Inside RIDE
Public Schools
Learning
Teachers & Administrators
Students, Families & Community
Print This Page The Highly Qualified Leaders Project  
Monitoring Implementation of District Priorities

A process utilizing research-based protocols designed to assist central office and school leaders in assessing the school-level implementation of district-wide priorities.

Links to Content:
Demonstration Site
Target Population
Need and Intent
Synopsis
Background
Implementation Process
Tips for Implementation
Case Study
Program Components and Materials
Contact For More Information


Demonstration Site: The Education Alliance at Brown University and Woonsocket Public Schools (NOTE: Central Falls Public Schools participated in a similar project.)


Target Population: Three elementary schools and their respective principals and staff


Background: The Education Alliance “promotes educational change to provide all students equitable opportunities to succeed. [They] advocate for populations whose access to excellent education has been limited or denied. Since 1975, The Education Alliance, a department at Brown University, has been working to effect real change in education… [They] assess needs, offer options, and respond with comprehensive, innovative programs and services.”

The Woonsocket School District is implementing three priority strategies to improve student achievement in its elementary schools:

  1. Improving instruction through training and implementation of the Principles of Learning with support from the Institute for Learning. (The Principles of Learning describe instructional environments and practices that enable all students to achieve high academic standards through sustained and targeted effort.)
  2. Improving literacy instruction by effectively using literacy coaches at the schools.
  3. Creating consistent curriculum through the uniform adoption and implementation of Assertive Discipline. (The use of assertive discipline is intended to bring consistency and stability to a school environment. There are clear expectations that are widely posted and known to all; students are held accountable for their choices; and teachers are accountable for the fair and equitable handling of all students’ behaviors.)

Need and Intent: The Education Alliance was brought into the district to determine the degree of implementation of the priorities and how effective the level of implementation was at the student level. The researchers from the Alliance were looking at whether the teachers were using the Principles of Learning, how the school was using the literacy coaches, and the consistency of implementation of Assertive Discipline. The second year’s research allowed the district to see how and where implementation was deepened by the feedback, strategies and support provided by the Alliance in response to the first year’s research.

The principals in the district had received professional development relative to the three district priorities, however, there was concern that the teachers had not participated in an appropriate level of professional development and, therefore, were unclear on how to implement the priorities at the classroom level. It was felt that it is critical to look at implementation, and to go beyond determining whether things are being taught and look at whether students are learning them. The feedback loop created by the researchers was used to provide relevant information with respect to the relationship of the district priorities vs. actual practices and to give support to the school and district leadership who are ultimately responsible for implementation at all levels.


Synopsis: In 2005, the Deputy Superintendent (now the superintendent) identified three elementary schools as sites to be examined to determine the degree of implementation of the three district priorities. Staff of the Alliance conducted district and school level interviews, convened focus groups, observed classrooms, attended grade level meetings, and reviewed pertinent documents to compile a report and recommendations.

Building on the findings and recommendations from the 2005 report, in 2006 the Education Alliance prepared updated and follow-up questions to re-interview central office staff, conducted two-day visits at each school for observations, reviewed documents to determine the degree of implementation and institutionalization of the three priority strategies, looked for changes resulting from the recommendations in the 2005 report, and sought evidence of improvement. At the completion of the 2006 data gathering activities, the Education Alliance produced a second report for the Woonsocket School District that documents the progress of the three elementary schools over the past year in working to use the district priorities to improve student achievement.

One particular focus was the principal’s role in implementing the three district priorities; especially what he or she had done to promote them among their faculty. The Alliance’s visitation team looked for “evidence of support” by the school leadership staff with respect to the district priorities.

Case Study: After the initial (2005) report was presented, the principal and several staff members of the target schools were trained by the Education Alliance in the process of Classroom Walk Throughs (CWTs). Using this technique, the principal and staff of one of the schools conducted two CWTs focusing on Assertive Discipline. The use of the CWTs has sent a clear message to the staff about the importance of the priorities, as well as revealed inconsistencies in the implementation of Assertive Discipline (AD) across the school. The CWTs provided a mechanism for constructive feedback that would allow for changes to ensure uniform implementation of AD. The classrooms visited and the visitors both benefited from this process. The visitors were able to identify strengths and weaknesses across the school and make recommendations for adjustments. In addition, the visitors were able to compare their own AD practices with their observations and make changes designed to align their implementation strategies with the expectations of the school.

As a result of the two CWTs, staff have made the necessary adjustments to ensure schoolwide consistency in AD implementation. Students know the class and school rules and understand that these rules apply throughout the school—in their classrooms, in the halls, on the playground, as well as from teacher to teacher.

Subsequent interviews with staff indicate that the overall school behavior has improved with the adoption and consistent use of AD at the school. There are now clear behavior expectations for all. In the halls and in classrooms, observers subsequently can hear the supportive language of AD: “Make good choices.”

NOTE: CLASSROOM WALK-THROUGHS are a teacher-driven, non-evaluative way of looking at students working in the classroom. They involve a protocol for groups of teachers to decide on an important instructional focus classroom, walk through the room as a group and observe student behavior, share evidence of what they saw, and decide next steps. (For Woonsocket, the focus questions of the group came from the three district priorities.) CWTs help the staff to self-monitor the implementation of an initiative and help teachers see what effects they should have on students. They promote a distributive leadership model that involves the principal in supporting teachers in examining their own practice. Principals often participate as well. Classroom Walk Throughs were developed by the UCLA Classroom Management Program.


Implementation Process:

1. April 2005

  • Interviewed the Deputy Superintendent to help define what the district priorities were, what strategies were being promulgated in the district, and how they were to be implemented at the schools.
  • Interviewed all central office staff to understand their perceptions of how strategies are formulated, how actions are implemented, how they fared, and the factors affecting implementation and “uptake” at the schools.
  • Requested and received copies of written materials and guidance documents that dealt with or described district policies. A subsequent document analysis added to the overall understanding of the district and its three priorities.
  • Click here for the protocol for interviews with the superintendent and central office staff - Year One.

2. April and May 2005

  • Conducted site visits at the three elementary schools to examine how they were responding to the district’s initiatives. Teams of two visited each school over a two-day period, following a protocol that included meeting with focus groups, interviews, classroom observations, and grade level meeting observations.
  • Approximately twenty five school community members per school were observed and/or interviewed. Participants were drawn from school-based staff, and sometimes included parents or community members.
  • Site visitors were specifically seeking to understand how the initiatives were implemented at the school and gather evidence to support their conclusions.
  • Click here for the protocol for school interviews and focus groups - Year One.

2. September 2005 - December 2005

  • Conducted training for selected central office staff and the principals from the three selected schools and several members of their staffs in the Classroom Walk Through Process. (The participants were identified from the previous year’s work.)
  • Reviewed and discussed the results of the report of findings from the Spring 2005 school visits and interviews.

3. January - February 2006

  • Met with Superintendent and Director of Grants and Assessment to confirm continuance of priorities and to finalize details for site visits.
  • Corresponded with school principals at the three schools to schedule two-day visits at each.

4. March – April 2006

5. June 2006

  • Delivered written report to superintendent.


Tips for Implementation:

  • Use of an outside group to get an honest look at implementation is important
  • The process must not be seen as an evaluation but rather a “feedback loop” to understand the depth of implementation.
  • Must maintain confidentiality. (Click here to read Visitor Code of Conduct.)
  • Must build trust so you get honesty
  • This research was especially valuable as the district and the schools had experienced a number of recent changes in leadership to provide a way for them to “stay the course” in the implementation of the priorities.

The Education Alliance recommends these tips for schools and districts implementing priorities:

  • With any program, be certain that the teachers are all trained in the program, understand the expected outcome, and have the materials and tools needed to make the program operate successfully.
  • There should be a mechanism in place to ensure that a district priority also becomes a school priority and that there is some form of monitoring and accountability, as well as documented measures of success.

Program Components and Materials:


Contact for More Information:
Name: Eileen Ferrance
Job Title: Manager, The Education Alliance
Phone: (401) 274-9548 x256
E-mail: Eileen_Ferrance@brown.edu
Address: 222 Richmond Street, Suite 300, Providence, RI 02903

Disclaimer | Site Map | Print Page | Comments / Corrections
2006 Rhode Island Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. All rights reserved.
Please contact webmaster@ride.ri.gov with questions or comments about this Web site.
Rhode Island Department of Education 255 Westminster Street Providence, RI 02903 401.222.4600

Site Best Viewed at 1024x768

 
Download Adobe Reader