Managing for High Performance.

A Superintendent's Nine Rules for a Results-Oriented School System

Every strategic and operational practice in our school district must contribute to a single outcome: students reaching high standards.

We have launched a systemwide effort to ensure that everything we do is examined through the lens of student learning. That means every practice and procedure--from the development of bus schedules to the delivery of instruction--must result in increased learning.

Our focus reaches beyond periodic updating of the curriculum, routine in-service programs to introduce teachers to new instructional methods, or purchasing the latest technology.

As superintendent of this 17,000-student district, I readily acknowledge the difficulty and complexity of transforming a good but static organization to a high performance system. We are a work-in-progress and have a long way to go.

In our journey we have established some ground rules for leadership. They are (1) keep focused; (2) plan strategically; (3) develop an integrated work plan; (4) create clear decision-making processes; (5) engage the public; (6) think systemically; (7) live by our beliefs; (8) be standards driven; and (9) pursue vigilantly our moral imperative that all students learn.

* Keep the Focus.

Through serious growing pains we have learned the importance of focus. Our goals are simple and few, our beliefs simple and few, and the parameters we use for decision making are simple and few.

Our first and most important task is to establish clear goals in collaboration with all stakeholders. We've learned that our goals must reflect the vision established by staff, parents, and community. Everything we do must support student learning. We do not design model classroom practices or superb record-keeping systems or instructional technologies for their own sake. We stay focused on our mission.

We sometimes became distracted by an abundance of good ideas and consequently expended valuable time and energy pursuing those ideas without first determining how those efforts would contribute to our primary goal. Now when we are tempted to pursue an idea like year-round education or all-day kindergarten, we step back and ask ourselves if the concept will help us directly ensure that students learn what they need to know and be able to do.

If the answer is "yes," we will vigorously go for it. If the answer is no, we drop it, regardless of how inviting the topic might be. If the response is "maybe," we wait until we have more data to know whether to move ahead. We are building a culture that encourages everyone to stay focused on the changes that make a positive difference and to use time and energy to realize our district's goals.

* Plan Strategically.

When we first began our strategic planning effort, we worked with a broad-based district/community team charged with establishing a vision, beliefs about education, initial goals, and action items. The planning effort produced 14 goals and 87 separate action items. It was a robust plan but proved far too complex to implement.

Over time we reviewed our work and reduced our goals to three--enhancement of the learning environment, enhancement of the organization, and enhancement of partnerships--with all action items built around these three goals.

If simplicity is, in fact, the soul of elegance, it is also the soul of good planning. Instead of 87 action items, we have one integrated work plan that ties together all strategic actions that grow out of the three goals.

The plan considers carefully the relationships of people and tasks, the priorities, and the time that it takes to do quality work. The integration of our work keeps us from getting sidetracked and from undertaking projects that are not tied to our major strategic goals. We are now at the point where we feel comfortable abandoning or dramatically modifying action plans that do not directly connect to our mission.

For example, in response to state legislation requiring a certificate of mastery to be implemented in the year 2000, we established a planning team to develop a proposal for our schools. The team proposed a grand work schedule involving a task force of some 40 people and enthusiastically embraced the charge we had given them.

However, after two lengthy meetings, they came back and asked us to reconsider their mission. They told us, "This should not be a stand-alone project." They reviewed our district's movement toward becoming a true standards-driven organization and determined that their efforts should be directed to a more fundamental question than how to comply with state law.

They wanted to redirect their work to researching what they saw as the natural outgrowth of standards-driven instruction--exit standards incorporated in the district's current work. Consequently, we avoided the frustration and cynicism that so often result from the hard work of a well-intended group being disconnected from the focus of the organization.

The work plan helps all individuals in the organization see how they fit into the school district's overall work. We call it "single-thread planning" where a thread connects everyone's work to the mission of the district. As everyone connected with the district comes to understand our goals and the tasks required to reach them, the work that needs to be done is more readily focused, and both the sequential and simultaneous steps we need to take become evident.

* Develop an Integrated Work Plan.

Three major strategies comprise our integrated work plan:

* We will develop and implement clear standards for what students should know and be able to do;

* We will develop and implement instructional delivery systems that ensure all students reach those standards; and

* We will develop and implement assessments that align with the standards to measure student progress and improve organizational operations.

For each strategy, some common planning components exist: organizational effectiveness, staff development, community and parent partnerships, and communication. We consider each component as we develop action steps for our three strategies.

As we began planning to meet our third strategy of developing and implementing student assessments that align with learning standards, we framed questions such as: "What structures must we hay to report, analyze, and review data?" (organizational effectiveness); "How will teachers learn about effective assessment practices?" (staff development); "How do we build understanding among stakeholders that the assessments truly measure student progress?" (communication); and "Who should be involved in establishing meaningful assessment standards?" (partnerships).

As we consider each planning component, we have learned that all are important but, depending on the task at hand, some are immediately critical. Training is an essential component in reaching our goal in implementing student assessments. Indeed, in a rapidly changing organization, ensuring that we are all proficient in new roles is a major challenge.

Training is central, not a fringe benefit. We are asking all staff members to learn new skills and it is critical that the plan include the staff development needed to make this transition. For example, our training efforts include support for staff to learn new planning and curriculum skills and for administrators and business office staff to learn new ways of organizing and working with teams and managing processes that support classrooms. (See related story, page 15.)

* Create Clear Processes for Decision-Making.

In our district, master decision-making matrix outlines where decisions are made for operational and structural functions. Each school develops its own decision-making matrix to increase the chances that site councils spend their time focused on the important work of increasing student performance.

The impetus for developing the matrices came from the AASA Curriculum Management Audit we conducted in 1994. The report told us that our decision-making processes were in "disarray." We weren't surprised by the conclusion. We could see the evidence.

The report gave us a new perspective about the reasons for the confusion. We learned that while we had well-defined decision-making functions, we had not clearly identified the role each stakeholder might play in carrying out those functions. Our decision-making matrix clearly identifies who plays what role.

The audit report used the principal selection process as one example of confusion about decision-making roles. Last fall we had a principalship vacancy arise just before school started and it required the quick selection of a new leader. We did not have time to use our normal inclusive process to help identify a new principal, and this created confusion and distrust.

It was clear to me and our management team that, in our district, the superintendent alone is accountable to the school board for recommending leaders who meet the quality and performance criteria we require. We also realized that the timing of a vacancy had an impact. As we reviewed our hiring and selection processes, we made provisions allowing us to accommodate just such a circumstance.

Staff were frustrated and angry because they were not aware of the process that would be followed in these circumstances. We then documented the process for principal selection and communicated it to staff members. The school staff accepted it as the district process. The hard feelings we encountered were not about the process or the person selected. Rather, not knowing the process created the distrust.

* Engage the Public.

Our work requires that good communication and strong family/community partnerships undergird every structure within the system. Ironically, improved communication often contributes to greater chaos and sometimes even confusion, something with which we grapple daily.

As a system moves from top-down management and one-way messages to a system of inclusion and shared responsibility, communication becomes more complex. Creating effective communication channels and quality feedback loops have become an obsession for us.

For instance, not so very long ago when parents asked us what eighth graders would learn in science by the time they finished the school year, we could show them the textbook the teacher used anti list the topics covered in each chapter. A simple question with a simple response.

Today, the response is not so simple. The teacher might not use a text. The teacher might have dozens of articles and problem-solving guides that students use in conducting experiments they design with their peers. The student might not memorize the periodic table of elements that we once considered essential, yet through their understanding of chemistry, they might demonstrate how the interaction of some common household products can harm water quality.

Communication with today's parent is far more complex and requires one-on-one contacts and discussion.

We continuously encourage early and continued dialogue with the community and within the organization although we may not have all the answers or we have not completed our work. As one of our District PTA Council presidents said, "Don't bring out your work after you think that you have all the wrinkles ironed out--bring it out early and let's iron it out together."

We try hard to avoid asking traditional questions like, "What subjects should high school students complete to graduate?" Instead we work with parents to identify critical questions like, "What should your child know and be able to do before he or she leaves our system?" "What is the parent/community role that will result in increased student learning?" The responses to critical question guide our work.

* Think Systemically.

School districts are complex systems. Sometimes I describe a high performance organization as being analogous to a healthy human being. The human body is a combination of smaller systems that come together to create a complete system. There is a respiratory system, a circulatory system, and a digestive system. To be healthy, all systems in the body work together, and each smaller system contributes to the whole.

The same is true of a school district when we approach it as a system with all parts working together. We cannot make changes independently in one part of the system if these changes impact other parts of the system.

In Everett, we found that our practice had been to use intuition, hunches, and tradition to make decisions. Many of those decisions could be characterized as tinkering or tampering with the parts. Instead of thinking carefully about the systemwide impact of our action, we often, as W. Edwards Deming used to say, optimized the part, but sub-optimized the whole. That is, we have improved performance in one area at the cost of performance in another area and often at the cost of overall performance of the organization.

For example, we reorganized our transportation system to reduce the cost to the district and make it more efficient. We were able to transfer almost $250,000 from transportation to the instructional budget. That seemed like a significant move to improve student learning. But was it?

The savings came about as a result of staggering our bus routes among elementary, middle, and high school levels to make maximum uses of buses. Consequently, some high schools started class over two hours before their feeder elementary schools. Tardiness and sleepiness among high school students increased as some started their day at 7 a.m., and complaints surfaced about how long younger children had to wait for the bus that arrived long after older siblings had gone to school and parents left for work.

Thinking systemically simply means that we have to examine the whole picture to see how changes in one area impact the whole system. Our decision to save money in transportation seemed to make sense, but if we had had data about how the decision might impact student learning, we could have determined if the changes were appropriate. We now have district beliefs and parameters to guide us in thinking systemically in decision-making and evaluating the impact of our decisions.

* Live by Your Beliefs.

One very important process to improve the overall performance of our system has been to examine the relationship among the things we say we believe, how we function, and the structures that are developed to carry out those functions. Unfortunately, what we have learned so often is that some of our most cherished beliefs, such as "All students will learn," are in no way reflected in some of the structures that we use.

In high performing organizations, "form" follows "function." Unfortunately, in the school business, it's often the other way around--"function" follows "form." Structures, such as 180 days per year, hours per day, 50 minutes per period, and teachers teaching isolated content, are not connected to our beliefs. We use these structures, but they do not flow out of our belief that all children will learn, given the time they need. As a system, we are carefully reviewing the way we function and our structures to see if, in fact, we are living by our beliefs. (See above.)

* Be Standards Driven.

It is essential that we gauge progress against measurable results. We abandoned generalized objectives like "facilitate involvement of parents" or "explore ways to address varied student needs." In their place we are establishing clear, high performance standards for staff and students.

The standards provide the framework for the transition to results-oriented thinking. We cannot know what progress we are making in reaching our mission unless there are clearly identified and understood standards with measures to assess progress against those standards.

This is true for community, staff, students, and particularly leaders. We have used results-oriented thinking in our performance assessment system. For example, we have a performance assessment process to give principals support in their quest for continuous improvement. The process is based on a district vision of an effective principal. From that vision we are establishing clear standards of performance for principals and criteria for assessing the quality of the principals' work against the desired standards.

If the standard is that principals will provide clear, focused instructional leadership that results in increased student learning, the criteria makes clear what is expected. Two criteria provide specific expectations: (1) report cards and parent conferences identify the standards for which students are being held accountable and the progress they are making; and (2) principals communicate with parents to help them know how to be engaged with the school in ways that increase student learning.

One way to do that is through the school/home newsletters that each school uses. Recently, we looked at the school newsletters from four years ago and compared them to the school newsletters of last year. Immediately we could see an increased focus on student learning, but the changes were not significant.

We realized that we had not been clear about what we expected of principals in the area of parent communication. We need to be much more intentional about establishing the standards and identifying our criteria. In the past, we have not had clear standards and criteria, leading to misunderstandings, ambiguity, and lack of direction.

What we know now is that with clearly established standards and criteria, the chance for greater success increases. Once, in conversation with a college professor about clear standards, I heard him say, "But if I make it clear what is expected of students, everyone could get an 'A.'" He thought that was bad. This is exactly what we want--every individual reaching standards. Our work in establishing clear, high standards for everyone is well under way from the students to the superintendent.

* Realize Our Moral Imperative.

All staff members need to know where the district is going and exactly how each person contributes to the success of the journey. One of the simple beliefs that we hold is that the district is accountable for the learning success of students.

That belief requires a profoundly complex shift in role and function. It means that teachers are not just responsible for dispensing information. It ensures that the students actually learn and are the central focus of the learning experience. Teaching to standards and emphasizing student-centered classrooms are helping us in this difficult shift to address our belief that "all students are successful learners." If it is to be more than words on a brochure, then we each need to embrace the obligation as a moral imperative and make the necessary changes.

The Everett School District is fortunate to have a school board, staff, employee associations, and community willing to take risks together, learn from mistakes, and keep focused on our destination. We know that students can learn what is expected of them given the time and support they need. We know we can design and implement systems to ensure they learn. We also know there are as many exhilarating opportunities as there are painful challenges along the way and we are dedicated to making changes regardless of the difficulties involved.

We are crystal clear about our destination. We understand the complexity of our journey, and we are totally committed that each child in our district will thrive in tomorrow 's changing world.

A Commitment to Staff Development

Becoming a standards-driven school district requires a major commitment to training and staff development. In Everett, the focus this year is on improving teachers' skills in connecting instruction, curriculum, and assessment to learning standards.

In August, teams from every school in the district spent five clays learning to develop standards-driven units of study. Led by Marge Sable from the National Alliance for Restructuring Education, more than 200 principals, teachers, district administrators, and parents learned together about the power of integrating learning standards with content and performance standards in classroom instruction.

Teachers spent the last two days of the training developing units that they will use in their classrooms this year. Follow-up sessions will take place throughout the school year so teachers can share experiences and improve their skills.

By the end of the five-day training, teachers were expected to:

* understand and be able to use content and performance standards;

* have a working knowledge of the district's curriculum guide;

* begin to understand and develop rubrics (scoring guidelines); and

* develop a standards-driven unit of study.

By the end of the 1995-96 school year; teachers will be expected to:

* develop and implement a standards-driven unit of study with rubrics and samples of student work and have the unit critiqued before the second follow-tip session;

* develop and implement one additional unit during the 1995-96 school year; and

* teach to standards consistently by the end of the school year.

Teacher Centers

Augmenting the district's efforts to ensure that all teaching is standards-driven are Teacher Development Centers. In 1994 the district opened a center at an elementary school with the assistance of the National Alliance and an Apple Classroom of Tomorrow grant. Teams of teachers from district schools spent a week learning about teaching to standards through hands-on work with students and other teachers. When they returned to their home school, they had direct support provided by the center coordinator to implement what they had learned.

The effort was so successful that the district replicated the model at two more elementary schools, a middle school, and a high school at a cost of more than $600,000 for teacher stipends, substitute staff time, and staffing of the centers.

Standards-driven units of study and the Teacher Development Centers support what we know about how effective teacher training must be sequenced. Teachers must:

1. learn new theory;

2. practice new skills in the training setting;

3. practice with support those new skills in the work setting; and

4. transfer the skills they have learned into their regular work.

-- Jane Hammond 

Beliefs Guide Actions in Everett

The Everett School District holds the following beliefs:

* All people are of inherent worth and are our greatest resources.

* It is essential for all students to be successful learners.

* Schools are one component within a system of human development.

* Continuous improvement is essential.

* Learning is constant, and time is fluid.

Here is an example of how our basic beliefs guide our actions:

Guiding Principle

We believe that learning is constant and time is fluid. (Time is the variable factor in children's learning.)

Functions

We function in ways that allow individual students the time they need to learn what they should know and be able to do.

Structures

We build schedules with flexibility to allow time for all children to learn.