteveryone’sideastohelptheschoolasawhole.”“A-hamoment,atlastPAGEconference,learnedthatnotaboutbeinganentertainer…no,notthat;notputngonshoweveryday;aboutbeinggetngtogetthemengaged,andthatmaynotbesuperfunacAviAes,butmakethemthink?”“Andwhatareourgoals,not100percentengagedalltheAme,notpossible.Whatare,whatdowereallywantwithourgoals?It’snot100percentengagementalltheAme,trytokeepthemajorityatthislevelmajorityofAme,a-hamomentsclarifiedbyconferenceforme.”Another:“IconAnuallyprobethem[students]forresponses,togetconAnualassessments,andforthis,engagementisneeded.Somemighthavetroublewiththenoise.”

5 Teachers Whatelseshouldweknow?“Notlikethiseverywhere…ifyougotoPAGEconferences,andyoutalkwithotherteachers,youlearnthat.We’redoingtheprincipalandleadershipnetworkthroughPAGE;wedohaveitawesomehere,youhearotherteacherssaywearesolucky;onegrouphadtosneakthere,becausethesuperintendentwasopposed.”

6 Teachers Firstimpressionofschool:“Iwas,like,Idiedandgonetoheaven…Cameaslongtermsub,verydifferentenvironmentatthatAme[whentheschoolfirstopened],verystructuredthefirstyear;verystructured,andithaschangedalot.”Another:“Ifeltverywelcome,likefamily.Itwasmyfirstyearteachinghere,but15yearsofteaching;Iwasconstantlyasking,whenistheballgoingtodrop,buteveryonesaiditisnotgoingto,issomethinglurkingaroundthecorner,butno!”

7 Teachers “Wecommunicatealot,you’dseelotsofcollaboraAon,sharingofwhatwearedoing;butthekidsfirst,changethings,flipschedules,theacAviAesbasedaroundthechildren,wearealwaysthinkingaboutthem;otherteacher—Iamrecognizedasanexpert,andtodevelopthelessons,andengagethekids,andcreatethoserelaAonshipswiththestudents(referencesengagementasakeyword);thatwasmyfirstweek,thelastyearatmiddlethirdprincipalinfiveyears,verystressful,alotofAmecrying,uphere,muchmorefreedomtodowhatIneedtodo;goingtoseealovingandnurturingenvironment;teacherslevelwitheachothernomaaerwhattheyaregoingthrough[startedcryingabouthowitmeansalot]goingtobetakencareofinaprofessionalmanner.

8 Teachers RelaAonshipwithadministraAon?“Principalhasmyback,caresforme,APsthatcareformywell-being,andtrust;I’mfrombusinessworld,whereIwondered,‘areyouprotected,doesbosshaveyourback?’;withouradmin,IknowIdo.AnyAmeIneededtoaskforhelp,theyhavegoaenforme.Beingmyfirstyear,itwasn’tevenaquesAon.Totallyfeelsupportedbyallofthem,100percent.”


�

9 Teachers Firstimpressionoftheschool:“Lastyearwasmyfirstyear,stoodout,opennessamongfaculty,andrelaAonshipwithstudents;communitybasedhighschool,notbeenaroundbefore.”Another:“4thyear;firstweek,sameideas,openwithfaculty,jumpin,twoinsciencenewtoSonoravillethatyear,otherteacherwasfirstyear.Wehelpedhimoutabit.Couldalwaysaskadminwhateverweneeded,anyAme;thatwashelpful.This14thyear,quesAonsansweredmorequicklyhere.”Another:“Admintrustsyoutodoyourjob,allowyoudoyourjob,notgoingtolashout,figureoutawaytomakewhatneededhappen.”Another:“FirstyearformemyhusbandandIcametofootballgamefirstyear,itwasascrimmagegame,butyetlotsofschoolspirit.Husband,‘areyousurethisisascrimmagegame’?Waydifferent.”Another:“Admintrustsustodoourjob;myfirsttwoweeksduring[namesevent],IthoughtIneededpermissionforeverymove,atonepoint[administrator]justsaid,justdoit,don’tneedtotellmeeverything….hewantstoknow,buthedoesn’thoveroveryou…hetrustsusasafaculty.”[Otherschools?Isthiscommon?]“Preayuniquehere.Nineyearshere,firstjobforme.WhenIcame,Iknew[namessubject],butnothingaboutworkingwithkids.Adminhelpedmeoutwithoutbeingcondescending;neverhadagotchamoment;otheradminatanotherschools,thatisthere.”

10 Teachers Focusoftheschool?“LearningcommunityacAvelypursuinghigherstandardofexcellence—goPhoenix[allsaysloganofschool];itstrue,wewantthekidstobeacAve.”Another:“Alotofworkonfrontendtodoengagingwork,whilerulesandexpectaAonsareflexible,ifsomethingnotworking,youchangethatup,butthereatsameAme.Studentsveryflexible.”Another:“Thereisnotonesinglequietclassroom…alotofgroups,outinthehall,onthefloor…[howdidyoucometodothisasaschool?]“Theyallowedustohavethereigns,westartedpretendingyouareastudent,go;weredesignourcurriculumeveryyear…weneverteachsamethingtwice.”Another:“TheWOW[alljumpingintotalkaboutit]lookatthekidfirst,otherschoolneverknewwhatthatwas,Phoenix40s[hadmorebeforelostdays],[namesadministrators]wouldpresentandtheframeworks,somethingtogoby,andwewentwiththat,thathelpedthat,Ineverheardaboutthat[WOW,etc.].”Another:“SawthecultureshiuwhenIcame,theideathatstudentisvolunteerandcustomer,thatwasdifferent,andwanAngtoengagethem,nowitistheexpectaAon,andwecollaborateevencrosscurricular;someonenewcomesin,thisiswaydifferent…newteacherinducAon,RiseUp,wheredesignqualiAesareexplained.”Another:“Whenthroughit[RiseUp]lastyear,itwaseyeopeninglastyear,hereitwaskidsneedtobeengaged,freedomtodesignthingsaroundthat.”Another:“TimetocollaborateoncreaAngengagingtasks…whensomeonenewcomesin,sayitiswaydifferent.”


�

11 Teachers RelaAonshipwitheachother,andstudents.“Wekeepeachothersane.”Another:“It’sacollaboraAveenvironment.”Another:“Greatfriendsandfamily;getengagedonpersonallevel.[Adminisrator]encouragesustosupportoutofschool…games,aplay…showwegenuinelycare.”Another:“Evenauergraduate,westayintouch.”Another:“Ifyoufollowedus,sure,everydaynotperfect,butoverallIdon’thatetocometoworkandmanyteacherselsewheredo,becauseofallthestressfromthestatelevel.Factis,Icouldnotworkinaschoolthatdidn’thavethisatmosphere[tohelpdealwithallstatedemands].”Another:“Inmydepartment,wecutupandlaugh,andenjoyandcollaboraAon.”Another:“Mostdepartmentssittogetherandwholedepartments,you’llseeatawedding.”Another:“We’retoldbyadmin,engagekids,don’tworryabouttestresults,theywillcome,sureenoughwegotgreattestscores;wetrustinthat,sowekeepthekidsengaged.WithEOCT,sAllgettestprep,butmajorityofAmenotthat.ThisisadrasAcshiufromotheradminsIhaveworkedwith.”

12 Parents Workorphrasetodescribetheschool:“Spirit,community,opportunity…[alwaysbeenlikethat?]PreaymuchconsistentfromwhatI’veseen,butstrongernow…everywhere,highschoolisinfluencinglowergrades…everyoneisgetngintohelpingchildreninneed.”

13 Parents Intalkingaboutteachers:“Ineverheardmychildtalkaboutbadexperience…theyreallycareaboutperformance…sports,coachesreallycareaboutfuture,theyarecoachingforfuture,whatclasstotake,theyguidedherthroughclassessheneedsforhealthcareer.”Another:“Theyareveryresponsive…teachersdon’tcometoher,butifIaskaquesAon,theyrespond,theyareeasytoreach.”

14 Parents IntalkingaboutrelaAonshipwithadministrators:“Theytrulycare,andthereisafamilyfeel.Theyaregoingoutintothecommunity,establishingourreputaAon;nameofschoolisgoingoutwithgraduates…[whatisthereputaAonoftheschool?]“Verygood,posiAve,getintodowntown,itscompeAAve…goingbacktoadminquesAon,theadministraAonworkedArelesslywhentherewasastorm,takingkidshome.Theyhademergencyplan…allstudentsinvolvedtohelpout,centerofcommunityhelpingoutcommunity.”Another:“Wehadsomestuffdisappear,andtheadministraAonveryprofessional,madesureeveryonewasok.”

15 Parents Inresponsetowhatkindofworkisassigned?“Thedualenrollmentclass,it’smoreinvolvedthanwhenIwasincollege;they’reproducinghighqualityamountsofwork,theyarechallengingthechildren.”Another:“Workchallengesmydaughter,shegetsboredeasily;theymovedherupwhenneeded.”Another:“Teachersmakethemselvesavailablewithhomework…heisavailabletohelpatnight…teachersgivestudentscell;texAngandkeepintouchontwiaer;ifthereisbadweather,theyassignwork,kidsknowit.”Another:“Theyhaveopenchannelwithteachers,planningandcommunicaAon.Icandropoffmydaughterearly,andshecangototutor,andcatchupandateacherisalwaysthere.”

16 Counselors Indiscussinghowtheschoolhaschanged:“Ithasgrownintermsofnumbers…morefamilylike.Itstartedoutsonew,itwasalmostcold,andnothingonthewalls,sobecamecommunityfamilyoriented;startedoutwithgoodstaff;becomecommunity,andnowaddedelementary,biggercommunity.”

20 Counselors IntalkingaboutrelaAonshipwithteachers:“It’sverygood!Theyareveryopenintalkingaboutstudents;mostofthemcometomewithaquesAonorissuewithastudent,andweworktogethertohelpsolveproblemsthatgetinthewayoflearning.[Usedtohavemorecounselors,buttherewasacut].


�

21 Counselors Focusofschool:“Focusedonstudentimprovement,engagementisafocusforsure.I’mnotintheclassroom,butI’veheardthatalot,teachersareworkingonthat.Whattheyteachnowissodifferent;verydifferentfrom15yrsago.Theyusedifferentstrategies,consideringlearningstylesofstudents.Andthecontenthaschanged.The[namessubject],itissomuchmorerigorousandexpectaAonnowthatallstudentsaregoingtofurthertheireducaAon.Beforethatwasn’twhatschoolwasgearedtoward.”

22 Students Wordorphraseaboutschool:“Pride![Saidveryquickly]Work!PhoenixnaAon![Severalgivetheseanswers][Whatdoesthatmean?]Itmeanslearningcommunity[ispeprallypartofit?]It’severybody,communitytoo.

23 Students Aboutteachers:“Theyhelpalot,stayauer,ifneeded.”Another:“Teacherscareabouteveryonewhocomesinthedoor,theyunderstanddisabiliAes,whatyouexcelat…mostteacherswantyoutosucceed.”

24 Students TalkingaboutkindsofacAviAesinschool:“Thereisthislab…parachutelabwherewetakeapieceofplasAc…wethrewitoffahigherarea,ifwindwouldcatch,wesawhowgravityandforcework.”Another:“Handsonexamples…likechewinggumforphysics.”Another:“Itiscommonforteacherstodoprojectsandclassestogether…majorityAmetheycometogether,likeifguestspeaker,forscience—guestspeakers,policeofficers,GBI[stateFBI]”.

25 Students Givenexamplesofsomethingtheyenjoyed:“I’mtakingthe[honors]programandweactedascongressandsenateandmadebillsanditwascooltoseethepoliAcalthingsplayout.”Another:“Wemadearau,andhadtoseeifitreallyworks[environmentalprogram];hadtolearnaboutdifferentwaterbuoyancy.”Another:“Wehadtodotheresearchtomakeabillanditwasneattoseepeople’sdifferentpoliAcalviews.”Anotherexample:“Wehaveaclubthathelpsoutfolkswhoareinneed.[Whatdoyoulearnfromthat?]“Itmakesyourealizesomepeoplearefarmoreluckythanothers…aueryouhelp,youjustwanttohelppeople,they[theschool]insAllinyouhowtohelpothers,that’simportantinreallife.”

26 Students WhatmakesassignmentsinteresAng?“Handson…goingoutandseeingwhathappensintherealworld,howyouaregoingtouseit.”Another:“WedoSocraAcseminars…skillscanweusetotalk…everyoneisinacircle.TheteachergivesusatopicandasksquesAons…wehaveconversaAons…theteachertriestopreventhimselffromsayingaword,tolearnfromeachother…butsomestudentsareshy.”Another:“SomeAmeswehavedebates,goodtoseeopinionsoutthere.”

27 Students RegardingrelaAonshipswithteachers:“Someteachersaredifferentfromothers…theyhavemorepaAencethanIwouldhave…Ithinkitistoughjob.”Another:“Someteachersareharderthanothers…buttheworkischallenging.”Another:“Thegradeisimportantforfuture,college,career[whatwouldyoudoifnogrades?]“Itisalsopersonalprideinknowingyoufinishedsomething…Ifeellikeourgovernmentisfocusedongradesandtestscores,butteachersarefocusedonusandwantustogenuinelysucceed.”

28 Students Whatwillyouremembermost?“Thepeople;homecoming,prom…sports,clubs[manyofferideas].”Another:“Everyonecanremembertheloveandpride,PhoenixnaAon.”[Aremoststudentsproud?]I’dsayso,wearerelaAvelynew,andhavetonsofsupport,andtheband,art.”


�

Appendix B


�

EVIDENCECODEKEY*

SOURCESOFEVIDENCE:FOCUSGROUPS,INTERVIEWSANDOBSERVATIONS

1. Designteam/teacherleaderobservaAonorfocusgroup1a.Focusgroupwith“rankandfile”teachers**

2. Focusgroupwithparents3. Interviewwithbuildingprincipal4. Interviewwithcounselor(s)5. Focusgroupwithstudents6. InterviewwithPAGE’sExecuAveDirector,Dr.AlleneMagill;7. InterviewwithDr.BillMcCown,formerSuperintendent(Sonoraville)8. InterviewwithDr.JimArnold,formerPrincipal(Shaw)9. InterviewswithMartaWalker;Dr.JudyHenry;RickyClemmons(PAGE/HSRI)

*CodingusedintheResearchQuesOonsdocument:e.g.,thefocusgroupwithparentswouldbe:F2.**Asonehighschooldidnotseparateteacherleadersfromrankandfileteachersduringthefocusgroups,thesetwooriginallyseparatesourcesofevidencehavebeencombinedintoasinglecode.

EVIDENCECODEKEY*

SOURCESOFEVIDENCE:DOCUMENTS

1. Aaendance:overall;percentmissingmorethan20daysofschool(fornon-medicalreasons),since2006-20072. College-creditbearingcourses:list,descripAon,andenrollmentbyyear(2006-2007topresent)3. College-goingratesfirstyearfollowinggraduaAon(2006-2007topresent)4. Creditrecoveryprograms:list,descripAon,andenrollmentbyyear(2006-2007topresent)5. EOCTscoressince2006-20076. Four(4)samplesofstudentworkfromCTAE/Academy/Magnetcourseswithrubrics,fromthepastschoolyear

(2013-2014).Equalemphasisonstrongandweakexamples(de-idenAfied)7. GraduaAonrates(withinexpectedAmeframe,orasdefinedbyStateofGeorgia),since2006-20078. HSRIEmailcommunicaAonarchivesforbothschools9. Impactevidencedocuments(i.e.,ImpactDesignandDevelopmentspreadsheets)10. Masterschedules(2006-2007topresent)11. PAGEPLeventaaendancebyschoolsince200612. PAGEvideos,podcasts,etc.13. PAGE’sHSRIbudgetsforeachschool14. RecordsofHSRI-relatedvisitstotheeachschool15. Relatedschool-createdtoolsandprocesses(e.g.,modifiedprotocols,PLpresentaAons,referenceguides,etc.)16. Samplingofcoursesyllabifromschoolyear2013-2014orfromtheupcomingschoolyear(2014-2015):25%

sampleofallcoursesrequiredforgraduaAon,PLUSCTAE/academycourses,chosenbyprincipal,withhalfoftheselectedsyllabibeingidenAfiedasexemplary,andhalfbeingidenAfiedaslessthanexemplary(de-idenAfied)

17. SchoolarAfacts,t-shirts,publicdisplaysofstudentwork,etc.18. Schoolimprovementplans(2006-2007topresent)19. Schoolwebsite/Facebook/youtube20. School’siniAalHSRIapplicaAon(andPAGE’sHSRIapplicaAonprocessoverview/history)21. Suspensions:in-school,auer-schoolandout-of-school,since2006-2007


�

22. Teacherreferralstoprincipal/office,2006-200723. Ten(10)samplesofstudentworkfromcoursesrequiredforgraduaAon,alongwithscoringrubrics,fromthe

pastschoolyear(2013-2014).Equalemphasisonstrongandweakexamples(de-idenAfied)24. Yearbooks

*CodingusedintheResearchQuesOonsdocument:e.g.,aaendancewouldbeD1


�

CaseStudyDocumentNeeds/Requests

TIMELINE/DEADLINE/TARGET–allitemsneededon/beforeSeptember30.Earlieristhemostadvantageous.Itemscanbesharedastheyareobtainedortheycanallbesubmi\edatoneOme.

1. David/PAGEwillprovidea. PAGEPLeventaaendancebyschool(Shaw,Sonoraville)since2006b. RecordsofDavid’sHSRI-relatedvisitstothetwoschoolsc. PAGE’sHSRIbudgetsfortwoschools(e.g.,conference/retreataaendance,etc.)d. EmailcommunicaAonarchivesforbothschoolse. Impactevidencedocuments(i.e.,David’sspreadsheets)f. Relatedschool-createdtoolsandprocesses(e.g.,modifiedprotocols,PLpresentaAons,reference

guides,etc.)g. School’siniAalHSRIapplicaAon(andPAGE’sHSRIapplicaAonprocessoverview/history)

2. EvidencerequestedofShawHSandSonoravilleHS

AllitemsarebeingrequestedBYSCHOOLYEAR,SINCESCHOOLYEAR2006-2007,orwhateverexists(intheeventmulApleyearsofhistoricaldataarenotavailable),unlessotherwisenoted(asine.,f.,andg.,below,whichspecifyonlyoneschoolyear).Itisunderstoodthatsomeofthesedataaresimplynotavailableforthenumberofyearsbeingsought.SharethatwithDavidwheniniAallyreviewingthislistandeachschool’suniqueinformaAonwillbenoted.Thislevelofdetailwillhelpstreamlinethefollowupthatisneededtoensurethatacomprehensivepictureoftheschool’sdataisinplace.NOTE:eCopiespreferredbutifhardcopiesaremorereadilyaccessible,thatformatisperfectlyfine.Theschoolisnotexpectedtospendlargeamountsof;meloca;ngthisdata.Theruleofthumbisfortheschooltoprovidethedocumenta;onthatisquicklylocatedandeasilyshared.

a. Masterschedules(2006-2007topresent)b. Schoolimprovementplans(2006-2007topresent)

NOTE:SonoravilleHShasalreadyprovidedanSIPforFY13NOTE:ShawHShasalreadyprovidedSIPsforFY11,FY12,andFY13

c. College-creditbearingcourses:list,descripAon*,andenrollmentbyyear(2006-2007topresent)d. Creditrecoveryprograms:list,descripAon*,andenrollmentbyyear(2006-2007topresent)e. SamplingofcoursesyllabifromSchoolYear2013-2014orfromtheupcomingschoolyear

(2014-2015):onlya25%sampleofallcoursesrequiredforgraduaAon,PLUSCTAE/academycourses,chosenbyprincipal,withhalfoftheselectedsyllabibeingidenAfiedasexemplary,andhalfbeingidenAfiedaslessthanexemplary.Canbede-idenAfied(anonymous/redacted).

f. Ten(10)samplesofstudentworkfromcoursesrequiredforgraduaAon,alongwithscoringrubrics,fromthepastschoolyear(2013-2014).Ifnoworkisonhandfromlastyear,samplescanbeselectedasthe2014-2015schoolyeargetsunderway,ifitisfeasibletodoso.Equalemphasisonstrongandweakexamples.Canbede-idenAfied(anonymous/redacted).

g. Four(4)samplesofstudentworkfromCTAE/Academy/Magnetcourseswithrubrics,fromthepastschoolyear(2013-2014).Ifnoworkisonhandfromlastyear,samplescanbeselectedasthe2014-2015schoolyeargetsunderway,ifitisfeasibletodoso.Equalemphasisonstrongandweakexamples.Canbede-idenAfied(anonymous/redacted).

h. AcademicPerformance,PersistenceandDisciplinestaAsAcs**,byyear,since2006-2007:i. GraduaAonrates(withinexpectedAmeframe,orasdefinedbyStateofGeorgia),since

2006-2007


�

ii. EOCTscoressince2006-2007(aggregatedand/ordisaggregated–whatisonhand–donotcreatenewreports)

iii. College-goingratesfirstyearfollowinggraduaAon(ifpossible)asfarbackaspossible(2006-2007)

iv. Aaendance:overall;percentmissingmorethan20daysofschool(fornon-medicalreasons),since2006-2007

v. Suspensions:in-school,auer-schoolandout-of-school,since2006-2007vi. Teacherreferralstoprincipal/office,2006-2007

*descrip;on–(seed.ande.above)descrip;onscanbeverybriefandgeneric–if,however,theschoolhasreasonstoaddspecificitytoadescrip;on–e.g.,whyonecreditrecoveryprogramwaschosen,orchanged–theschoolshouldfeelfreetoincludethatinforma;on

**AcademicPerformance,PersistenceandDisciplinesta;s;cs–ifyouknowthatyourSIP(orsomeotherdocumentyoucansupplyorhavesupplied)containsitemsinthissec;on(h.,i.-vi.),simplynotethatontheappropriatelineandreferencethecoredocument–donotrecreatedataorduplicateeffortssubmiSngittwice.


�

SchoolVisitSchedule–interviewsandfocusgroups

Weareassumingaschooldaybeginningatapproximately8:00a.m.andendingatapproximately3:00p.m.Wecanbeginearlier,orstaylater,sopleaseletDavidknowyourpreferredmeeAngstartAme.YourguidancewillassistwithourplanningandwillhelpusminimizetheAmeyouprepforthevisit.Wedon’twanttodisturb/distractanyoneduringarrivalordismissal,althoughwewilllikelywanttoobservethoseperiodsofAmeduringourfallvisit.InaddiAontothestarAngAmeforthefirstsession(detailsbelow),pleaseletusknowthebestAmeforustoarriveattheschoolsothatwecanobservestudentsandstaffastheystarttheirday.

Theorderoftheinterviews/focusgroupsisflexible,andwillbedeterminedenArelybyyou,withasingleexcepAonwherewedohaveapreference(theinterviewwithprincipal-seebelow–whichisbestconductedat/nearday’send).

Eachinterview/focusgroupshouldbeabout45minutesinlength,andwewouldlikeeachtobeaudiorecorded.TherecordingwillbemadeavailabletoDavid/PAGE,butotherwisewillremaincompletelyconfidenAal.ThisAmeframe(45minutes)givesusAmetoaskforfurtherinformaAon,documentaAon,debriefbetweensessions(about15minutesbetweeneach),usetherestroom,etc.ThisschedulealsoallowsussomeAmetoeatlunch,whichcouldbeincludedinoneofthesessionswithadults(e.g.,parents).Weareverywillingtostayauerschoolifthatwouldassistyouinplanningfortheseinterviews/focusgroups.

Herearethesixrequestedinterviews/focusgroupsforyourschool.

-Designteam/teacherleaderobservaAonorfocusgroup/interview

Note:Theideahereisthatifwecanobservetheseteachersatwork,asadesignteamoritsequivalentmeeAng,thatwouldbegreat,butwerealizethattheschedulewillprobablymakethisunlikely.ThenextbestopAonisafocusgroupwithteachersdesignatedasleaders.Theother/finalopAonisaninterviewwithateacherwhoplaysaleadingroleinHSRIrelatedwork.Weareassumingtheappropriatenumberhereisbetween3-5teachers,butsinceatypicalfocusgroupsizeforthisprojectis6-9individuals,thenumbercanexceedfive.OnlyMarkandAgnes(notDavid)willbepresentforthisobserva;on,focusgroup,orinterview.

-Focusgroupwith“rankandfile”teachers

Note:“Rankandfile”descriptorusedsimplytoindicateteacherswhoarenotnecessarilypartofaformal,structuredteam/groupthat“officially”leadengagement-centeredwork.Wewouldlikefortheseteacherstoconsistofarangeoffacultyintermsofexperience,“buy-in,”lengthofAmeemployedattheschool,contentarearepresentaAon,gradelevels,etc.(SonoravilleHS,pleaseinclude8thgrade.)Wesuggestthattheprincipaland/ordesignteam(orteacherleaders)canbestmakesuggesAonsastowhoshouldbeinthisfocusgroup.IncludingteacherswithliXlebuy-incanbeveryusefuliniden;fyingculturechange(posi;vequali;esofeffortsattheschool),astheseteachers,inexpressinglackofbuy-intoHSRIprinciplesforexample,provideevidenceoftheexistenceoftheseprinciplesinopera;onattheschool.Ifwecouldrecruit6-9teachers,thatwouldbegreat.Mark,AgnesandDavidwilllikelybepresentforthisfocusgroup.

-Focusgroupwithstudents

Note:aswiththe“rankandfile”teachers,we’dliketospeakwitharangeofstudents,intermsofgradelevel,interests,academicperformance,etc.Schoolpersonnelshoulddecidewhoshouldmakethisdecision,butwedoaskthatinaddiAontotheabovecriteria,thatthegroupbecomposedtoavoidincludingstudentswithstrong


�

friendshipsorrivalries.Putdifferently,studentsselectedtoparAcipateshouldnotbetoofamiliarwitheachother.Wewouldlike6-9studentsforthisgroup.Mark,AgnesandDavidwilllikelybepresentforthisfocusgroup.

-Focusgroupwithparents

Note:OpAmally,thiswouldinclude6-9parents,butwerealizethismaybehardtopulltogether;wearehopingforaminimumofthreeparents.Arangeofparents,intermsoftheirinvolvementinandexperiencewiththeschool,wouldbegreat,ifpossible.Mark,AgnesandDavidwilllikelybepresentforthisfocusgroup.

-Interviewwithcounselor(s)

Note:OpAmally,thiswouldincludemorethanonecounselor(threewouldbegreat),butwerealizethismaybehardtopulltogether,ortheremayonlybeoneortwo.Mark,AgnesandDavidwilllikelybepresentforthisinterview.

-Interviewwithbuildingprincipal

Note:Ifthiscantakeplacetowardtheendoftheday,itwouldbebest,aswecanfollowupwithquesAonsthathaveemergedfromtheobservaAonsandconversaAonsthroughouttheday.Weareleavingituptotheprincipaliftheassistantprincipalshouldbeincluded.OnlyMarkandAgnes(notDavid)willbepresentforthisinterview.


�

FocusGroupQues;ons:Counselors

IntroducOon:ThankyouforsharingyourOmewithustoday!Weareinterestedinlearningmoreaboutthisschool;wearenotevaluators,andthisfocusgroupisunrelatedtoandwillnotaffectyourformalevaluaOons.Weareheretolearnfromtheworkyoudo!

Groundrules:beforewebeginwiththefirstquesOon,wewanteveryonetofeelcomfortableandsharetheirviews;therearenowrongorrightanswers.Everyoneshouldhaveachancetospeak,buteveryonedoesnotneedtoanswereveryquesOon.

OpeningQuesAon:Couldyoupleaseintroduceyourselves,providingyournameandresponsibiliAes,andhowlongyouhavebeenworkingatthisschool?

IntroductoryQuesAon:Whatwordsorphrasesbestdescribeorsymbolizeyourworkhereattheschool?

TransiAonQuesAon:Brieflytalkaboutyourimpressionofthisschoolthefirstweekyoustartedworkinghere.

KeyQuesAons:HowwouldyoudescribethefocusandidenAtyofShaw/SonoravilleHighSchool?—>Howdidthisfocusemerge?—>Doyouseekeypointsinthedevelopmentofthisfocus?—Canyoudescribethem?

IfweshadowedyoueverydayforanenAremonth,whatwouldstandoutabouthowyouconductyourworkhere?—>Whatinfluencedyoutoworkthewayyoudo?

HowwouldyoudescribeyourrelaAonshipwithteachers,administrators,parents,andstudents?—>Describetheroleofeachgroup—>Havetheseroleschangedsinceyoustartedworkinghere?Ifyes,howdidtheychange?Whatinfluencedthechange?

ClosingQuesAons:What’syourfavoriteeventatthisschool?Why?

Ifyouweretostartaschoolfromscratch,whatwouldyoutakefromyourexperienceheretoinformthatwork?—>Whatsupportswouldyouneed,andfromwhowouldyouseekthem?

IsthereanythinginaddiAontowhatyouhavetoldusthatweshouldknowtounderstandShaw/SonoravilleHighSchool?


�

FocusGroupQues;ons:Parents

IntroducOon:thankyoufortakingtheOmetomeetwithustoday.Weareinterestedinlearningmoreaboutthisschool,andaboutitsrelaOonshipwithparentsandthecommunity;wearenotevaluators,andthisfocusgroupisunrelatedtoandwillnotaffecthowyourchildorchildrenorthisschool,willbeevaluated.


OpeningQuesAon:Brieflyintroduceyourselves,andtellushowlongyourchildorchildrenhavebeenatthisschool.

IntroductoryQuesAon:Whatwordorphrasebestdescribesthehighschoolyouaaended?

TransiAonQuesAon:Whatisthefirstwordorphrasethatcomestomindwhenyouthinkaboutthishighschool?

KeyQuesAons:DescribeyourrelaAonshipwiththisschool—>howdoyoulearnaboutwhatisgoingonattheschool?—>tellusaboutyourrelaAonshipswithteachers,theschoolprincipal,assistantprincipal,andschoolcounselors?

IfIwereyourchild’steacher,whatwouldIhavetodotomakeanassignmentinteresAngtothem?—>sinceyourchildstartedschoolhere,tellusaboutsomethingtheyreallyenjoyedandlearnedfrom—>whydoyouthinktheyenjoyedit,andlearnedfromit?—>howdoyouknowtheylearned?

Describetheworkyoutypicallyseethisschoolingassigningyourchild?—>doesitlookchallengingtoyou?—>whatcharacterisAcsofschoolworkdoyouvaluethemost?—>whatisyourfavoriteschoolevent?

ClosingQuesAons:Howisthisschooldifferentfromwhenyouwenttoschool?

IsthereaquesAonthatwedidnotaskyou,thatweshouldhave,oristhereanythingyouwouldliketoadd?


�

FocusGroupQues;ons:Students

IntroducOon:ThankyouformeeOngwithustoday.Weareinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowteachingandlearningtakesplaceatyourschool.Wearenotevaluators,andthisfocusgroupwillnotaffecthowyouorthisschoolwillbeevaluated.Weareinterestedinyourexperiencesatthisschool,soquesOonsarefocusedonlyonyourexperiencessinceenrollinghere.Weareheretolearnfromyou!

Groundrules:beforewebeginwiththefirstquesOon,wewanteveryonetofeelcomfortableandsharetheirviews;therearenowrongorrightanswers.Youdon’tneedtomenOonanynames,whentalkingaboutyourexperiencesatthisschool;andwewon’tshareanynamesiftheyaremenOoned.Everyoneshouldhaveachancetospeak,buteveryonedoesnotneedtoanswereveryquesOon.

OpeningQuesAon:Brieflyintroduceyourselves,andwhatyearofhighschoolthisisforyou,howmanyyearshaveyoubeenhere,andtellusifanysiblingshaveaaendedthisschool.

IntroductoryQuesAon:Whatdoyouthinkyou’llremembermostaboutthisschool?

TransiAonQuesAon:ThinkofawordorphrasethatbestdescribesyourrelaAonshipwithteachersatthisschool

KeyQuesAons:TellusaboutyourrelaAonshipswithteachers,theschoolprincipal,assistantprincipal(s),andschoolcounselors?—>howdoesthisschoolviewandtreatstudents?

Tellusaboutaschoolexperience(project,assignment,acAvity)thatyoureallyenjoyedandlearnedfrom—>whatmadetheexperienceenjoyable?—>howdoyouknowyouhavelearnedfromit?—>beyondgrades—>whatmakessomelearninglast,andusableinothersubjectsorevenoutofschool?

Howouendoesschoolworkinterestyou?—>Whataboutyourfriendsorotherstudentsyouknow?—>whatdoyouconsider“busywork”?

Whatdoeschallengingworklookliketoyou?—>whatcausesyoutopersistinwork(amathproblem,ascienceexperiment,aresearchpaper)thatisdifficult?

ClosingQuesAons:Whatisyourfavoriteschoolevent?

Ifyouweretostartyourownschool,whataspectsofthisschoolwouldyoukeep?Whataspectswouldyouchange?

IsthereaquesAonthatwedidnotaskyou,thatweshouldhave,oristhereanythingyouwouldliketoadd?


�

FocusGroupQues;ons:Teachers

IntroducOon:ThankyoufortakingtheOmetotalkwithustoday!Weareinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowteachingandlearningtakesplaceattheschool.Wearenotevaluators,andthisfocusgroupisunrelatedtoandwillnotaffectyourevaluaOons.Weareheretolearnfromtheworkyoudo!


OpeningQuesAon:Couldyoupleaseintroduceyourselves,providingyournameandteachingresponsibiliAes,andhowlongyouhavebeenworkingatthishighschool?

IntroductoryQuesAon:Whatwordsorphrasesbestdescribeorsymbolizeyourapproachtoteachingandlearning?


KeyQuesAons:HowwouldyoudescribethefocusandidenAtyofShaw/SonoravilleHighSchool?—>Howdidthisfocusemerge?—>Doyouseekeypointsinthedevelopmentofthisfocus?—>Canyoudescribethem?

IfweshadowedyoueverydayforanenAremonth,whatwouldstandoutabouthowyouconductyourworkhere?—>Whatinfluencedyoutoworkthewayyoudo?

HowwouldyoudescribeyourrelaAonshipwithteachers,administrators,parents,andstudents?—>Describetheroleofeachgroup—>Havetheseroleschangedsinceyoustartedworkinghere?Ifyes,howdidtheychange?Whatinfluencedthechange?



IsthereanythinginaddiAontowhatyouhavetoldusthatweshouldknowtounderstandyourworkatthisschool?


�

InterviewQues;ons:Principals

IntroducOon:ThankyouforsharingyourOmewithustoday!SincethisschoolhasbeenidenOfiedasexemplary,weareinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowteachingandlearningtakesplaceattheschool.Wearenotevaluators,andtheinterviewwillnotaffecttheschool’sevaluaOon.Weareheretolearnfromtheworkyoudo.Therearenorightorwronganswers.

OpeningQuesAon:Couldyoupleaseintroduceyourselves,providingyournameandresponsibiliAes,andhowlongyouhavebeenworkingasprincipalatthisschool?

IntroductoryQuesAon:Whatwordsorphrasesbestdescribeorsymbolizeyourworkhereattheschool?


KeyQuesAons:HowwouldyoudescribethefocusandidenAtyofthisschool—>howdidthisfocusemerge?—>doyouseekeypointsinthedevelopmentofthisfocus?—>canyoudescribethem?

IfweshadowedyoueverydayforanenAremonth,whatwouldstandoutabouthowyouconductyourworkhere?—>whatinfluencedyoutoworkthewayyoudo?

HowwouldyoudescribeyourrelaAonshipwithteachers,otheradministrators,parents,andstudents?—>describetheroleofeachgroup—>havetheseroleschangedsinceyoustartedworkinghere?Ifyes,howdidtheychange?Whatinfluencedthechange?



IsthereanythinginaddiAontowhatyouhavetoldusthatweshouldknowtounderstandShaw/SonoravilleHighSchool?


�

Semi-StructuredInterview:PAGEstaff

Notes:

Thereareno“right”or“wrong”answers,andtheinformaAonprovidedisnotpartofanevaluaAon;thepurposeistohelpusdocumenttheeffectoftherelaAonshipPAGEhashadwithtwoHSRIschools.TheobjectofourresearchisthisrelaAonship,andso,weneedtolearnaboutPAGEandHSRIstaffasmuchasweneedtolearnaboutthetwoschoolsinthiscasestudy,sinceitistheirinteracAonanditsimpactthatistheobjectofstudy.

The“—>”indicatesapossiblefollow-upquesAon,ordirecAonfortheconversaAon.

ItisunderstoodthatsomequesAonsmaybeansweredbytheintervieweepriortotheirbeingformallyaskedbytheinterviewer,andassuch,thequesAonwouldbeskipped,orelaboraAonwillbesought.

1.OpeningQuesAon

a) Brieflyintroduceyourselfb) BrieflytellmehowyoucametoworkforPAGE,andhowlongyouhavebeenworkingwithHSRI

2.IntroductoryQuesAon

a) WhatisyourroleinHSRI?BrieflytalkaboutyourmainresponsibiliAes

3.TransiAonQuesAon

a) WheredidtheideaforHSRIcomefrom?

4.KeyQuesAons

a) HowwouldyoudescribeHSRItosomeonewhohaslialeknowledgeaboutPAGEorHSRI?—>AretherekeycomponentsofHSRI?—>AretheirdisAnctphases?—>HowdoesaschooljoinHSRI?

b) WhatisHSRIulAmatelydesignedtoachieve?—>WhyisHSRIbelievedtobethewaytoachievethisaim?—>“TheoryofacAon”:IfwedoX,Ywilloccur.

c) Inyourexperience,whatisthemostcommonaffectofHSRIonparAcipaAngschools?—>Howdoyouknow?

d) HowwouldyoudescribetherelaAonshipofHSRIstaffwithparAcipaAngschools?—>Describetheirrole,thenatureoftheirwork?—>HowdoHSRIstaffworkwitheachother?

e) TellmeaboutanoutcomewithaparAcipaAngHSRIschoolthatyoudidnotexpect?f) Inyourview,arethereanyschoolcharacterisAcsthatcontributetosomeHSRIschoolsbenefiAng

morefromtheiniAaAvethanotherHSRIschools?g) Inyourview,whatisthebiggestbenefitaschoolreceivesfromPAGEthroughHSRI?

5.EndingQuesAons

a) Itlooksliketherearewellover40schoolsparAcipaAnginHSRI?Canyoutalkabouttherangeofexperiencestheseschoolsrepresent?

b) HowhasHSRIchangedsinceitsincepAon,whatremainsthesame?c) Giventhepurposeofthestudy,isthereanythingyouhavenottoldmethatIwouldneedtoknowto

understandHSRIandPAGE?


�

Appendix C


�

Prof

essi

onal

Ass

ocia

tion

of

G

eorg

ia E

duca

tors

** S

chle

chty

Cen

ter f

or L

eade

rshi

p an

d Sch

ool R

efor

m p

rovi

des a

nd/o

r in

itial

ly le

ads t

hese

exp

erie

nces

© S

chle

chty

Cen

ter

for L

eade

rshi

p in

Sch

ool R

efor

m,

All

Rig

hts

Res

erve

d.

PAGE Principals’ Network (Ongoing/Active) and PAGE Principals’ Academy (Participant . . . Critical Friend)

PAGE Principals’ Network (Ongoing/Active) and PAGE Principals’ Academy (Participant . . . Critical Friend)

H

igh

Scho

ol R

edes

ign

Initi

ativ

e - H

SRI A

t-A

-Gla

nce

(tent

ativ

e, fl

exib

le, s

ubje

ct to

ong

oing

rev

iew

and

rev

isio

n)

• U

rgen

cy o

f Cha

nge

Pres

enta

tion*

* •

1-da

y Le

ader

ship

Ret

reat

**

• W

OW

Con

fere

nce

- Eng

agem

ent 2

.0**

•

2-da

y W

orki

ng o

n th

e W

ork

Ret

reat

**

• Pr

inci

pal’s

Aca

dem

y C

onfe

renc

e**

• Te

ache

r Lea

der A

cade

my

Con

fere

nce*

* •

Ince

ntiv

e G

rant

(at t

he e

nd o

f Yea

r 2)

o St

aff a

war

enes

s of H

SRI i

nitia

tive

(vol

unte

ers)

o

Imag

es o

f Sch

ool*

*, b

ook

stud

y, v

ideo

s, ar

ticle

s, et

c.

o Id

entif

y be

liefs

/cor

e bu

sine

ss

o Id

entif

y D

esig

n Te

am

o Ex

ecut

ive

Ass

essm

ent*

* an

d/or

Sch

oolh

ouse

Tra

nsfo

rmat

ion

o In

itial

dra

ft of

in-h

ouse

pla

n (S

IP, i

ncl P

rof L

earn

)/dat

a de

cisi

ons

o St

atus

/Upd

ate/

Shar

ing*

, Inc

entiv

e G

rant

• W

OW

Con

fere

nce

(Des

ign

2.0)

**

• W

OW

Con

fere

nce

(Sch

ool T

rans

form

atio

n 2.

0)**

•

2-da

y D

esig

n Te

am R

etre

at**

•

Prin

cipa

l’s L

eade

rshi

p C

onfe

renc

e (p

ossi

bilit

y)**

•

Ince

ntiv

e G

rant

•

Scho

ol(s

) “pa

rent

gro

up”

pres

enta

tion*

*

o D

esig

n Te

am c

ontin

uity

pro

cess

o

SIP/

Dat

a/Pr

ofes

sion

al L

earn

ing

upda

te

o B

egin

Mea

surin

g En

gage

men

t o

Stra

tegi

c ab

ando

nmen

t o

Initi

ativ

e al

ignm

ent

o U

pdat

e Ex

ecut

ive

Ass

essm

ent

and/

or S

choo

lhou

se T

rans

form

atio

n o

Stat

us/U

pdat

e/Sh

arin

g*, I

ncen

tive

Gra

nt

• 1-

day

Lead

ersh

ip R

etre

at (a

dditi

onal

staf

f)**

•

2-da

y W

orki

ng o

n th

e W

ork

Ret

reat

(add

ition

al st

aff)

**

• Te

ache

r Lea

der A

cade

my

Con

fere

nce

(add

ition

al st

aff)

**

• W

OW

Con

fere

nce

Enga

gem

ent 2

.0 (a

dditi

onal

staf

f)**

•

Des

ign

Team

Con

fere

nce*

* •

Coa

chin

g fo

r Des

ign

II (b

y re

ques

t)**

• C

entra

l Off

ice

Con

fere

nce

(if a

pplic

able

)**

• Tr

ansi

tion

supp

ort t

rain

ing*

* •

Ince

ntiv

e G

rant

o SI

P/D

ata/

Prof

essi

onal

Lea

rnin

g up

date

o

Red

o Im

ages

of S

choo

l act

ivity

o

Embe

d co

ncep

ts/la

ngua

ge in

pro

cess

es/d

ocum

ent

o St

atus

/Upd

ate/

Shar

ing*

, Inc

entiv

e G

rant

o

Rev

isit

belie

fs/c

ore

busi

ness

o

Opt

iona

l/pos

sibl

e de

sign

aca

dem

y (in

tra-d

istri

ct)

o SI

P/D

ata/

Prof

essi

onal

Lea

rnin

g up

date

o

Upd

ate

Exec

utiv

e A

sses

smen

t an

d/or

Sch

oolh

ouse

Tra

nsfo

rmat

ion

Ong

oing

/Yea

rly

HSR

I Sup

port

•

HSR

I Sta

ff S

ite V

isit

• 24

/7 e

mai

l/pho

ne su

ppor

t •

Prof

essi

onal

Rea

ding

Mat

eria

l/Vid

eos/

Res

ourc

es/D

ocs &

For

ms

• Pr

of L

earn

supp

ort (

incl

. ass

ista

nce

faci

litat

ing

initi

al e

xper

ienc

es)

• Su

bs/re

leas

e tim

e (f

or a

ll fo

rmal

, stru

ctur

ed e

vent

s)

• N

etw

orki

ng c

onne

ctio

ns

• PA

GE

Sum

mer

Con

fere

nce

Supe

rinte

nden

ts a

re a

lway

s wel

com

e to

atte

nd a

ll PA

GE-

supp

orte

d ev

ents

. Th

e si

ze o

f th

e sc

hool

(st

uden

t and

sta

ff p

opul

atio

n) is

a f

acto

r de

term

inin

g th

e nu

mbe

r of p

artic

ipan

ts in

vite

d to

PA

GE-

supp

orte

d ev

ents

.

*St

atus

/Upd

ate/

Shar

ing,

Ince

ntiv

e G

rant

•

SIP

(evi

denc

e of

HSR

I foc

us)/n

ext s

teps

and

/or S

choo

lhou

se T

rans

form

atio

n •

Cal

enda

r or s

peci

fic H

SRI-

focu

sed

wor

k •

Res

ourc

es d

evel

oped

•

Any

per

tinen

t dat

a o

# st

aff a

ctiv

ely

enga

ged

in H

SRI

o Ex

ecut

ive

Ass

essm

ent

o St

uden

t ach

ieve

men

t o

Stud

ent a

ttend

ance

o

Dis

cipl

ine

refe

rral

s o

Pare

nt c

omm

enda

tions

/com

plai

nts

o St

uden

t/sta

ff/p

aren

t/com

mun

ity p

erce

ptio

n da

ta (e

.g.,

surv

eys,

focu

s gr

oups

, etc

.)

P P

hase

IV (Y

ears

6-1

0) A

nnua

l min

i-gra

nt o

ppor

tuni

ty, S

tatu

s/U

pdat

e/Sh

arin

g*

Yea

r 10

- R

epor

t/Pub

lish

(HSR

I At-A

-Gla

nce

docu

men

t rev

ised

110

709)

Und

er d

evel

opm

ent:

glo

ssar

y, re

sour

ce li

st,

refle

ctiv

e qu

estio

ns, d

ocum

ents

/form

s,

H

SRI s

ite-c

reat

ed to

ols,

PLU

info

, etc

.

Phas

e I (

Yea

rs 1

-2)

Phas

e II

(Yea

rs 2

-4)

Phas

e II

I (Y

ears

3-5

)

Flui

d, m

utua

l,

tw

o-w

ay in

quir

y,

initi

atio

n, sh

arin

g


�