talking points and key messages that a District Leadership Team or Community School Leadership Team (DLT/CSLT) and Building Leadership Teams (BLTs) can use to facilitate the process It contains scant research because this information can be found in the Ohio Leadership Development Framework Modules (www.ohioleadership.org) Further online training on each stage (Stages 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4) can be found at this same website OHIO’S IMPROVEMENT PROCESS S chool districts that have persistently failing schools are required to embark upon the Ohio Improvement Process (OIP), which contains four stages as identified in Figure Created by the Ohio Department of Education in 2012, the OIP seeks to ensure that all Ohio The Ohio Improvement Process schools are high performing All Priority Schools are required to implement the OIP To see the full-size visual, click here Figure – Ohio Improvement Process STAGE Prepare for the OIP the necessary collaborative structures, it describes the practices of communication and engagement, decision making, and resource management that are threaded throughout the OIP STAGE Develop a Focused Plan How these teams work in districts and schools? How these teams work in districts and schools? Develop goal(s), strategies, indicators, and action steps focused on Stage critical needs Use data to identify critical needs • District and Community School Leadership Team (DLT/CSLT) • Building Leadership Teams (BLTs) How these teams work in districts and schools? • Teacher-Based Teams (TBTs) How STEP Collect and chart data Review data Gather evidence of implementation and impact STEP Collect, chart, and analyze post data STEP Implement changes consistently TheOHIO Ohio 5-Step 5-STEP Process STEP these teams work in districts and schools? Implement strategies and action steps to achieve district goals Analyze data PROCESS STEP Establish shared expectations for implementing implementation and effect on changes in adult practice and student learning Policy Brief Improvement andand Turnaround Policy Brief#4: #4:School School Improvement Turnaround RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MOVING FORWARD RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MOVING FORWARD W ith than 370,000 of Ohio’s students students affected by affected inadequateby learning environments, timeenvironments, is of the ithmore more than 370,000 of Ohio’s inadequate learning time is of the essence Ohio mustmust continue to advance school improvement efforts and capitalize on flexibility ushered in ESSA To that end, essence Ohio continue to advance school improvement efforts and capitalize onbyflexibility ushered Philanthropy Ohio urges Ohio’s leaders and stakeholders by ESSA To that end, Philanthropy Ohio urgesto:Ohio’s leaders and stakeholders to: in Build Build a a pipeline of effective teachersteachers and leaders who are ready to step the state’s lowest schools and performing turn them around, pipeline of effective and leaders who areinto ready to step intoperforming the state’s lowest whether traditionally prepared or alternatively trained Great teachers and strong leaders matter The state must examine the effectiveness schools and turn them around, whether traditionally prepared or alternatively trained Great teachers and and retention rates of educator preparation programs and alternative programs operating in the state, including Woodrow Wilson, Teach strong leaders matter The state must examine the effectiveness and retention rates of educator preparation for America and Ohio, and, if worthy, continue toin support and expand such initiatives programs andBRIGHT alternative programs operating the state, including Woodrow Wilson, Teach for America and Ohio, and, if worthy, continue to support expand such BRIGHT Push hard to identify “evidence-based” turnaround strategies and and implement those initiatives approaches at even greater scale This means leveraging the expertise of key education partners, including Battelle for strategies Kids, Push hard to identify “evidence-based” turnaround and implement those approaches at even various Education Service Centers, colleges of education and others whoeducation have expertise in implementing greater scale This means leveraging the expertise of key partners, including Battelle for Kids, transformative teaching, leading, instructional, curricular and support strategies various Education Service Centers, colleges of education and others who have expertise in implementing teaching,innovation leading, instructional, curricular support transformative Create a school improvement fund, including Title I dollars,and whereby schoolsstrategies receive grants and funding based on top-flight educational criteria, improvement which is rooted in innovation and informed by the state’s SIG evaluation report currently underway at the Ohio Department Create a school fund, including Title I dollars, whereby schools receive grants and of Education The development of this fund should build on lessons learned from Ohio and across the country, including the evaluation significant funding based on top-flight educational criteria, which is rooted in and informed by the state’s SIG investments of Ohio’s Straight A Fund report currently underway at the Ohio Department of Education The development of this fund should build lessons learned from Ohio and across thebest country, including the significant investments of Ohio’s Straight A on Prioritize interventions and identify and disseminate practices to that end The Ohio Department of Fund Education must become a partner in helping local leaders, faculty and staff understand and consider options that demonstrate success and support interventions local turnaround efforts We know and that one size does not best fit all practices We also know schools guidance Prioritize and identify disseminate to that thatlocal end The need Ohioadditional Department of and support to undertake this work on behalf of students Education must become a partner in helping local leaders, faculty and staff understand and consider options demonstrate success and support local turnaround efforts.toWe know that by one not fitofall We also that Examine and retool the use of “transformation specialists” who are assigned Priority Schools thesize Ohiodoes Department Education know that local schools need additional guidance and support to undertake this work on behalf of students Often ODE is too focused on compliance and not enough on supporting and connecting schools to resources aimed at facilitating dramatic turnaround for retool our students Transformation specialists should be supported andare prepared to fully ESSA-related evi5 Examine and the use of “transformation specialists” who assigned to understand Priority Schools by the dence-based strategies of andEducation equipped to help principals and teachers in Priority Schools implement those strategies Ohio Department Often ODE is too focused on compliance and not enough on supporting and resources aimed facilitating dramatic for our students connecting Report on the schools impact ofto Ohio’s previous school at improvement processes andturnaround Straight A investments The results Transformation of these evaluations specialists should be supported and prepared to fully understand ESSA-related evidence-based strategies should be used to drive state and local direction for leveraging ESSA flexibilities and maximizing its approach to deploying funds and equipped to help principals and teachers in Priority Schools implement those strategies These steps will help put Ohio on a new path for turning around the state’s failing schools and ensuring Report on themore impact of Ohio’s school improvement processes and Straight A investments The opportunity for the than 370,000 Ohio previous students enrolled in those schools results of these evaluations should be used to drive state and local direction for leveraging ESSA flexibilities and maximizing its approach to deploying funds These steps will help put Ohio on a new path for turning around the state’s failing schools and ensuring opportunity for the more than 370,000 Ohio students enrolled in those schools ENDNOTES ENDNOTES _ MUCH MONEY HAS BEENSPENT SPENT ON IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS? HOWHOW MUCH MONEY HAS BEEN ONSCHOOL SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS? F ederal that have dedicated to Ohio’s ederalinvestments investments thatbeen have been dedicated School Improvement (SIG) over Grants the last eight to Ohio’s School Grants Improvement (SIG) years total as shown in the following table over the $266 last million, eight years total $266 million, as shown in tothe table the state received In addition SIGfollowing and ARRA funding, $558 million into federal funds infunding, 2015 It is expected to In addition SIG Title andIARRA the state receive an estimated $575 million in 2016 In spite of these received $558 million in federal Title I funds major investments, it is unclear if Ohio’s school improvein 2015 It is expected to receive an estimated ment approach been successful As these of August 2016, $575 million has in 2016 In spite of major the Ohio Department of Education has not finalized investments, it is unclear if Ohio’s school and released its evaluation of SIG.has been successful improvement approach As of August 2016, the Ohio Department of Education has not finalized and released its evaluation of SIG Note: Note: This This brief brief defines defines “failing “failing schools” schools” as as schools schools whose whose local local report report cards cards consist consist of of Fs Fs and and Ds Ds without without any any As As and and Bs Bs 3 FSG Social Impact Advisors, The School Turnaround Field Guide (2010), accessed August 15, 2016, http://www.wallacefoundation.org/ FSG Social Impact Advisors, The School Turnaround Field Guide (2010), accessed August 15, 2016, http://www.wallacefoundation.org/ knowledge-center/Documents/The-School-Turnaround-Field-Guide.pdf knowledge-center/Documents/The-School-Turnaround-Field-Guide.pdf Year Investment Year Investment 2009 2009 2010 2010 2011 2011 2012 2012 2013 2013 2014 2014 2015 2015 2016 2016 regular $132M (includes $20M in regular SIG SIG funds and $112M in ARRA) $20M $21M $20M $20M $19M $18M $16M Mark Edmundson, Edmundson, Why Why read? read? (New (New York: York: Bloomsbury, Bloomsbury, 2004); 2004); E.D E.D Hirsch, Hirsch, The The Making Making of of Americans Americans (New (New Haven: Haven: Yale Yale University University Press, Press, 2009) 2009) Mark Ohio Department of of Education, Education, “Ohio “Ohio School School Report Report Cards,” Cards,” accessed accessed August August 15, 15, 2016, 2016, http://reportcard.education.ohio.gov/Pages/ http://reportcard.education.ohio.gov/Pages Ohio Department default.aspx default.aspx 1 2 Mike Schmoker, Leading Leading with with Focus; Focus; Elevating Elevating the the Essentials Essentials for for School School and and District District Improvement Improvement (2016) (2016) Mike Schmoker, Kate Taylor, “After “After 2 Years, Years, Progress Progress Is Is Hard Hard to to See See in in Some Some Struggling Struggling City City Schools,” Schools,” New New York York Times, Times, July July 19, 19, 2016, 2016, accessed accessed August August 15, 15, Kate Taylor, 2016, 2016, http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/19/nyregion/after-2-years-progress-is-hard-to-see-in-some-struggling-city-schools.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/19/nyregion/after-2-years-progress-is-hard-to-see-in-some-struggling-city-schools.html 4 5 6 Ohio Department of Education, “Priority Schools,” accessed August 15, 2016, http://education.ohio gov/Topics/School-Improvement/ Ohio Department of Education, “Priority Schools,” accessed August 15, 2016, http://education.ohio gov/Topics/School-Improvement/ Federal-Programs/Elementary-and-Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools-and-Districts/Priority-Schools Federal-Programs/Elementary-and-Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools-and-Districts/Priority-Schools 7 Ohio Department of Education, “Focus Schools,” accessed August 15, 2016, http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/School-Improvement/ Ohio Department of Education, “Focus Schools,” accessed August 15, 2016, http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/School-Improvement/ Federal-Programs/Elementary-and-Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools-and-Districts/Focus-Schools Federal-Programs/Elementary-and-Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools-and-Districts/Focus-Schools 8 Ohio Department of Education, “Watch Schools,” accessed August 15, 2016, http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/School-Improvement/ Ohio Department of Education, “Watch Schools,” accessed August 15, 2016, http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/School-Improvement/ Federal-Programs/Elementary-and-Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools-and-Districts/Watch-Schools Federal-Programs/Elementary-and-Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools-and-Districts/Watch-Schools 9 Cleveland’s Plan for Transforming Schools, accessed August 15, 2016, http://clevelandmetroschools.org/cms/lib05/OH01915844/ Cleveland’s Plan for Transforming Schools, accessed August 15, 2016, http://clevelandmetroschools.org/cms/lib05/OH01915844/ Centricity/Domain/98/ClevelandPlanandLegislation.pdf Centricity/Domain/98/ClevelandPlanandLegislation.pdf Cincinnati Public Public Schools, Schools, “Elementary “Elementary Initiative,” Initiative,” accessed accessed August August 15, 15, 2016, 2016, http://www.cps-k12.org/about-cps/district-initiatives/ http://www.cps-k12.org/about-cps/district-initiatives/ Cincinnati elementary-initiative elementary-initiative 11 11 Sara Mead, Turning Around Low-Performing Schools (2012), accessed August 15, 2016, http://standleadershipcenter.org/sites/ Sara Mead, Turning Around Low-Performing Schools (2012), accessed August 15, 2016, http://standleadershipcenter.org/sites/ standleadershipcenter.org/files/media/Turn%20Arounds.pdf standleadershipcenter.org/files/media/Turn%20Arounds.pdf 10 10 500 SouthStreet, Front Street, Suite900 900 500 South 37 WestFront Broad Street,Suite Suite 800 Columbus, 43215-7628 Columbus, OhioOhio 43215-4198 Columbus, Ohio 43215-7628 info@philanthropyohio.org • 614.224.1344 info@philanthropyohio.org 614.224.1344 info@philanthropyohio.org • •614.224.1344 www.philanthropyohio.org www.philanthropyohio.org www.philanthropyohio.org Philanthropy Ohio 2016 Philanthropy Ohio © ©2016 Breakthrough Schools, Schools, “Annual “Annual Reports,” Reports,” accessed accessed August August 15, 15, 2016, 2016, http://breakthroughschools.org/resources/annual-reports http://breakthroughschools.org/resources/annual-reports Breakthrough Danette Parsley Parsley & & Rhonda Rhonda Barton, Barton, “School “School Turnaround Turnaround in in the the Rural Rural Context,” Context,” accessed accessed August August 15, 15, 2016, 2016, http://educationnorthwest.org/ http://educationnorthwest.org/ Danette northwest-matters/school-turnaround-rural-context northwest-matters/school-turnaround-rural-context 12 12 13 13 Lauren Camera, Camera, “Rural “Rural School School Collaboratives: Collaboratives: Key Key to to Success?” Success?” U.S U.S News News & & World World Report, Report, accessed accessed August August 16, 16, 2016, 2016, Lauren http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-02-11/rural-school-collaboratives-key-to-success http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-02-11/rural-school-collaboratives-key-to-success 14 14 THE URGENCY TURNING AROUND LOW-PERFORMING SCHOOLS: THE URGENCYOFOF TURNING AROUND LOW-PERFORMING EVERY CHILD DESERVES A GREAT EDUCATION SCHOOLS: EVERY CHILD DESERVES A GREAT EDUCATION P hilanthropy Ohio stands resolute that eachthat and every hilanthropy Ohio stands resolute eachOhio andstudent, every no matter his/her zip deserves Ohio student, no code, matter his/her zip code, deserves access toto a high-performing school that is equipped the best with teachers, access a high-performing school that iswith equipped leaders, instructional strategies, the best teachers, leaders, instructional strategies, community engagement effortsefforts and wraparound supports thatsupports result community engagement and wraparound in student success The research is decisive: a well-rounded education that result in student success The research is decisive: a has life-altering effects on everyhas aspect of society, particularly poor well-rounded education life-altering effects ontheevery New evidence from the Brookings Institute affirms the effects of a aspect of society, particularly the poor New evidencequality education individual incomes, earnings, social mobility, health from theon Brookings Institutelifetime affirms the effects of a quality and life expectancy education on individual incomes, lifetime earnings, social mobility, health and life expectancy Despite all of the evidence pointing to the importance of a high-quality education,all Ohio to be challenged high importance number of schools Despite ofcontinues the evidence pointingbytoa the of that fall short of meeting the education needs of their students Of the a high-quality education, Ohio continues to be challenged state’s more number than 3,400 of schools, about 820 fall (25 percent) struggle with the by a high schools that short of meeting low performance More than 370,000 students are currently enrolled in education needs of their students Of the state’s more than those schools Most serve students in urban, high-poverty communities 3,400 schools, about 820 (25 percent) struggle with low category of schools is emerging across Ohio’s cities Another troubling More than 370,000 students are currently performance and suburbs: those that receive passing grades students on their local cards, enrolled in those schools Most serve inreport urban, but, upon closer examination, face continued achievement gaps among high-poverty communities Another troubling category of student subgroups And, across high-poverty, rural school districts, whichthose dot schools is emerging Ohio’s cities and suburbs: the state’s landscape and serve more than 170,000 students, face their own that receive passing grades on their local report cards, but, unique sets of challenges Philanthropy Ohio believes it is unacceptable to upon closer examination, face continued achievement gaps deny any student, whether in an urban, suburban or rural school setting, among student subgroups And, high-poverty, rural school access to a high-quality Doing so strips students of themore keys districts, which doteducation the state’s landscape and serve they need to unlock their future economic opportunities that are all but than 170,000 students, face their own unique sets of chalguaranteed with the right education opportunities lenges Philanthropy Ohio believes it is unacceptable to deny any student, whether in an urban, suburban or rural school setting, access to a high-quality education Doing so strips students of the keys they need to unlock their future economic opportunities that are all but guaranteed with the right education opportunities Ohio’s education leaders have been attempting, with little success, turn Ohio’s education leaders have been attempting, with to little around the state’s lowest performing schools for nearly 14 years, since success, to turn around the state’s lowest performing the passage offor the nearly No Child14 Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2002 of Yet,the more than a schools years, since the passage No decade later, 370,000 students still remain trapped in inadequate learning Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2002 Yet, more than It is370,000 time for education to stop, take stock, pool aenvironments decade later, studentsleaders still remain trapped in resources and supports and determine a more effective path inadequate learning environments It is time for forward education leaders to stop, take success stock, has pool resources supports While school turnaround been somewhatand fleeting over the last and determine more effective path forward decade, we have at aleast learned some important lessons, which, based upon theschool evidence, must anchor success our path forward: While turnaround has been somewhat fleeting the last decade, we have at least learned some • School over leadership and teacher effectiveness stand as the most critical important which, upon the evidence, factors for lessons, school success Thisbased is why we dedicated Brief #1 to must the anchor ourcannot path turn forward: topic You around a school without a top-flight leader and effective teachers • School leadership and teacher effectiveness stand as the factors for school success This why we • most Schoolcritical boards, superintendents and union leaders areis integral to dedicated Briefturnaround #1 to theefforts topic.These Youleaders cannot turn around a successful school must have an school without a top-flight leader aand aligned vision and jointly agree to support plan effective for turning teachers around a school building • School boards, superintendents and union leaders are integral to successful school turnaround efforts These • High quality curriculum and instruction are also key leaders must have an aligned vision and jointly to ingredients, and these are dependent upon effective schoolagree leadership turning around a school building and support a plan for and rigorous expectations • quality curriculum and instruction are also key • High A sense-of-urgency must be balanced with perseverance ingredients, and these are dependent upon and an eye toward the long game There is no evidenceeffective of a school school leadership expectations improvement initiativeand in therigorous country that has demonstrated long-term success and showed •A sense-of-urgency must be balanced with perseverance improvement twothe or three Lasting and an eye within toward longyears game Thereschool is noimprovement evidence takes time, resources, leadership,initiative in the country that of a school improvement community support and buy-in has demonstrated long-term success and showed school improvement within two or three years.5 Lasting • School governance, operations and fiscal management all play into the improvement takes time, resources, leadership, success of turning around a lowcommunity support andbe buy-in performing school and cannot ignored • School governance, operations and fiscal management all play into the success of turning around a lowperforming school and cannot be ignored OHIO’S CURRENT SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT APPROACH U nder the NCLB requirements, schools that failed to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), a measure of student achievement for multiple years, faced a series of escalating interventions After passage of NCLB, the federal government implemented Race to the Top and School Improvement Grants (SIG), calling for states to identify the lowest performing percent of schools as “persistently lowest achieving,” and use SIG funds to implement one of four “reform models” in these schools: turnaround, transformation, restart and closure Ohio’s school improvement policies were built around those four reform models plus one additional model: intervention and improvement Today, Ohio identifies Priority, Focus and Watch schools The state’s 129 Priority Schools must select and implement one of five school turnaround intervention models as a part of its mandatory school improvement plan: • Turnaround Model, whereby school districts must pursue 12 steps, including replacing the principal; implementing strategies to recruit, place and train staff; and instituting a new evaluation system, among other things; • Transformation Model, which calls for school districts to pursue most of the steps associated with the Turnaround Model, with a few variations, including identifying and rewarding staff who are increasing student outcomes and providing increased learning time for students; • Restart Model, which is focused on converting or closing and reopening a school under a charter school operator or educational management organization; • Closure Model, whereby a school district closes a school and enrolls its students in schools that are high achieving; or • Ohio’s Intervention and Improvement Model, which calls for the school district to pursue similar steps to the Turnaround Model, with a major modification: instead of replacing the principal, the school can demonstrate to the Ohio Department of Education that the current principal has a proven track record of improving achievement and has the ability to lead the turnaround effort This is the only turnaround option that does not require the replacement of the principal The consistent theme across each of Ohio’s five school turnaround intervention models is leadership All but one of four models calls for the removal and replacement of the school principal, signaling the importance of the school leader in turning around the school Ohio currently identifies more than 230 schools as Focus Schools, which are buildings that receive Title I funds and have the state’s largest achievement gaps in student performance and graduation rates.7 These schools receive support and monitoring from regional support teachers to implement a school improvement plan using the Ohio Improvement Process (OIP) The state currently identifies more than 950 schools as Watch Schools These are buildings where student subgroups demonstrate low achievement School districts are responsible for developing improvement plans and ensuring that funds are allocated properly to target these schools WHAT TURNAROUND AND SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES ARE MOVING THE NEEDLE? M oving forward, Ohio must draw from best practices to drive its investments and partnerships with local school districts to turn around low-performing schools To that end, we shine light on the following initiatives that are achieving results: • The Cleveland Metropolitan School District, following several years of unsuccessful reform of its lowestperforming schools under SIG, embarked on a new strategy of phasing out failing comprehensive high schools and replacing them with new high school models Some schools were developed from scratch; others were developed from known models Rather than a total replacement of principal and staff, the schools took a more strategic approach, interviewing staff and putting together design teams comprised of school and community leaders District governance and management was also retained, as opposed to the restart requirement of turning over a school to a charter school operator or educational management organization Since 2012, nine new high schools have opened, most of which explicitly replaced failing comprehensive schools They all benefit from significant school-based autonomy granted under the groundbreaking Cleveland’s Plan for Transforming Schools,9 signed into law in July 2012 As a cohort, new schools in Cleveland are outperforming peer schools in student achievement, student progress, student and staff attendance and student and staff retention of 5.2 to 15.9 percentage points in reading Math improvement increased in all but one grade (seventh), ranging from 2.1 to 14.8 percentage points • The Academy for Urban School Leadership (AUSL) ) has turned around 14 previously low-performing schools in the Chicago Public Schools (CPS) system AUSL completely overhauls a low-performing school, including renovating facilities, bringing in new staff and leadership and implementing a new curriculum and culture The schools remain CPS neighborhood schools serving the same students, and teachers in the new school are CPS employees covered by the CPS teacher contract and salary schedule Turnaround elementary schools operated by AUSL have made dramatic achievement gains: schools operated by AUSL for more than three years have increased their percentage of students meeting or exceeding standards on the Illinois State Achievement Test by more than 30 points and newer turnaround schools are also showing strong gains AUSL applies a turnaround framework that includes an emphasis on positive school culture; engaged parents and community members; social supports to meet student needs; clear goals for schools, teams and individuals; shared responsibility for achievement; a strong college-prep curriculum and aligned assessments; and engaging and personalized instruction • Cincinnati Public Schools implemented its Elementary Initiative in 2008-09 to turn around 16 of the district’s most challenged buildings Initiative strategies include a comprehensive audit of each elementary school, realignment of resources to address the needs of individual children, the development of success plans for each child, an intensive focus on mathematics and reading and the implementation of a summer program named “Fifth Quarter,” which extended learning time by a month at each school and expanded early childhood programs Additionally, the initiative focuses heavily on the use of data Student scores on Ohio’s achievement tests increased dramatically in 2010 Each grade 3-8 experienced increases A WORD ABOUT CHARTER SCHOOLS I n many states, charter schools stand as a discrete option for school turnaround That is not necessarily true in Ohio, where, in the case of the Restart Model, districts must surrender control of the school to an independent charter school board Many districts, as a result, have selected the Turnaround, Transformation or Closure Models, whereby the school district maintains oversight of the school While charter schools have not held a prominent role in the state’s Turnaround Model portfolio, they hold a key role in offering an alternative for students seeking a nontraditional approach One such example includes Breakthrough Schools Rated the highest network of public charter schools in Cleveland, Breakthrough educates nearly 3,300 K-8 students across 10 campuses in Cleveland Overall, its students performed one point higher (83 percent) than the statewide average (82 percent) in 2014.10 Philanthropy Ohio honors such high-value education options and recognizes that many of the innovations adopted by successful charter schools could be valuable in district turnaround efforts THE CHALLENGE OF RURAL SCHOOL TURNAROUND S chool turnaround efforts often paint rural schools with the same broad brush as their urban and suburban counterparts As a result, the efforts inappropriately, and sometimes detrimentally, apply a one-size-fits-all approach to rural schools.11 The biggest challenge among these schools includes the recruitment and retention of effective teachers and leaders One emerging solution employed by a number of rural school districts that comprise the Ohio Appalachian Collaborative includes the use of collaborative strategies that have resulted in marked improvements Ultimately, sharing resources helps rural schools meet education goals and objectives by providing access to programs and services—like professional learning for teachers and advanced course options for students—that individual districts would not otherwise be able to afford and offer on their own.12 HOW WILL THE EVERY STUDENT SUCCEEDS ACT (ESSA) CHANGE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT & TURNAROUND? ESSA includes two very significant changes that affect states’ efforts to turn around schools: differentiated accountability and more local control • Differentiated Accountability: The Ohio Department of Education will be required to identify two main categories of schools for support and improvement: Comprehensive Support and Improvement Schools and Targeted Support and Improvement Schools Comprehensive Support and Improvement Schools, as defined by ESSA, are very similar to how Ohio defines and identifies its Priority Schools: the lowest performing percent of Title I schools as well as high schools with graduation rates below 67 percent This category also includes schools initially identified for Targeted Support and Improvement Schools that not meet the state’s criteria for improving outcomes of underperforming subgroups within a to-be-determined number of years Targeted Support and Improvement Schools include those that have one or more persistently underperforming student subgroups These schools must develop and implement improvement plans that are informed by indicators in the state’s accountability system, include “evidence-based interventions” and are approved by the local school district • More Local Control: There are no longer any federal required interventions or models that school improvement funds must be used to support; however, the law specifies that efforts must be “evidence-based.” ESSA does away with the School Improvement Grant program Instead, the Ohio Department of Education will be required to reserve percent of its Title I funds for school improvement grants Ninety-five percent of the funds must be distributed either competitively or by formula to districts to support schools that are among the lowest achieving in the state or have consistently underperforming student subgroups The department can retain no more than percent of the school improvement funds to carry out certain activities to implement and monitor grants Local districts, through a robust stakeholder engagement process, must identify the intervention(s) that best meet the needs of their students Moving forward, Ohio will have to be thoughtful about providing guidance to districts, based on lessons learned from previous school improvement efforts, as they implement “evidence-based” turnaround strategies ABOUT PHILANTHROPY OHIO P hilanthropy Ohio is an association of foundations, corporate giving programs, individuals and organizations actively involved in philanthropy in Ohio Its mission is to provide leadership for philanthropy in Ohio and to enhance the ability of members to fulfill their charitable goals It provides the network, tools and knowledge to help people engaged in philanthropy become more effective, powerful change agents in their communities Together, its more than 220 members hold over $50 billion in assets and provide over $4 billion in grants to nonprofit organizations that work to improve the lives of community residents OHIO’S CURRENT SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT APPROACH U nder the NCLB requirements, schools that failed to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), a measure of student achievement for multiple years, faced a series of escalating interventions After passage of NCLB, the federal government implemented Race to the Top and School Improvement Grants (SIG), calling for states to identify the lowest performing percent of schools as “persistently lowest achieving,” and use SIG funds to implement one of four “reform models” in these schools: turnaround, transformation, restart and closure Ohio’s school improvement policies were built around those four reform models plus one additional model: intervention and improvement Today, Ohio identifies Priority, Focus and Watch schools The state’s 129 Priority Schools must select and implement one of five school turnaround intervention models as a part of its mandatory school improvement plan: • Turnaround Model, whereby school districts must pursue 12 steps, including replacing the principal; implementing strategies to recruit, place and train staff; and instituting a new evaluation system, among other things; • Transformation Model, which calls for school districts to pursue most of the steps associated with the Turnaround Model, with a few variations, including identifying and rewarding staff who are increasing student outcomes and providing increased learning time for students; • Restart Model, which is focused on converting or closing and reopening a school under a charter school operator or educational management organization; • Closure Model, whereby a school district closes a school and enrolls its students in schools that are high achieving; or • Ohio’s Intervention and Improvement Model, which calls for the school district to pursue similar steps to the Turnaround Model, with a major modification: instead of replacing the principal, the school can demonstrate to the Ohio Department of Education that the current principal has a proven track record of improving achievement and has the ability to lead the turnaround effort This is the only turnaround option that does not require the replacement of the principal The consistent theme across each of Ohio’s five school turnaround intervention models is leadership All but one of four models calls for the removal and replacement of the school principal, signaling the importance of the school leader in turning around the school Ohio currently identifies more than 230 schools as Focus Schools, which are buildings that receive Title I funds and have the state’s largest achievement gaps in student performance and graduation rates.7 These schools receive support and monitoring from regional support teachers to implement a school improvement plan using the Ohio Improvement Process (OIP) The state currently identifies more than 950 schools as Watch Schools These are buildings where student subgroups demonstrate low achievement School districts are responsible for developing improvement plans and ensuring that funds are allocated properly to target these schools WHAT TURNAROUND AND SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES ARE MOVING THE NEEDLE? M oving forward, Ohio must draw from best practices to drive its investments and partnerships with local school districts to turn around low-performing schools To that end, we shine light on the following initiatives that are achieving results: • The Cleveland Metropolitan School District, following several years of unsuccessful reform of its lowestperforming schools under SIG, embarked on a new strategy of phasing out failing comprehensive high schools and replacing them with new high school models Some schools were developed from scratch; others were developed from known models Rather than a total replacement of principal and staff, the schools took a more strategic approach, interviewing staff and putting together design teams comprised of school and community leaders District governance and management was also retained, as opposed to the restart requirement of turning over a school to a charter school operator or educational management organization Since 2012, nine new high schools have opened, most of which explicitly replaced failing comprehensive schools They all benefit from significant school-based autonomy granted under the groundbreaking Cleveland’s Plan for Transforming Schools,9 signed into law in July 2012 As a cohort, new schools in Cleveland are outperforming peer schools in student achievement, student progress, student and staff attendance and student and staff retention of 5.2 to 15.9 percentage points in reading Math improvement increased in all but one grade (seventh), ranging from 2.1 to 14.8 percentage points • The Academy for Urban School Leadership (AUSL) ) has turned around 14 previously low-performing schools in the Chicago Public Schools (CPS) system AUSL completely overhauls a low-performing school, including renovating facilities, bringing in new staff and leadership and implementing a new curriculum and culture The schools remain CPS neighborhood schools serving the same students, and teachers in the new school are CPS employees covered by the CPS teacher contract and salary schedule Turnaround elementary schools operated by AUSL have made dramatic achievement gains: schools operated by AUSL for more than three years have increased their percentage of students meeting or exceeding standards on the Illinois State Achievement Test by more than 30 points and newer turnaround schools are also showing strong gains AUSL applies a turnaround framework that includes an emphasis on positive school culture; engaged parents and community members; social supports to meet student needs; clear goals for schools, teams and individuals; shared responsibility for achievement; a strong college-prep curriculum and aligned assessments; and engaging and personalized instruction • Cincinnati Public Schools implemented its Elementary Initiative in 2008-09 to turn around 16 of the district’s most challenged buildings Initiative strategies include a comprehensive audit of each elementary school, realignment of resources to address the needs of individual children, the development of success plans for each child, an intensive focus on mathematics and reading and the implementation of a summer program named “Fifth Quarter,” which extended learning time by a month at each school and expanded early childhood programs Additionally, the initiative focuses heavily on the use of data Student scores on Ohio’s achievement tests increased dramatically in 2010 Each grade 3-8 experienced increases A WORD ABOUT CHARTER SCHOOLS I n many states, charter schools stand as a discrete option for school turnaround That is not necessarily true in Ohio, where, in the case of the Restart Model, districts must surrender control of the school to an independent charter school board Many districts, as a result, have selected the Turnaround, Transformation or Closure Models, whereby the school district maintains oversight of the school While charter schools have not held a prominent role in the state’s Turnaround Model portfolio, they hold a key role in offering an alternative for students seeking a nontraditional approach One such example includes Breakthrough Schools Rated the highest network of public charter schools in Cleveland, Breakthrough educates nearly 3,300 K-8 students across 10 campuses in Cleveland Overall, its students performed one point higher (83 percent) than the statewide average (82 percent) in 2014.10 Philanthropy Ohio honors such high-value education options and recognizes that many of the innovations adopted by successful charter schools could be valuable in district turnaround efforts THE CHALLENGE OF RURAL SCHOOL TURNAROUND S chool turnaround efforts often paint rural schools with the same broad brush as their urban and suburban counterparts As a result, the efforts inappropriately, and sometimes detrimentally, apply a one-size-fits-all approach to rural schools.11 The biggest challenge among these schools includes the recruitment and retention of effective teachers and leaders One emerging solution employed by a number of rural school districts that comprise the Ohio Appalachian Collaborative includes the use of collaborative strategies that have resulted in marked improvements Ultimately, sharing resources helps rural schools meet education goals and objectives by providing access to programs and services—like professional learning for teachers and advanced course options for students—that individual districts would not otherwise be able to afford and offer on their own.12 HOW WILL THE EVERY STUDENT SUCCEEDS ACT (ESSA) CHANGE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT & TURNAROUND? ESSA includes two very significant changes that affect states’ efforts to turn around schools: differentiated accountability and more local control • Differentiated Accountability: The Ohio Department of Education will be required to identify two main categories of schools for support and improvement: Comprehensive Support and Improvement Schools and Targeted Support and Improvement Schools Comprehensive Support and Improvement Schools, as defined by ESSA, are very similar to how Ohio defines and identifies its Priority Schools: the lowest performing percent of Title I schools as well as high schools with graduation rates below 67 percent This category also includes schools initially identified for Targeted Support and Improvement Schools that not meet the state’s criteria for improving outcomes of underperforming subgroups within a to-be-determined number of years Targeted Support and Improvement Schools include those that have one or more persistently underperforming student subgroups These schools must develop and implement improvement plans that are informed by indicators in the state’s accountability system, include “evidence-based interventions” and are approved by the local school district • More Local Control: There are no longer any federal required interventions or models that school improvement funds must be used to support; however, the law specifies that efforts must be “evidence-based.” ESSA does away with the School Improvement Grant program Instead, the Ohio Department of Education will be required to reserve percent of its Title I funds for school improvement grants Ninety-five percent of the funds must be distributed either competitively or by formula to districts to support schools that are among the lowest achieving in the state or have consistently underperforming student subgroups The department can retain no more than percent of the school improvement funds to carry out certain activities to implement and monitor grants Local districts, through a robust stakeholder engagement process, must identify the intervention(s) that best meet the needs of their students Moving forward, Ohio will have to be thoughtful about providing guidance to districts, based on lessons learned from previous school improvement efforts, as they implement “evidence-based” turnaround strategies ABOUT PHILANTHROPY OHIO P hilanthropy Ohio is an association of foundations, corporate giving programs, individuals and organizations actively involved in philanthropy in Ohio Its mission is to provide leadership for philanthropy in Ohio and to enhance the ability of members to fulfill their charitable goals It provides the network, tools and knowledge to help people engaged in philanthropy become more effective, powerful change agents in their communities Together, its more than 220 members hold over $50 billion in assets and provide over $4 billion in grants to nonprofit organizations that work to improve the lives of community residents OHIO’S CURRENT SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT APPROACH U nder the NCLB requirements, schools that failed to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), a measure of student achievement for multiple years, faced a series of escalating interventions After passage of NCLB, the federal government implemented Race to the Top and School Improvement Grants (SIG), calling for states to identify the lowest performing percent of schools as “persistently lowest achieving,” and use SIG funds to implement one of four “reform models” in these schools: turnaround, transformation, restart and closure Ohio’s school improvement policies were built around those four reform models plus one additional model: intervention and improvement Today, Ohio identifies Priority, Focus and Watch schools The state’s 129 Priority Schools must select and implement one of five school turnaround intervention models as a part of its mandatory school improvement plan: • Turnaround Model, whereby school districts must pursue 12 steps, including replacing the principal; implementing strategies to recruit, place and train staff; and instituting a new evaluation system, among other things; • Transformation Model, which calls for school districts to pursue most of the steps associated with the Turnaround Model, with a few variations, including identifying and rewarding staff who are increasing student outcomes and providing increased learning time for students; • Restart Model, which is focused on converting or closing and reopening a school under a charter school operator or educational management organization; • Closure Model, whereby a school district closes a school and enrolls its students in schools that are high achieving; or • Ohio’s Intervention and Improvement Model, which calls for the school district to pursue similar steps to the Turnaround Model, with a major modification: instead of replacing the principal, the school can demonstrate to the Ohio Department of Education that the current principal has a proven track record of improving achievement and has the ability to lead the turnaround effort This is the only turnaround option that does not require the replacement of the principal The consistent theme across each of Ohio’s five school turnaround intervention models is leadership All but one of four models calls for the removal and replacement of the school principal, signaling the importance of the school leader in turning around the school Ohio currently identifies more than 230 schools as Focus Schools, which are buildings that receive Title I funds and have the state’s largest achievement gaps in student performance and graduation rates.7 These schools receive support and monitoring from regional support teachers to implement a school improvement plan using the Ohio Improvement Process (OIP) The state currently identifies more than 950 schools as Watch Schools These are buildings where student subgroups demonstrate low achievement School districts are responsible for developing improvement plans and ensuring that funds are allocated properly to target these schools WHAT TURNAROUND AND SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES ARE MOVING THE NEEDLE? M oving forward, Ohio must draw from best practices to drive its investments and partnerships with local school districts to turn around low-performing schools To that end, we shine light on the following initiatives that are achieving results: • The Cleveland Metropolitan School District, following several years of unsuccessful reform of its lowestperforming schools under SIG, embarked on a new strategy of phasing out failing comprehensive high schools and replacing them with new high school models Some schools were developed from scratch; others were developed from known models Rather than a total replacement of principal and staff, the schools took a more strategic approach, interviewing staff and putting together design teams comprised of school and community leaders District governance and management was also retained, as opposed to the restart requirement of turning over a school to a charter school operator or educational management organization Since 2012, nine new high schools have opened, most of which explicitly replaced failing comprehensive schools They all benefit from significant school-based autonomy granted under the groundbreaking Cleveland’s Plan for Transforming Schools,9 signed into law in July 2012 As a cohort, new schools in Cleveland are outperforming peer schools in student achievement, student progress, student and staff attendance and student and staff retention of 5.2 to 15.9 percentage points in reading Math improvement increased in all but one grade (seventh), ranging from 2.1 to 14.8 percentage points • The Academy for Urban School Leadership (AUSL) ) has turned around 14 previously low-performing schools in the Chicago Public Schools (CPS) system AUSL completely overhauls a low-performing school, including renovating facilities, bringing in new staff and leadership and implementing a new curriculum and culture The schools remain CPS neighborhood schools serving the same students, and teachers in the new school are CPS employees covered by the CPS teacher contract and salary schedule Turnaround elementary schools operated by AUSL have made dramatic achievement gains: schools operated by AUSL for more than three years have increased their percentage of students meeting or exceeding standards on the Illinois State Achievement Test by more than 30 points and newer turnaround schools are also showing strong gains AUSL applies a turnaround framework that includes an emphasis on positive school culture; engaged parents and community members; social supports to meet student needs; clear goals for schools, teams and individuals; shared responsibility for achievement; a strong college-prep curriculum and aligned assessments; and engaging and personalized instruction • Cincinnati Public Schools implemented its Elementary Initiative in 2008-09 to turn around 16 of the district’s most challenged buildings Initiative strategies include a comprehensive audit of each elementary school, realignment of resources to address the needs of individual children, the development of success plans for each child, an intensive focus on mathematics and reading and the implementation of a summer program named “Fifth Quarter,” which extended learning time by a month at each school and expanded early childhood programs Additionally, the initiative focuses heavily on the use of data Student scores on Ohio’s achievement tests increased dramatically in 2010 Each grade 3-8 experienced increases A WORD ABOUT CHARTER SCHOOLS I n many states, charter schools stand as a discrete option for school turnaround That is not necessarily true in Ohio, where, in the case of the Restart Model, districts must surrender control of the school to an independent charter school board Many districts, as a result, have selected the Turnaround, Transformation or Closure Models, whereby the school district maintains oversight of the school While charter schools have not held a prominent role in the state’s Turnaround Model portfolio, they hold a key role in offering an alternative for students seeking a nontraditional approach One such example includes Breakthrough Schools Rated the highest network of public charter schools in Cleveland, Breakthrough educates nearly 3,300 K-8 students across 10 campuses in Cleveland Overall, its students performed one point higher (83 percent) than the statewide average (82 percent) in 2014.10 Philanthropy Ohio honors such high-value education options and recognizes that many of the innovations adopted by successful charter schools could be valuable in district turnaround efforts THE CHALLENGE OF RURAL SCHOOL TURNAROUND S chool turnaround efforts often paint rural schools with the same broad brush as their urban and suburban counterparts As a result, the efforts inappropriately, and sometimes detrimentally, apply a one-size-fits-all approach to rural schools.11 The biggest challenge among these schools includes the recruitment and retention of effective teachers and leaders One emerging solution employed by a number of rural school districts that comprise the Ohio Appalachian Collaborative includes the use of collaborative strategies that have resulted in marked improvements Ultimately, sharing resources helps rural schools meet education goals and objectives by providing access to programs and services—like professional learning for teachers and advanced course options for students—that individual districts would not otherwise be able to afford and offer on their own.12 HOW WILL THE EVERY STUDENT SUCCEEDS ACT (ESSA) CHANGE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT & TURNAROUND? ESSA includes two very significant changes that affect states’ efforts to turn around schools: differentiated accountability and more local control • Differentiated Accountability: The Ohio Department of Education will be required to identify two main categories of schools for support and improvement: Comprehensive Support and Improvement Schools and Targeted Support and Improvement Schools Comprehensive Support and Improvement Schools, as defined by ESSA, are very similar to how Ohio defines and identifies its Priority Schools: the lowest performing percent of Title I schools as well as high schools with graduation rates below 67 percent This category also includes schools initially identified for Targeted Support and Improvement Schools that not meet the state’s criteria for improving outcomes of underperforming subgroups within a to-be-determined number of years Targeted Support and Improvement Schools include those that have one or more persistently underperforming student subgroups These schools must develop and implement improvement plans that are informed by indicators in the state’s accountability system, include “evidence-based interventions” and are approved by the local school district • More Local Control: There are no longer any federal required interventions or models that school improvement funds must be used to support; however, the law specifies that efforts must be “evidence-based.” ESSA does away with the School Improvement Grant program Instead, the Ohio Department of Education will be required to reserve percent of its Title I funds for school improvement grants Ninety-five percent of the funds must be distributed either competitively or by formula to districts to support schools that are among the lowest achieving in the state or have consistently underperforming student subgroups The department can retain no more than percent of the school improvement funds to carry out certain activities to implement and monitor grants Local districts, through a robust stakeholder engagement process, must identify the intervention(s) that best meet the needs of their students Moving forward, Ohio will have to be thoughtful about providing guidance to districts, based on lessons learned from previous school improvement efforts, as they implement “evidence-based” turnaround strategies ABOUT PHILANTHROPY OHIO P hilanthropy Ohio is an association of foundations, corporate giving programs, individuals and organizations actively involved in philanthropy in Ohio Its mission is to provide leadership for philanthropy in Ohio and to enhance the ability of members to fulfill their charitable goals It provides the network, tools and knowledge to help people engaged in philanthropy become more effective, powerful change agents in their communities Together, its more than 220 members hold over $50 billion in assets and provide over $4 billion in grants to nonprofit organizations that work to improve the lives of community residents talking points and key messages that a District Leadership Team or Community School Leadership Team (DLT/CSLT) and Building Leadership Teams (BLTs) can use to facilitate the process It contains scant research because this information can be found in the Ohio Leadership Development Framework Modules (www.ohioleadership.org) Further online training on each stage (Stages 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4) can be found at this same website OHIO’S IMPROVEMENT PROCESS S chool districts that have persistently failing schools are required to embark upon the Ohio Improvement Process (OIP), which contains four stages as identified in Figure Created by the Ohio Department of Education in 2012, the OIP seeks to ensure that all Ohio The Ohio Improvement Process schools are high performing All Priority Schools are required to implement the OIP To see the full-size visual, click here Figure – Ohio Improvement Process STAGE Prepare for the OIP the necessary collaborative structures, it describes the practices of communication and engagement, decision making, and resource management that are threaded throughout the OIP STAGE Develop a Focused Plan How these teams work in districts and schools? How these teams work in districts and schools? Develop goal(s), strategies, indicators, and action steps focused on Stage critical needs Use data to identify critical needs • District and Community School Leadership Team (DLT/CSLT) • Building Leadership Teams (BLTs) How these teams work in districts and schools? • Teacher-Based Teams (TBTs) How STEP Collect and chart data Review data Gather evidence of implementation and impact STEP Collect, chart, and analyze post data STEP Implement changes consistently TheOHIO Ohio 5-Step 5-STEP Process STEP these teams work in districts and schools? Implement strategies and action steps to achieve district goals Analyze data PROCESS STEP Establish shared expectations for implementing implementation and effect on changes in adult practice and student learning Policy Brief Improvement andand Turnaround Policy Brief#4: #4:School School Improvement Turnaround RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MOVING FORWARD RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MOVING FORWARD W ith than 370,000 of Ohio’s students students affected by affected inadequateby learning environments, timeenvironments, is of the ithmore more than 370,000 of Ohio’s inadequate learning time is of the essence Ohio mustmust continue to advance school improvement efforts and capitalize on flexibility ushered in ESSA To that end, essence Ohio continue to advance school improvement efforts and capitalize onbyflexibility ushered Philanthropy Ohio urges Ohio’s leaders and stakeholders by ESSA To that end, Philanthropy Ohio urgesto:Ohio’s leaders and stakeholders to: in Build Build a a pipeline of effective teachersteachers and leaders who are ready to step the state’s lowest schools and performing turn them around, pipeline of effective and leaders who areinto ready to step intoperforming the state’s lowest whether traditionally prepared or alternatively trained Great teachers and strong leaders matter The state must examine the effectiveness schools and turn them around, whether traditionally prepared or alternatively trained Great teachers and and retention rates of educator preparation programs and alternative programs operating in the state, including Woodrow Wilson, Teach strong leaders matter The state must examine the effectiveness and retention rates of educator preparation for America and Ohio, and, if worthy, continue toin support and expand such initiatives programs andBRIGHT alternative programs operating the state, including Woodrow Wilson, Teach for America and Ohio, and, if worthy, continue to support expand such BRIGHT Push hard to identify “evidence-based” turnaround strategies and and implement those initiatives approaches at even greater scale This means leveraging the expertise of key education partners, including Battelle for strategies Kids, Push hard to identify “evidence-based” turnaround and implement those approaches at even various Education Service Centers, colleges of education and others whoeducation have expertise in implementing greater scale This means leveraging the expertise of key partners, including Battelle for Kids, transformative teaching, leading, instructional, curricular and support strategies various Education Service Centers, colleges of education and others who have expertise in implementing teaching,innovation leading, instructional, curricular support transformative Create a school improvement fund, including Title I dollars,and whereby schoolsstrategies receive grants and funding based on top-flight educational criteria, improvement which is rooted in innovation and informed by the state’s SIG evaluation report currently underway at the Ohio Department Create a school fund, including Title I dollars, whereby schools receive grants and of Education The development of this fund should build on lessons learned from Ohio and across the country, including the evaluation significant funding based on top-flight educational criteria, which is rooted in and informed by the state’s SIG investments of Ohio’s Straight A Fund report currently underway at the Ohio Department of Education The development of this fund should build lessons learned from Ohio and across thebest country, including the significant investments of Ohio’s Straight A on Prioritize interventions and identify and disseminate practices to that end The Ohio Department of Fund Education must become a partner in helping local leaders, faculty and staff understand and consider options that demonstrate success and support interventions local turnaround efforts We know and that one size does not best fit all practices We also know schools guidance Prioritize and identify disseminate to that thatlocal end The need Ohioadditional Department of and support to undertake this work on behalf of students Education must become a partner in helping local leaders, faculty and staff understand and consider options demonstrate success and support local turnaround efforts.toWe know that by one not fitofall We also that Examine and retool the use of “transformation specialists” who are assigned Priority Schools thesize Ohiodoes Department Education know that local schools need additional guidance and support to undertake this work on behalf of students Often ODE is too focused on compliance and not enough on supporting and connecting schools to resources aimed at facilitating dramatic turnaround for retool our students Transformation specialists should be supported andare prepared to fully ESSA-related evi5 Examine and the use of “transformation specialists” who assigned to understand Priority Schools by the dence-based strategies of andEducation equipped to help principals and teachers in Priority Schools implement those strategies Ohio Department Often ODE is too focused on compliance and not enough on supporting and resources aimed facilitating dramatic for our students connecting Report on the schools impact ofto Ohio’s previous school at improvement processes andturnaround Straight A investments The results Transformation of these evaluations specialists should be supported and prepared to fully understand ESSA-related evidence-based strategies should be used to drive state and local direction for leveraging ESSA flexibilities and maximizing its approach to deploying funds and equipped to help principals and teachers in Priority Schools implement those strategies These steps will help put Ohio on a new path for turning around the state’s failing schools and ensuring Report on themore impact of Ohio’s school improvement processes and Straight A investments The opportunity for the than 370,000 Ohio previous students enrolled in those schools results of these evaluations should be used to drive state and local direction for leveraging ESSA flexibilities and maximizing its approach to deploying funds These steps will help put Ohio on a new path for turning around the state’s failing schools and ensuring opportunity for the more than 370,000 Ohio students enrolled in those schools ENDNOTES ENDNOTES _ MUCH MONEY HAS BEENSPENT SPENT ON IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS? HOWHOW MUCH MONEY HAS BEEN ONSCHOOL SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS? F ederal that have dedicated to Ohio’s ederalinvestments investments thatbeen have been dedicated School Improvement (SIG) over Grants the last eight to Ohio’s School Grants Improvement (SIG) years total as shown in the following table over the $266 last million, eight years total $266 million, as shown in tothe table the state received In addition SIGfollowing and ARRA funding, $558 million into federal funds infunding, 2015 It is expected to In addition SIG Title andIARRA the state receive an estimated $575 million in 2016 In spite of these received $558 million in federal Title I funds major investments, it is unclear if Ohio’s school improvein 2015 It is expected to receive an estimated ment approach been successful As these of August 2016, $575 million has in 2016 In spite of major the Ohio Department of Education has not finalized investments, it is unclear if Ohio’s school and released its evaluation of SIG.has been successful improvement approach As of August 2016, the Ohio Department of Education has not finalized and released its evaluation of SIG Note: Note: This This brief brief defines defines “failing “failing schools” schools” as as schools schools whose whose local local report report cards cards consist consist of of Fs Fs and and Ds Ds without without any any As As and and Bs Bs 3 FSG Social Impact Advisors, The School Turnaround Field Guide (2010), accessed August 15, 2016, http://www.wallacefoundation.org/ FSG Social Impact Advisors, The School Turnaround Field Guide (2010), accessed August 15, 2016, http://www.wallacefoundation.org/ knowledge-center/Documents/The-School-Turnaround-Field-Guide.pdf knowledge-center/Documents/The-School-Turnaround-Field-Guide.pdf Year Investment Year Investment 2009 2009 2010 2010 2011 2011 2012 2012 2013 2013 2014 2014 2015 2015 2016 2016 regular $132M (includes $20M in regular SIG SIG funds and $112M in ARRA) $20M $21M $20M $20M $19M $18M $16M Mark Edmundson, Edmundson, Why Why read? read? (New (New York: York: Bloomsbury, Bloomsbury, 2004); 2004); E.D E.D Hirsch, Hirsch, The The Making Making of of Americans Americans (New (New Haven: Haven: Yale Yale University University Press, Press, 2009) 2009) Mark Ohio Department of of Education, Education, “Ohio “Ohio School School Report Report Cards,” Cards,” accessed accessed August August 15, 15, 2016, 2016, http://reportcard.education.ohio.gov/Pages/ http://reportcard.education.ohio.gov/Pages Ohio Department default.aspx default.aspx 1 2 Mike Schmoker, Leading Leading with with Focus; Focus; Elevating Elevating the the Essentials Essentials for for School School and and District District Improvement Improvement (2016) (2016) Mike Schmoker, Kate Taylor, “After “After 2 Years, Years, Progress Progress Is Is Hard Hard to to See See in in Some Some Struggling Struggling City City Schools,” Schools,” New New York York Times, Times, July July 19, 19, 2016, 2016, accessed accessed August August 15, 15, Kate Taylor, 2016, 2016, http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/19/nyregion/after-2-years-progress-is-hard-to-see-in-some-struggling-city-schools.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/19/nyregion/after-2-years-progress-is-hard-to-see-in-some-struggling-city-schools.html 4 5 6 Ohio Department of Education, “Priority Schools,” accessed August 15, 2016, http://education.ohio gov/Topics/School-Improvement/ Ohio Department of Education, “Priority Schools,” accessed August 15, 2016, http://education.ohio gov/Topics/School-Improvement/ Federal-Programs/Elementary-and-Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools-and-Districts/Priority-Schools Federal-Programs/Elementary-and-Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools-and-Districts/Priority-Schools 7 Ohio Department of Education, “Focus Schools,” accessed August 15, 2016, http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/School-Improvement/ Ohio Department of Education, “Focus Schools,” accessed August 15, 2016, http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/School-Improvement/ Federal-Programs/Elementary-and-Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools-and-Districts/Focus-Schools Federal-Programs/Elementary-and-Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools-and-Districts/Focus-Schools 8 Ohio Department of Education, “Watch Schools,” accessed August 15, 2016, http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/School-Improvement/ Ohio Department of Education, “Watch Schools,” accessed August 15, 2016, http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/School-Improvement/ Federal-Programs/Elementary-and-Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools-and-Districts/Watch-Schools Federal-Programs/Elementary-and-Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools-and-Districts/Watch-Schools 9 Cleveland’s Plan for Transforming Schools, accessed August 15, 2016, http://clevelandmetroschools.org/cms/lib05/OH01915844/ Cleveland’s Plan for Transforming Schools, accessed August 15, 2016, http://clevelandmetroschools.org/cms/lib05/OH01915844/ Centricity/Domain/98/ClevelandPlanandLegislation.pdf Centricity/Domain/98/ClevelandPlanandLegislation.pdf Cincinnati Public Public Schools, Schools, “Elementary “Elementary Initiative,” Initiative,” accessed accessed August August 15, 15, 2016, 2016, http://www.cps-k12.org/about-cps/district-initiatives/ http://www.cps-k12.org/about-cps/district-initiatives/ Cincinnati elementary-initiative elementary-initiative 11 11 Sara Mead, Turning Around Low-Performing Schools (2012), accessed August 15, 2016, http://standleadershipcenter.org/sites/ Sara Mead, Turning Around Low-Performing Schools (2012), accessed August 15, 2016, http://standleadershipcenter.org/sites/ standleadershipcenter.org/files/media/Turn%20Arounds.pdf standleadershipcenter.org/files/media/Turn%20Arounds.pdf 10 10 500 SouthStreet, Front Street, Suite900 900 500 South 37 WestFront Broad Street,Suite Suite 800 Columbus, 43215-7628 Columbus, OhioOhio 43215-4198 Columbus, Ohio 43215-7628 info@philanthropyohio.org • 614.224.1344 info@philanthropyohio.org 614.224.1344 info@philanthropyohio.org • •614.224.1344 www.philanthropyohio.org www.philanthropyohio.org www.philanthropyohio.org Philanthropy Ohio 2016 Philanthropy Ohio © ©2016 Breakthrough Schools, Schools, “Annual “Annual Reports,” Reports,” accessed accessed August August 15, 15, 2016, 2016, http://breakthroughschools.org/resources/annual-reports http://breakthroughschools.org/resources/annual-reports Breakthrough Danette Parsley Parsley & & Rhonda Rhonda Barton, Barton, “School “School Turnaround Turnaround in in the the Rural Rural Context,” Context,” accessed accessed August August 15, 15, 2016, 2016, http://educationnorthwest.org/ http://educationnorthwest.org/ Danette northwest-matters/school-turnaround-rural-context northwest-matters/school-turnaround-rural-context 12 12 13 13 Lauren Camera, Camera, “Rural “Rural School School Collaboratives: Collaboratives: Key Key to to Success?” Success?” U.S U.S News News & & World World Report, Report, accessed accessed August August 16, 16, 2016, 2016, Lauren http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-02-11/rural-school-collaboratives-key-to-success http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-02-11/rural-school-collaboratives-key-to-success 14 14 THE URGENCY TURNING AROUND LOW-PERFORMING SCHOOLS: THE URGENCYOFOF TURNING AROUND LOW-PERFORMING EVERY CHILD DESERVES A GREAT EDUCATION SCHOOLS: EVERY CHILD DESERVES A GREAT EDUCATION P hilanthropy Ohio stands resolute that eachthat and every hilanthropy Ohio stands resolute eachOhio andstudent, every no matter his/her zip deserves Ohio student, no code, matter his/her zip code, deserves access toto a high-performing school that is equipped the best with teachers, access a high-performing school that iswith equipped leaders, instructional strategies, the best teachers, leaders, instructional strategies, community engagement effortsefforts and wraparound supports thatsupports result community engagement and wraparound in student success The research is decisive: a well-rounded education that result in student success The research is decisive: a has life-altering effects on everyhas aspect of society, particularly poor well-rounded education life-altering effects ontheevery New evidence from the Brookings Institute affirms the effects of a aspect of society, particularly the poor New evidencequality education individual incomes, earnings, social mobility, health from theon Brookings Institutelifetime affirms the effects of a quality and life expectancy education on individual incomes, lifetime earnings, social mobility, health and life expectancy Despite all of the evidence pointing to the importance of a high-quality education,all Ohio to be challenged high importance number of schools Despite ofcontinues the evidence pointingbytoa the of that fall short of meeting the education needs of their students Of the a high-quality education, Ohio continues to be challenged state’s more number than 3,400 of schools, about 820 fall (25 percent) struggle with the by a high schools that short of meeting low performance More than 370,000 students are currently enrolled in education needs of their students Of the state’s more than those schools Most serve students in urban, high-poverty communities 3,400 schools, about 820 (25 percent) struggle with low category of schools is emerging across Ohio’s cities Another troubling More than 370,000 students are currently performance and suburbs: those that receive passing grades students on their local cards, enrolled in those schools Most serve inreport urban, but, upon closer examination, face continued achievement gaps among high-poverty communities Another troubling category of student subgroups And, across high-poverty, rural school districts, whichthose dot schools is emerging Ohio’s cities and suburbs: the state’s landscape and serve more than 170,000 students, face their own that receive passing grades on their local report cards, but, unique sets of challenges Philanthropy Ohio believes it is unacceptable to upon closer examination, face continued achievement gaps deny any student, whether in an urban, suburban or rural school setting, among student subgroups And, high-poverty, rural school access to a high-quality Doing so strips students of themore keys districts, which doteducation the state’s landscape and serve they need to unlock their future economic opportunities that are all but than 170,000 students, face their own unique sets of chalguaranteed with the right education opportunities lenges Philanthropy Ohio believes it is unacceptable to deny any student, whether in an urban, suburban or rural school setting, access to a high-quality education Doing so strips students of the keys they need to unlock their future economic opportunities that are all but guaranteed with the right education opportunities Ohio’s education leaders have been attempting, with little success, turn Ohio’s education leaders have been attempting, with to little around the state’s lowest performing schools for nearly 14 years, since success, to turn around the state’s lowest performing the passage offor the nearly No Child14 Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2002 of Yet,the more than a schools years, since the passage No decade later, 370,000 students still remain trapped in inadequate learning Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2002 Yet, more than It is370,000 time for education to stop, take stock, pool aenvironments decade later, studentsleaders still remain trapped in resources and supports and determine a more effective path inadequate learning environments It is time for forward education leaders to stop, take success stock, has pool resources supports While school turnaround been somewhatand fleeting over the last and determine more effective path forward decade, we have at aleast learned some important lessons, which, based upon theschool evidence, must anchor success our path forward: While turnaround has been somewhat fleeting the last decade, we have at least learned some • School over leadership and teacher effectiveness stand as the most critical important which, upon the evidence, factors for lessons, school success Thisbased is why we dedicated Brief #1 to must the anchor ourcannot path turn forward: topic You around a school without a top-flight leader and effective teachers • School leadership and teacher effectiveness stand as the factors for school success This why we • most Schoolcritical boards, superintendents and union leaders areis integral to dedicated Briefturnaround #1 to theefforts topic.These Youleaders cannot turn around a successful school must have an school without a top-flight leader aand aligned vision and jointly agree to support plan effective for turning teachers around a school building • School boards, superintendents and union leaders are integral to successful school turnaround efforts These • High quality curriculum and instruction are also key leaders must have an aligned vision and jointly to ingredients, and these are dependent upon effective schoolagree leadership turning around a school building and support a plan for and rigorous expectations • quality curriculum and instruction are also key • High A sense-of-urgency must be balanced with perseverance ingredients, and these are dependent upon and an eye toward the long game There is no evidenceeffective of a school school leadership expectations improvement initiativeand in therigorous country that has demonstrated long-term success and showed •A sense-of-urgency must be balanced with perseverance improvement twothe or three Lasting and an eye within toward longyears game Thereschool is noimprovement evidence takes time, resources, leadership,initiative in the country that of a school improvement community support and buy-in has demonstrated long-term success and showed school improvement within two or three years.5 Lasting • School governance, operations and fiscal management all play into the improvement takes time, resources, leadership, success of turning around a lowcommunity support andbe buy-in performing school and cannot ignored • School governance, operations and fiscal management all play into the success of turning around a lowperforming school and cannot be ignored talking points and key messages that a District Leadership Team or Community School Leadership Team (DLT/CSLT) and Building Leadership Teams (BLTs) can use to facilitate the process It contains scant research because this information can be found in the Ohio Leadership Development Framework Modules (www.ohioleadership.org) Further online training on each stage (Stages 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4) can be found at this same website OHIO’S IMPROVEMENT PROCESS S chool districts that have persistently failing schools are required to embark upon the Ohio Improvement Process (OIP), which contains four stages as identified in Figure Created by the Ohio Department of Education in 2012, the OIP seeks to ensure that all Ohio The Ohio Improvement Process schools are high performing All Priority Schools are required to implement the OIP To see the full-size visual, click here Figure – Ohio Improvement Process STAGE Prepare for the OIP the necessary collaborative structures, it describes the practices of communication and engagement, decision making, and resource management that are threaded throughout the OIP STAGE Develop a Focused Plan How these teams work in districts and schools? How these teams work in districts and schools? Develop goal(s), strategies, indicators, and action steps focused on Stage critical needs Use data to identify critical needs • District and Community School Leadership Team (DLT/CSLT) • Building Leadership Teams (BLTs) How these teams work in districts and schools? • Teacher-Based Teams (TBTs) How STEP Collect and chart data Review data Gather evidence of implementation and impact STEP Collect, chart, and analyze post data STEP Implement changes consistently TheOHIO Ohio 5-Step 5-STEP Process STEP these teams work in districts and schools? Implement strategies and action steps to achieve district goals Analyze data PROCESS STEP Establish shared expectations for implementing implementation and effect on changes in adult practice and student learning Policy Brief Improvement andand Turnaround Policy Brief#4: #4:School School Improvement Turnaround RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MOVING FORWARD RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MOVING FORWARD W ith than 370,000 of Ohio’s students students affected by affected inadequateby learning environments, timeenvironments, is of the ithmore more than 370,000 of Ohio’s inadequate learning time is of the essence Ohio mustmust continue to advance school improvement efforts and capitalize on flexibility ushered in ESSA To that end, essence Ohio continue to advance school improvement efforts and capitalize onbyflexibility ushered Philanthropy Ohio urges Ohio’s leaders and stakeholders by ESSA To that end, Philanthropy Ohio urgesto:Ohio’s leaders and stakeholders to: in Build Build a a pipeline of effective teachersteachers and leaders who are ready to step the state’s lowest schools and performing turn them around, pipeline of effective and leaders who areinto ready to step intoperforming the state’s lowest whether traditionally prepared or alternatively trained Great teachers and strong leaders matter The state must examine the effectiveness schools and turn them around, whether traditionally prepared or alternatively trained Great teachers and and retention rates of educator preparation programs and alternative programs operating in the state, including Woodrow Wilson, Teach strong leaders matter The state must examine the effectiveness and retention rates of educator preparation for America and Ohio, and, if worthy, continue toin support and expand such initiatives programs andBRIGHT alternative programs operating the state, including Woodrow Wilson, Teach for America and Ohio, and, if worthy, continue to support expand such BRIGHT Push hard to identify “evidence-based” turnaround strategies and and implement those initiatives approaches at even greater scale This means leveraging the expertise of key education partners, including Battelle for strategies Kids, Push hard to identify “evidence-based” turnaround and implement those approaches at even various Education Service Centers, colleges of education and others whoeducation have expertise in implementing greater scale This means leveraging the expertise of key partners, including Battelle for Kids, transformative teaching, leading, instructional, curricular and support strategies various Education Service Centers, colleges of education and others who have expertise in implementing teaching,innovation leading, instructional, curricular support transformative Create a school improvement fund, including Title I dollars,and whereby schoolsstrategies receive grants and funding based on top-flight educational criteria, improvement which is rooted in innovation and informed by the state’s SIG evaluation report currently underway at the Ohio Department Create a school fund, including Title I dollars, whereby schools receive grants and of Education The development of this fund should build on lessons learned from Ohio and across the country, including the evaluation significant funding based on top-flight educational criteria, which is rooted in and informed by the state’s SIG investments of Ohio’s Straight A Fund report currently underway at the Ohio Department of Education The development of this fund should build lessons learned from Ohio and across thebest country, including the significant investments of Ohio’s Straight A on Prioritize interventions and identify and disseminate practices to that end The Ohio Department of Fund Education must become a partner in helping local leaders, faculty and staff understand and consider options that demonstrate success and support interventions local turnaround efforts We know and that one size does not best fit all practices We also know schools guidance Prioritize and identify disseminate to that thatlocal end The need Ohioadditional Department of and support to undertake this work on behalf of students Education must become a partner in helping local leaders, faculty and staff understand and consider options demonstrate success and support local turnaround efforts.toWe know that by one not fitofall We also that Examine and retool the use of “transformation specialists” who are assigned Priority Schools thesize Ohiodoes Department Education know that local schools need additional guidance and support to undertake this work on behalf of students Often ODE is too focused on compliance and not enough on supporting and connecting schools to resources aimed at facilitating dramatic turnaround for retool our students Transformation specialists should be supported andare prepared to fully ESSA-related evi5 Examine and the use of “transformation specialists” who assigned to understand Priority Schools by the dence-based strategies of andEducation equipped to help principals and teachers in Priority Schools implement those strategies Ohio Department Often ODE is too focused on compliance and not enough on supporting and resources aimed facilitating dramatic for our students connecting Report on the schools impact ofto Ohio’s previous school at improvement processes andturnaround Straight A investments The results Transformation of these evaluations specialists should be supported and prepared to fully understand ESSA-related evidence-based strategies should be used to drive state and local direction for leveraging ESSA flexibilities and maximizing its approach to deploying funds and equipped to help principals and teachers in Priority Schools implement those strategies These steps will help put Ohio on a new path for turning around the state’s failing schools and ensuring Report on themore impact of Ohio’s school improvement processes and Straight A investments The opportunity for the than 370,000 Ohio previous students enrolled in those schools results of these evaluations should be used to drive state and local direction for leveraging ESSA flexibilities and maximizing its approach to deploying funds These steps will help put Ohio on a new path for turning around the state’s failing schools and ensuring opportunity for the more than 370,000 Ohio students enrolled in those schools ENDNOTES ENDNOTES _ MUCH MONEY HAS BEENSPENT SPENT ON IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS? HOWHOW MUCH MONEY HAS BEEN ONSCHOOL SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS? F ederal that have dedicated to Ohio’s ederalinvestments investments thatbeen have been dedicated School Improvement (SIG) over Grants the last eight to Ohio’s School Grants Improvement (SIG) years total as shown in the following table over the $266 last million, eight years total $266 million, as shown in tothe table the state received In addition SIGfollowing and ARRA funding, $558 million into federal funds infunding, 2015 It is expected to In addition SIG Title andIARRA the state receive an estimated $575 million in 2016 In spite of these received $558 million in federal Title I funds major investments, it is unclear if Ohio’s school improvein 2015 It is expected to receive an estimated ment approach been successful As these of August 2016, $575 million has in 2016 In spite of major the Ohio Department of Education has not finalized investments, it is unclear if Ohio’s school and released its evaluation of SIG.has been successful improvement approach As of August 2016, the Ohio Department of Education has not finalized and released its evaluation of SIG Note: Note: This This brief brief defines defines “failing “failing schools” schools” as as schools schools whose whose local local report report cards cards consist consist of of Fs Fs and and Ds Ds without without any any As As and and Bs Bs 3 FSG Social Impact Advisors, The School Turnaround Field Guide (2010), accessed August 15, 2016, http://www.wallacefoundation.org/ FSG Social Impact Advisors, The School Turnaround Field Guide (2010), accessed August 15, 2016, http://www.wallacefoundation.org/ knowledge-center/Documents/The-School-Turnaround-Field-Guide.pdf knowledge-center/Documents/The-School-Turnaround-Field-Guide.pdf Year Investment Year Investment 2009 2009 2010 2010 2011 2011 2012 2012 2013 2013 2014 2014 2015 2015 2016 2016 regular $132M (includes $20M in regular SIG SIG funds and $112M in ARRA) $20M $21M $20M $20M $19M $18M $16M Mark Edmundson, Edmundson, Why Why read? read? (New (New York: York: Bloomsbury, Bloomsbury, 2004); 2004); E.D E.D Hirsch, Hirsch, The The Making Making of of Americans Americans (New (New Haven: Haven: Yale Yale University University Press, Press, 2009) 2009) Mark Ohio Department of of Education, Education, “Ohio “Ohio School School Report Report Cards,” Cards,” accessed accessed August August 15, 15, 2016, 2016, http://reportcard.education.ohio.gov/Pages/ http://reportcard.education.ohio.gov/Pages Ohio Department default.aspx default.aspx 1 2 Mike Schmoker, Leading Leading with with Focus; Focus; Elevating Elevating the the Essentials Essentials for for School School and and District District Improvement Improvement (2016) (2016) Mike Schmoker, Kate Taylor, “After “After 2 Years, Years, Progress Progress Is Is Hard Hard to to See See in in Some Some Struggling Struggling City City Schools,” Schools,” New New York York Times, Times, July July 19, 19, 2016, 2016, accessed accessed August August 15, 15, Kate Taylor, 2016, 2016, http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/19/nyregion/after-2-years-progress-is-hard-to-see-in-some-struggling-city-schools.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/19/nyregion/after-2-years-progress-is-hard-to-see-in-some-struggling-city-schools.html 4 5 6 Ohio Department of Education, “Priority Schools,” accessed August 15, 2016, http://education.ohio gov/Topics/School-Improvement/ Ohio Department of Education, “Priority Schools,” accessed August 15, 2016, http://education.ohio gov/Topics/School-Improvement/ Federal-Programs/Elementary-and-Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools-and-Districts/Priority-Schools Federal-Programs/Elementary-and-Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools-and-Districts/Priority-Schools 7 Ohio Department of Education, “Focus Schools,” accessed August 15, 2016, http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/School-Improvement/ Ohio Department of Education, “Focus Schools,” accessed August 15, 2016, http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/School-Improvement/ Federal-Programs/Elementary-and-Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools-and-Districts/Focus-Schools Federal-Programs/Elementary-and-Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools-and-Districts/Focus-Schools 8 Ohio Department of Education, “Watch Schools,” accessed August 15, 2016, http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/School-Improvement/ Ohio Department of Education, “Watch Schools,” accessed August 15, 2016, http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/School-Improvement/ Federal-Programs/Elementary-and-Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools-and-Districts/Watch-Schools Federal-Programs/Elementary-and-Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools-and-Districts/Watch-Schools 9 Cleveland’s Plan for Transforming Schools, accessed August 15, 2016, http://clevelandmetroschools.org/cms/lib05/OH01915844/ Cleveland’s Plan for Transforming Schools, accessed August 15, 2016, http://clevelandmetroschools.org/cms/lib05/OH01915844/ Centricity/Domain/98/ClevelandPlanandLegislation.pdf Centricity/Domain/98/ClevelandPlanandLegislation.pdf Cincinnati Public Public Schools, Schools, “Elementary “Elementary Initiative,” Initiative,” accessed accessed August August 15, 15, 2016, 2016, http://www.cps-k12.org/about-cps/district-initiatives/ http://www.cps-k12.org/about-cps/district-initiatives/ Cincinnati elementary-initiative elementary-initiative 11 11 Sara Mead, Turning Around Low-Performing Schools (2012), accessed August 15, 2016, http://standleadershipcenter.org/sites/ Sara Mead, Turning Around Low-Performing Schools (2012), accessed August 15, 2016, http://standleadershipcenter.org/sites/ standleadershipcenter.org/files/media/Turn%20Arounds.pdf standleadershipcenter.org/files/media/Turn%20Arounds.pdf 10 10 500 SouthStreet, Front Street, Suite900 900 500 South 37 WestFront Broad Street,Suite Suite 800 Columbus, 43215-7628 Columbus, OhioOhio 43215-4198 Columbus, Ohio 43215-7628 info@philanthropyohio.org • 614.224.1344 info@philanthropyohio.org 614.224.1344 info@philanthropyohio.org • •614.224.1344 www.philanthropyohio.org www.philanthropyohio.org www.philanthropyohio.org Philanthropy Ohio 2016 Philanthropy Ohio © ©2016 Breakthrough Schools, Schools, “Annual “Annual Reports,” Reports,” accessed accessed August August 15, 15, 2016, 2016, http://breakthroughschools.org/resources/annual-reports http://breakthroughschools.org/resources/annual-reports Breakthrough Danette Parsley Parsley & & Rhonda Rhonda Barton, Barton, “School “School Turnaround Turnaround in in the the Rural Rural Context,” Context,” accessed accessed August August 15, 15, 2016, 2016, http://educationnorthwest.org/ http://educationnorthwest.org/ Danette northwest-matters/school-turnaround-rural-context northwest-matters/school-turnaround-rural-context 12 12 13 13 Lauren Camera, Camera, “Rural “Rural School School Collaboratives: Collaboratives: Key Key to to Success?” Success?” U.S U.S News News & & World World Report, Report, accessed accessed August August 16, 16, 2016, 2016, Lauren http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-02-11/rural-school-collaboratives-key-to-success http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-02-11/rural-school-collaboratives-key-to-success 14 14 THE URGENCY TURNING AROUND LOW-PERFORMING SCHOOLS: THE URGENCYOFOF TURNING AROUND LOW-PERFORMING EVERY CHILD DESERVES A GREAT EDUCATION SCHOOLS: EVERY CHILD DESERVES A GREAT EDUCATION P hilanthropy Ohio stands resolute that eachthat and every hilanthropy Ohio stands resolute eachOhio andstudent, every no matter his/her zip deserves Ohio student, no code, matter his/her zip code, deserves access toto a high-performing school that is equipped the best with teachers, access a high-performing school that iswith equipped leaders, instructional strategies, the best teachers, leaders, instructional strategies, community engagement effortsefforts and wraparound supports thatsupports result community engagement and wraparound in student success The research is decisive: a well-rounded education that result in student success The research is decisive: a has life-altering effects on everyhas aspect of society, particularly poor well-rounded education life-altering effects ontheevery New evidence from the Brookings Institute affirms the effects of a aspect of society, particularly the poor New evidencequality education individual incomes, earnings, social mobility, health from theon Brookings Institutelifetime affirms the effects of a quality and life expectancy education on individual incomes, lifetime earnings, social mobility, health and life expectancy Despite all of the evidence pointing to the importance of a high-quality education,all Ohio to be challenged high importance number of schools Despite ofcontinues the evidence pointingbytoa the of that fall short of meeting the education needs of their students Of the a high-quality education, Ohio continues to be challenged state’s more number than 3,400 of schools, about 820 fall (25 percent) struggle with the by a high schools that short of meeting low performance More than 370,000 students are currently enrolled in education needs of their students Of the state’s more than those schools Most serve students in urban, high-poverty communities 3,400 schools, about 820 (25 percent) struggle with low category of schools is emerging across Ohio’s cities Another troubling More than 370,000 students are currently performance and suburbs: those that receive passing grades students on their local cards, enrolled in those schools Most serve inreport urban, but, upon closer examination, face continued achievement gaps among high-poverty communities Another troubling category of student subgroups And, across high-poverty, rural school districts, whichthose dot schools is emerging Ohio’s cities and suburbs: the state’s landscape and serve more than 170,000 students, face their own that receive passing grades on their local report cards, but, unique sets of challenges Philanthropy Ohio believes it is unacceptable to upon closer examination, face continued achievement gaps deny any student, whether in an urban, suburban or rural school setting, among student subgroups And, high-poverty, rural school access to a high-quality Doing so strips students of themore keys districts, which doteducation the state’s landscape and serve they need to unlock their future economic opportunities that are all but than 170,000 students, face their own unique sets of chalguaranteed with the right education opportunities lenges Philanthropy Ohio believes it is unacceptable to deny any student, whether in an urban, suburban or rural school setting, access to a high-quality education Doing so strips students of the keys they need to unlock their future economic opportunities that are all but guaranteed with the right education opportunities Ohio’s education leaders have been attempting, with little success, turn Ohio’s education leaders have been attempting, with to little around the state’s lowest performing schools for nearly 14 years, since success, to turn around the state’s lowest performing the passage offor the nearly No Child14 Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2002 of Yet,the more than a schools years, since the passage No decade later, 370,000 students still remain trapped in inadequate learning Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2002 Yet, more than It is370,000 time for education to stop, take stock, pool aenvironments decade later, studentsleaders still remain trapped in resources and supports and determine a more effective path inadequate learning environments It is time for forward education leaders to stop, take success stock, has pool resources supports While school turnaround been somewhatand fleeting over the last and determine more effective path forward decade, we have at aleast learned some important lessons, which, based upon theschool evidence, must anchor success our path forward: While turnaround has been somewhat fleeting the last decade, we have at least learned some • School over leadership and teacher effectiveness stand as the most critical important which, upon the evidence, factors for lessons, school success Thisbased is why we dedicated Brief #1 to must the anchor ourcannot path turn forward: topic You around a school without a top-flight leader and effective teachers • School leadership and teacher effectiveness stand as the factors for school success This why we • most Schoolcritical boards, superintendents and union leaders areis integral to dedicated Briefturnaround #1 to theefforts topic.These Youleaders cannot turn around a successful school must have an school without a top-flight leader aand aligned vision and jointly agree to support plan effective for turning teachers around a school building • School boards, superintendents and union leaders are integral to successful school turnaround efforts These • High quality curriculum and instruction are also key leaders must have an aligned vision and jointly to ingredients, and these are dependent upon effective schoolagree leadership turning around a school building and support a plan for and rigorous expectations • quality curriculum and instruction are also key • High A sense-of-urgency must be balanced with perseverance ingredients, and these are dependent upon and an eye toward the long game There is no evidenceeffective of a school school leadership expectations improvement initiativeand in therigorous country that has demonstrated long-term success and showed •A sense-of-urgency must be balanced with perseverance improvement twothe or three Lasting and an eye within toward longyears game Thereschool is noimprovement evidence takes time, resources, leadership,initiative in the country that of a school improvement community support and buy-in has demonstrated long-term success and showed school improvement within two or three years.5 Lasting • School governance, operations and fiscal management all play into the improvement takes time, resources, leadership, success of turning around a lowcommunity support andbe buy-in performing school and cannot ignored • School governance, operations and fiscal management all play into the success of turning around a lowperforming school and cannot be ignored ... http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/19/nyregion/after-2-years-progress-is-hard-to-see-in-some-struggling-city-schools.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/19/nyregion/after-2-years-progress-is-hard-to-see-in-some-struggling-city-schools.html 4. .. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/19/nyregion/after-2-years-progress-is-hard-to-see-in-some-struggling-city-schools.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/19/nyregion/after-2-years-progress-is-hard-to-see-in-some-struggling-city-schools.html 4. .. Federal-Programs/Elementary -and- Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools -and- Districts/Watch-Schools Federal-Programs/Elementary -and- Secondary-Education-Act/ESEA-Support-Schools -and- Districts/Watch-Schools 9 Cleveland’s Plan for