• Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
519
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. 3rd Generation Overview: Becoming an Autonomous School Session 1 1
  • 2. AGENDA  Welcome, Introduction and Agenda Review  Evolution of Autonomy  Overview of the Models  Available Autonomies  Key Differences  Wows, Wonders and Whoas Protocol  Case Study Discussion  Applying for an autonomy model  Wrap Up / Next Steps 2
  • 3. MEETING OBJECTIVES By the end of this session, participants will have a better understanding of:  the history of autonomous schools in LAUSD  the three autonomous school model options – ESBMM, Pilot and LIS  the autonomies available with each model  the process and requirements for applying for each of the models 3
  • 4. EVOLUTION OF AUTONOMY IN LAUSD Local School Leadership Council School-Based Management LEARN ESBMM PILOT LIS 4
  • 5. WHY AUTONOMY IN LAUSD? “Autonomy initiatives rest on a shared assumption that increasing schools’ autonomy – generally defined in policy designs as authority over key decisions about school improvement – will enable schools to develop and implement approaches to teaching and learning that better build on their strengths and address the needs of their students than if policy makers or others outside schools made those decisions” • Tight accountability with flexibility in how schools meet those accountabilities. --Dr. John Deasy • Those closest to the students—teachers, parents, administrators—should be empowered to have greater decision making authority. --LAUSD, UTLA, AALA via LSSEI Agreement • When schools own the means to their results, they then own the results and are more likely to improve. Autonomy is a way to engender greater ownership at the school site. --Rachel Bonkovsky 5
  • 6. AUTONOMOUS SCHOOL MODELS ESBMM PILOT LIS • Expanded School Based Management Model • Pilot School Model • Local Initiative Model 6
  • 7. ESBMM: GENERAL OVERVIEW  Established jointly between LAUSD and UTLA in April 2010 to enhance flexibility, accountability and local control for participating schools to promote academic excellence and full engagement by the school community  Set package of autonomies available to all approved schools  Exempt from District policies and Board Rules, except those necessary for legal compliance  Subject to state and federal laws  All provisions of the District-UTLA CBA apply to all members  Remain part of the District; open to students in accordance with student assignment plan  Total of 23 ESBMM schools across LAUSD at all school levels 7
  • 8. ESBMM: PRINCIPLES and PRACTICES  Disperse Power  Participation of many stakeholders, including parents, in the governance of the school  Established governance council and committees (including the SSC) with identified roles and responsibilities such as setting the school vision, approving the annual budget and selecting the school leader  Emphasis on Professional Development. Support school objectives to build capacity for change, create a professional community and develop a shared knowledge base  Disseminate Information. Information is shared consistently and in a timely manner with all school stakeholders and is used to make informed decisions regarding the organization and direction of the school.  Effective Leadership. The principal promotes a school-wide commitment to growth in skills and knowledge by leading, delegating, dispersing power across the school and getting all stakeholders to participate in the work of the school. 8
  • 9. ESBMM: AUTONOMIES  Financial Resources: site-based model funding determined by the District-General Fund School Program  Staffing: subject to restraints of CBA and District staffing policies  Curriculum and Assessment: choose curriculum materials, methodology or implementation that aligns with the state adopted CCSS  Professional Development: aligned with the instructional program to best meet the needs school community  Bell Schedules: maximize student learning and meets laws and District requirements for minimal instructional minutes 9
  • 10. ESBMM: ACCOUNTABILITY  Accountability Metrics: establish clear accountability measures for each area of autonomy  Annual Review: ensure the school is on target to meet annual improvement goals  Formal Quality Review: in year three and every five years thereafter unless the review reveals issues requiring earlier follow up 10
  • 11. PILOT: GENERAL OVERVIEW  Created in LD 4 in February 2007, through a partnership between LAUSD and UTLA to be models of educational innovation and to serve as research and development sites for effective urban public schools.  Set package of autonomies available to all approved schools  Subject to state and federal laws  Stipulate the work conditions for the coming year via an Elect-to- Work Agreement  May waive parts of the CBA except for the following articles: IV, X, X- A, XII, XIII, XVII, and XXVIII  Remain part of the District; open to students in accordance with student assignment plan  Total of 48 Pilot schools across LAUSD at all school levels 11
  • 12. PILOT: PRINCIPLES and PRACTICES  Unifying Vision and Mission. Reflected in all school practices and structures  Equity. School communities are inclusive and ensure that practices provide all students with opportunities to reach high levels of achievement  Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment. Teaching and learning are characterized by the following attributes:  Explicit high expectations for every member of the school community  Instruction is differentiated and teachers empower students to be responsible for their own learning  Provide a rigorous core academic curriculum to all students  Students are assessed and demonstrate their understanding of key competencies in multiple ways, including standardized tests, exhibitions and portfolios  Commitment to Personalization. Optimal size is between 450-550 students to enable teachers and student to build strong relationships and a safe environment 12
  • 13. PILOT: PRINCIPLES and PRACTICES  Professional Collaborative Culture  Teachers share their practice to sustain a professional collaborative culture  Emphasis on shared decision-making through consensus-building and shared responsibility for student achievement  Leadership  People closest to the students make the school and policy decisions  Governing boards have increased decision-making power over the school’s vision, budget approval, principal selection/evaluation and local policies  Family and Community Engagement  Focused on respect, trust and collaboration  Families are expected to participate as partners  Schools form partnerships with community organizations 13
  • 14. PILOT: AUTONOMIES  Financial Resources: funded through a lump sum per pupil dollar allocation to make decisions based on what programs and services best meet students’ need  Staffing: may select and replace staff to create a unified school community and the best learning environment for students; the CBA is in place as it pertains to RIFs in selecting staff  Curriculum and Assessment: may structure their A-G Curriculum and assessment practices as long as they are equal to in rigor or better than the District’s  Professional Development: schools decide on the professional development in which to engage  Calendar: freedom to modify school days and calendar years for both students and faculty provided they meet the (1) daily and annual instructional minutes and (2) number of instructional days required by the state  Governance: freedom to create a governance structure that takes on increased governing responsibilities including (1) principal selection, supervision, evaluation, with final approval by ESC supt. And (2) set their own policies that will best help students be successful. 14
  • 15. PILOT: ACCOUNTABILITY  Accountability Process: based on three categories which articulate the criteria for a high-performing quality school:  Unwavering focus on academic achievement  School Culture, Climate and infrastructure that support personalization and academic achievement  Leadership that supports high achievement for students and staff  Annual Review: a self-reflection and a day of classroom observation by a team of stakeholders who provide feedback to the school community  Full School Review: in year three and every five years thereafter; involves all school community members in a self study and an external team conducts a comprehensive school visit 15
  • 16. LIS: GENERAL OVERVIEW  Established through the LAUSD-UTLA Local School Stabilization and Empowerment Initiative, LSSEI, of 2011 and provides for increased decision-making authority and empowerment of the faculty, Principal and parents to determine various aspects of a school’s educational program and policies.  Allows for deliberate adoption of specific autonomy from an array of autonomy options for local empowerment  Granted automatic waivers from District controls and parts of the LAUSD-UTLA CBA as needed to implement matters subject to local determination  Local Initiatives are to be driven solely by the imperative of continued improvement in student achievement and quality of instruction  Remain part of the District; open to students in accordance with student assignment plan  Total of 11 LIS schools across LAUSD at all school levels 16
  • 17. LIS: AUTONOMIES Instructional Program Autonomy: offers the following options from which to choose  Methods of Improving Pedagogy: methods to improve pedagogy and student achievement, such as articulation between grade levels/departments, intervention strategies and support programs  Curriculum: instructional standards, objectives and emphases subject to State and District minimum curriculum standards  Assessment: Local interim benchmark assessments, tests, pacing plans, aligned with and equivalent to District requirements and complying with any State and Federal requirements  Professional Development: aligned with the Single Plan for Student Achievement except as to training related to legal/compliance mandates 17
  • 18. LIS: AUTONOMIES Internal Organization and Operations: schools may choose to exercise autonomy over the following areas  Schedule: refers to daily instructional days/minutes, school activities and events, and special schedules to accommodate additional prep time for elementary teachers subject to District mandated minimum number of school days, instructional minutes and calendar requirements  Internal Organization: such as division into academies, SLCs, houses within the assigned student population  Budget: provides general fund budget control pursuant to District’s evolving site based funding system-General School Fund Program 18
  • 19. LIS: AUTONOMIES Internal Organization and Operations: schools may choose to exercise autonomy over the following areas  Health and Safety: aligned with District-wide health/safety mandates  Re-adoption in the Local Initiative School Program: any current special conditions/waivers already applicable to the school pursuant to SBM, ESBMM, Pilot or other arrangements  Adoption of Separate Waiver Plans: Pilot program or ESBMM subject to each programs requirements  Discipline & Code of Conduct: aligned with the District-wide standards and rules governing student conduct, suspensions, expulsions and transfers. 19
  • 20. LIS: AUTONOMIES Staffing: three available areas of autonomy in regards to the staffing  Mutual Consent: no district mandated priority placements at the school site; schools must comply with the return rights or other placement rights to the school  Teacher Assignments: determine assignment of teachers to grade levels, departments, subjects and classes, (looping, teamteaching, ungraded or multi-age classrooms)  Staff Appointments: selecting grade level or department chairs, coordinators, deans, instructional coaches, etc. 20
  • 21. LIS: ACCOUNTABILITY The monitoring process and tools are in the process of being developed. 21
  • 22. 22
  • 23. KEY DIFFERENCES IN MODELS ESBMM Pilot LIS Contract remains intact Waive some articles of the contracthours, working conditions Waivers from Article IX-A (assignments) May use non-District curriculum that meets State requirements and material approvals May use non-District curriculum that meets State requirements Locally determined curriculum that meets State & minimum District requirements Local School Leadership Council School Site Council (Categorical) Governing School Council LSLC unless waiver requested School Site Council (Categorical) Bell schedule School calendar & bell schedule Bell schedule General School Fund Program General School Fund Program or Lump sum allocation General School Fund Program “Mutual Consent” Staff Selection via the EWA “Mutual Consent” and internal process for Teacher Assignments and Appointed Positions • Annual School Review • Quality Review • Annual Review • Full School Review Under Development Superintendent Pilot School Steering Committee and LAUSD Board School site through a petition and vote 23
  • 24. 24
  • 25. 25
  • 26. 26
  • 27. ESTABLISHING AN ESBMM SCHOOL Planning Phase • Attend training to learn more about the ESBM model • Develop an outreach plan that includes involvement and engagement of all school community stakeholders in the decision to pursue the model • Document all engagement efforts (e.g., meeting agendas, notes, etc.) • Seek approval from the Leadership Council to pursue the ESBM model Plan Development • Identify a team who will support the writing and development of the proposal • Submit a Letter of Intent and write the proposal • Continue to engage all school community stakeholders in the development of the proposal; must host a minimum of three (3) different meetings at various times with parents and community members; document all meetings • Periodically share draft proposal with all staff and gather feedback 27
  • 28. ESTABLISHING AN ESBMM SCHOOL Voting Requirements • Share final proposal shared with all staff • Conduct and document staff vote; Proposal is approved if 67% of UTLA bargaining unit members who work at least 50% of the time at the site vote in favor Proposal Submission and Approval • Submit plan for approval • School receives written notification from the Superintendent or the Designee regarding next steps relative to the proposal submitted 28
  • 29. ESTABLISHING A PILOT SCHOOL Planning Phase • Attend orientation meeting hosted by the District Plan Development • Identify a team who will support the development of the proposal • Submit a Letter of Intent and write the proposal • Periodically share draft proposal with all staff and gather feedback Voting Requirements • Conduct and document staff vote; Proposal is approved if 67% of UTLA bargaining unit members who work at least 50% of the time at the site vote in favor Proposal Submission and Approval • Proposal reviewed by the Pilot School Steering Committee (PSSC) • Teams may be invited by the PSSC to participate in a meeting to discuss proposal or asked to re-write sections of the proposal • Proposals approved by the PSSC go to the Board of Education for approval • Receive written notification of the Board of Education decision 29
  • 30. ESTABLISHING A LIS SCHOOL  Attend autonomy workshops  Submit a Letter of Intent  Engage all school staff, parents and community in the       process Conduct a Petition; Secure principal concurrence Write a proposal Provide proposal to staff at least 10 days before the election Conduct a faculty meeting to discuss the proposal Hold election-requires 60% of the votes cast in favor of the proposal 30
  • 31. ESTABLISHING A LIS SCHOOL Planning Phase  Attend Autonomy workshops hosted by the Local Options Oversight Committee (LOOC).  Submit a Letter of Intent  Review the current Single Plan for Student Achievement as well as other relevant school data and proceed through a systematic analysis of the existing data.  Engage school staff, family and community members in the data analysis process (ongoing) and collect documentation of that engagement, attaching staff and parent meeting agendas. Sign-in sheets and other evidence.  Inform staff, parents, community members, and students (in the case of high schools) of the Autonomy options offered to LAUSD schools.  Conduct the petition process and gain the concurrence of the principal. 31
  • 32. ESTABLISHING A LIS SCHOOL Proposal Development  Develop and finalize the proposal  Continue to engage all school community stakeholders in the development of the proposal; document all meetings Voting Requirements  Submit final proposal to the faculty ten working days before a vote  Convene at least one faculty meeting prior to the day of voting to review and discuss the merits of the proposal  Adoption of the LIS model requires an affirmative vote of 60% of the votes cast. Voter eligibility is limited to the UTLA-represented certificated staff assigned full-time to the school. The voting shall be by secret ballot, supervised jointly by the Principal and the Chapter Chair. 32
  • 33. 33
  • 34. WRAP UP AND NEXT STEPS • Review materials included in the packet – Agenda – History of Autonomous Schools in LAUSD – Timeline • Feedback Form • List of future Sessions – Mandatory sessions – Optional Sessions • Salary Point Opportunity 34