Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

ERS System 20/20 Analysis of Denver Public Schools March, 2017

1,386 views

Published on

ERS presented its findings from our School System 20/20 diagnostic of DPS on March 15, 2017 to the district's leadership team, board of education, and members of the Denver education community.

Published in: Education
  • You can try to use this service ⇒ www.HelpWriting.net ⇐ I have used it several times in college and was absolutely satisfied with the result.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • I was looking for a car through AutoTrader, but decided to join Gov-Auctions and I bought my new car and saved over $8700. ➜➜➜ https://w.url.cn/s/AiIrNWD
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • You can try to use this service ⇒ www.WritePaper.info ⇐ I have used it several times in college and was absolutely satisfied with the result.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • The last one problem with writing is the most actual) If to speak sinceresly writing is not an easy task especially if you have no certain writing skills. That's why our company HelpWriting.net helps students to write any type of scientific papers!
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Making a living taking surveys at home! I have been a stay at home mom for almost 5 years and I am so excited to be able to still stay home, take care of my children and make a living taking surveys on my own computer! It's so easy to get started and I plan to make enough money each week so that my husband can actuallly quit his second job!!! Thank you so much!  http://t.cn/AieX2Loq
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

ERS System 20/20 Analysis of Denver Public Schools March, 2017

  1. 1. © Education Resource Strategies, Inc., 2014 Draft—do not cite or disseminate Denver Public Schools: Leveraging System Transformation to Improve Student Results March, 2017
  2. 2. © Education Resource Strategies, Inc., 2014 Draft—do not cite or disseminate © 2017 Education Resource Strategies. All rights reserved. Education Resource Strategies (ERS) is a non-profit organization dedicated to transforming how urban school systems organize resources (people, time, technology, and money) so that every school succeeds for every student.
  3. 3. 3 Saint Paul Chicago Cincinnati Atlanta Philadelphia New York City SyracuseRochester Providence Baltimore Prince George’s County, MD Washington, D.C. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Duval County Boston Georgia Districts Fulton County Hall County Vidalia City Treutlen County Marietta City Cleveland Austin Albuquerque Michigan Tennessee Waterbury, CT Aldine Newark District work State work 2015-16 partners Recent partners Knox County Lake County Indianapolis Nashville Georgia Santa Fe New Haven, CT Tulsa Palm Bach County Los Angeles Oakland Sacramento California Buffalo Over the last 10 years, ERS has worked closely with the nation’s largest school systems to improve resource use
  4. 4. Why school systems? Every student succeeds SUCCESSFUL STUDENTS EFFECTIVE DISTRICTS Coherent systems that give schools the flexibility, capacity, and support they need Do your district’s structures and policies maximize the enabling conditions for excellent schools? EFFECTIVE SCHOOLS Schools that deliberately manage talent, time, and money around a clear instructional model Are practices and resource use aligned with high performing strategies at every school? EFFECTIVE TEACHING High-quality instruction that is aligned with standards Are the structures in place to improve instructional quality and alignment? 4
  5. 5. What is the School System 2020 Diagnostic? Every student succeeds SUCCESSFUL STUDENTS EFFECTIVE DISTRICTS Coherent systems that give schools the flexibility, capacity, and support they need Do your district’s structures and policies maximize the enabling conditions for excellent schools? EFFECTIVE SCHOOLS Schools that deliberately manage talent, time, and money around a clear instructional model Are practices and resource use aligned with high performing strategies at every school? EFFECTIVE TEACHING High-quality instruction that is aligned with standards Are the structures in place to improve instructional quality and alignment?  District Impact: To help district leaders answer these questions and identify and track changes to System Conditions and Resource Use that lead to improved student achievement  Field Building: To build a data set of where districts are along this spectrum, to highlight best practices and ultimately to demonstrate that creating system conditions that promote the strategic use of resources in districts and schools drives improved student outcomes 5
  6. 6. School System 20/20 identifies key transformational levers across seven areas of district activity Teaching Standards and Instruction LeadershipPartners Funding School Support School Design • Broad, but high level • Research-based • Includes qualitative and quantitative measures • Benchmarks against best practice and other districts 6
  7. 7. To date we have conducted School System 20/20 in 16 districts, including 3 districts we’ve identified as best practice case studies: Addison, NY (2016) Aldine, TX (2014) Baltimore City, MD (2016) Boston, MA (2015) Charlotte, NC (2016) Cleveland, OH (2016) Denver, CO (2016) El Paso, TX (2017) Indianapolis, IN (2015) Lawrence, MA (2014) Memphis, TN (2017) Norwalk, CT (2016) Oakland, CA (2015) Palm Beach County, FL (2015) Tulsa, OK (2015) Spring Branch, TX (2017) 7 “I’ve been inundated with so much information, and this is by far the most strategic, easiest to understand and most useful.” - Dr. Sonja Santelises, Superintendent, Baltimore City Schoolsen inundated with so “You were successful in doing what is the hardest thing, which is making the link between budget and school design…If we had this information as we were developing our strategic plan, we would have had a better strategic operating plan.” -Steven Adamowski, Norwalk Superintendent
  8. 8. Looking at this information helps us to understand:  How does performance growth in DPS compare to other districts in Colorado and nationwide?  What actions over the past five years have driven changes in system conditions, resource use, and student outcomes?  How does DPS compare to other leading districts and research-based best practice?  Where should DPS target future investments?  What can other district leaders and policy makers learn from DPS’ experience? 8
  9. 9. What is our history with DPS?  ERS has partnered with DPS over the past 8 years on a number of paid engagements  ERS is currently engaged with DPS in two areas:  Teacher compensation workshops  New teacher case studies with DPS-specific supplement  The work we are reviewing today was funded by the Charles and Lynn Schusterman Foundation as a case study 9
  10. 10. DPS’ performance story 10
  11. 11. According to Stanford NCES comparison data, DPS had the second highest growth of any district >25K nationwide between 2009-10 and 2012-13 Denver [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% GrowthinGradeEquivalentUnits,AveragedAcross Grades,2009-2013 District Percent FRL Denver Average Grade Equivalent Unit Growth 2009-2013, Against Large Districts Stanford Educational Data Archive, NCES; comparison includes all districts with more than 25,000 students, data only available 2009-2013 11 Averaged across grades and subjects, DPS performance improved almost an entire grade level, from 1.5 grade levels behind in 09-10 to .5 grade levels behind in 12-13.
  12. 12. 45% 54% 36% 69% 70% 41% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 DPS vs. Colorado % Proficient & Advanced TCAP Reading DPS Percent Proficient State Percent Proficient (Excluding DPS) 12Source: Colorado Department of Education, Achievement Percentile Rank Report CMAS PARCC Assessment …and within Colorado
  13. 13. Proficiency increased across all subgroups 54% 44% 42% 46% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 ELAPercentProficient ELA Percent Proficient- all tested grades All Students FRL ELL Non-White Source: CDE website-DPS student enrollment & performance data, 2004-2014 13
  14. 14. And across both charter and district-run schools 43% 57% 45% 54% 38% 51% 31% 42% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 ELAPercentProficient ELA Percent Proficient by School Type Charter Traditional Charter - FRL Traditional - FRL Source: CDE website-DPS student enrollment & performance data, 2004-2014 14
  15. 15. The combination of improvements across charter and district schools with a shift of student into charters increased DPS’ % proficient in ELA from 49% to 54% between 2008 and 2014 5% 87% 8% % of Performance Improvement by source 15Source: ERS Analysis Charter school improvement: 8% of students were in charter schools from 08-14; proficiency in those schools improved on average 4 points District-run school improvement: DPS-run schools gained on average 4% pts proficiency since 2008. In 2008 these schools served 92% of students. Shift from district-run to charter: From 2008 to 2014, 7% of students moved from district schools to charter schools. In addition to the 4% they would have gained in district schools (in dark blue), the schools they moved into were performing 4% better than the district-run schools, accounting for 5% of the overall improvement.
  16. 16. And despite DPS having a significantly higher need population than the rest of the state… 62% 62% 68% 64% 66% 66% 71% 72% 72% 71% 72% 70% 68% 27% 28% 31% 31% 31% 32% 35% 37% 38% 38% 39% 38% 39% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 % of students eligible for free and reduced lunch DPS % FRL State % FRL (Excluding DPS) 16Source: Colorado Department of Education, Achievement Percentile Rank Report
  17. 17. ..gaps with the state for ELL and FRL students narrowed; and as of 2014 DPS was outperforming the state with white students 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 ELL DPS ELL Colorado ELL Source: CDE website-DPS student enrollment & performance data, 2004-2014 17 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 x FRL DPS FRL Colorado FRL 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Non-Minority Colorado Non-Minority DPS Non-Minority 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Minority Colorado Minority DPS Minority ELA Percent Proficient
  18. 18. Though we don’t have national comparison data beyond 2013, state data indicates that DPS’ improvement trajectory has continued and even steepened 45% 54% 36% 69% 70% 41% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 DPS vs. Colorado Percent Proficient & Advanced TCAP Reading to PARCC ELA DPS Percent Proficient State Percent Proficient (Excluding DPS) 18Source: Colorado Department of Education, Achievement Percentile Rank Report CMAS PARCC Assessment Closed the gap by 2 percentage points from 09-10 to 12-13 Closed the gap by 12 percentage points from 12-13 to 15-16
  19. 19. More than might be suggested by the narrowing need gap with the rest of the state 62% 62% 68% 64% 66% 66% 71% 72% 72% 71% 72% 70% 68% 27% 28% 31% 31% 31% 32% 35% 37% 38% 38% 39% 38% 39% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 % of students eligible for free and reduced lunch DPS % FRL State % FRL (Excluding DPS) 19Source: Colorado Department of Education, Achievement Percentile Rank Report
  20. 20. How did DPS do it? 20
  21. 21. The School System 20/20 framework identifies the key transformations we believe that districts must make to drive significant, sustained improvement 21 System 20/20 Area Key transformations STANDARDS • Rigorous, information-age standards with effective curricula, instructional strategies, and assessments to achieve them. TEACHING • Selective hiring, development, and strategic assignment to schools and teams. Career path and compensation enable growth and reward contribution. SCHOOL DESIGN • Schools with restructured teams and schedules: personalized learning and support that responds to student needs and promotes instructional collaboration. LEADERSHIP • Clear standards and accountability with the support school leaders need to succeed. SCHOOL SUPPORT • A central office that serves as a strategy partner, leveraging data to increase efficiency and identify best practices. FUNDING • A central office that serves as a strategy partner, leveraging data to increase efficiency and identify best practices. • Partnering with families, community institutions, youth service organizations, and online instructors to serve students’ needs.PARTNERS
  22. 22. For over a decade, DPS has undertaken a broad array of structural changes aimed at many of these key levers 22 System 20/20 Area DPS Actions STANDARDS • Development of CCRS readiness assessment for schools • Creation of curriculum and instructional support resources TEACHING • Implementation of LEAP • Teacher leadership program • Incentives to attract teachers to highest-need subjects and schools • Cross-district year-long plan for professional development SCHOOL DESIGN • Increased school level flexibility • Focus on whole child LEADERSHIP • Expanded principal pipeline and development programs • Implement LEAD • Incentives to attract and retain effective principals in high-need schools SCHOOL SUPPORT • Data systems • Accountability system • Lower instructional superintendent ratios, especially for turnaround schools FUNDING • Shared funding system across charter and district run schools • Incorporation of ELL weights into funding system • Active management of school portfolio across district-run and charter schools
  23. 23. The result is a measurable improvement in system conditions and practice & resource use 23Source: DPS financial, student, and school data; ERS database. 2015-162009-10 STANDARDS TEACHING SCHOOL DESIGN SYSTEM CONDITIONS PRACTICE & RESOURCE USE LEADERSHIP SCHOOL SUPPORT FUNDING PARTNERS 2015-162009-10
  24. 24. These efforts have created the most strategic enabling conditions of any district we’ve studied 24 Denver 2015-16 Charlotte 2015-16 Aldine 2012-13 Lawrence 2013-14 Palm Beach County 2014-15 Boston 2014-15 Denver 2009-10 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 Less Strategic More Strategic System CondistionsSystem Conditions
  25. 25. Practice & resource use in DPS lags system conditions, but is also among the leaders of districts we’ve studied 25 Denver 2015-16 Charlotte 2015-16 Aldine 2012-13 Lawrence 2013-14 Palm Beach County 2014-15 Boston 2014-15 Denver 2009-10 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 Less Strategic More Strategic Practice & Resource Use System CondistionsSystem Conditions
  26. 26. Key Funding & Portfolio findings  DPS is unique in how you have leveraged you chartering authority to create a more level playing field across district-run and charter schools  Willingness to put teeth into accountability systems by closing chronically underperforming schools  Strategic approach to opening new schools that avoids the unplanned and fragmented enrollment impacts on surrounding schools often seen in other districts  Deliberately moving beyond choice to increase equity of access  Implementation of single system designed to ensure equitable funding across all schools  This approach has resulted in better options for students  Increase in high quality seats across all regions; largest in regions with fewest high quality seats  More similarity in student needs between district-run and charter schools than in many districts  But high quality options are still lagging in some high need regions 26 Funding & Portfolio
  27. 27. DPS has the most sophisticated portfolio management approach of all districts we’ve studied 27 Metric # Metric Less Strategic More Strategic FundingandPortfolio Portfolio School opening and closing decisions support long-term portfolio goals. The district calculates the cost of different school types and has a clear plan for staffing small and specialty schools to balance access The district has deliberately created a portfolio of school governance types and decision models (e.g., charter, autonomy) to reflect district capacity and to meet the needs of the students in the district. The district has deliberately created a portfolio of school grade levels and sizes to meet the needs of the students in the district. The district has deliberately created a portfolio of school program offerings (e.g., magnet, academy, specialized programming, themed schools) to meet the needs of the students in the district. The district proactively balances the number of seats by deliberately reducing the number of seats at one school when seats are added at another. Boston Charlotte Lawrence Denver Funding & Portfolio
  28. 28. Across the district, the number of high-quality seats has increased most in areas with the lowest access 27% 28% 34% 57% 68% 31% 41% 44% 60% 67% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Far Northeast Northwest Southwest Near Northeast Southeast Percent of Students in High-Quality Seats by Year 09-10 15-16 28Source: DPS school enrollment and performance data 09-10 and 15-16 Funding & Portfolio 15-16 % Poverty 81% 78% 89% 58% 45%
  29. 29. DPS has more similarity in student needs between charter and district-run schools than we see in many other districts Source: DPS school enrollment 09-10 and 15-16 73% 68% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Charter Traditional % FRL 37% 30% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Charter Traditional % ELL 10% 12% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% Charter Traditional % SPED 84% 76% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Charter Traditional % Non-White 30% 34% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Charter Traditional % Incoming Proficiency 6th Grade ELA 28% 32% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Charter Traditional % Direct Certification Funding & Portfolio 29
  30. 30. But access for high-need students still lags behind 30 Funding & Portfolio 41% 67% 41% 53% 43% 70% 41% 65% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% FRL Non FRL ELL Not ELL Non-White White Below- Proficient Proficient and Above Percent of Students in High-Quality Seats, 2015-16 Source: DPS school enrollment and performance data 09-10 and 15-16
  31. 31. Key Teaching and Leadership Findings  DPS investment in LEAP, LEAD and growth supports for teachers and leaders seems to be paying off  Increased rigor in teacher evaluation  High retention of strongest performers coupled with relatively higher attrition of lowest performers  But high need schools are lagging in teacher and leader stability and quality  Turnover and % novice teachers and leaders is much higher in higher need schools  ProComp incentives for priority schools compete with incentives for high growth/high performing schools  Schools are not consistently maximizing the opportunities provided by the district, particularly around the hiring timeline, and teacher leaders 31 LeadershipTeaching
  32. 32. DPS’ highest performing teachers are also most likely to stay, which is a leading indicator of teaching quality 1% 19% 19% 23% 18% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Aldine Boston Charlotte All Teachers Non-Probationary teachers Pct. Point Difference Between Retention of Teachers Below Effective vs Above Effective 32 Retention of Teachers above effective 86% 89% 89% 91% 92% Retention of Teachers below effective 85% 70% 70% 68% 74% Denver
  33. 33. However, low-performing schools tend to have a higher share of novice teachers and higher attrition rates 33 14% 6% 54% 33% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Lowest-Performing Quartile Highest-Performing Quartile Percent Novice SY17 and Within School Attrition (SY15-SY17) by Performance Quartile Percent Novice Percent Attrition (2 years) Leadership Note: Turnover adjusted to exclude new and closed schools Teaching
  34. 34. Key School Design/Standards/School Support Findings  DPS has implemented strong enabling conditions and supports for school improvement  School-level flexibilities  Curriculum, assessments, and instructional support  Instructional superintendent support targeted to lowest performers  But these conditions do not consistently result in strategic school designs that meet the needs of all students and teachers  Lack of consistent, adequate, high-quality collaborative planning time is constraining shifts in instructional practice  Inconsistent matching of talent and time to student need within schools is a missed opportunity to improve student outcomes 34 School SupportStandardsSchool Design
  35. 35. DPS schools have more flexibility than comparison districts 35353535 Metric # Metric Less Strategic More Strategic SchoolDesign Flexibility Schools have flexibility over how they spend their budget, including class size and staffing ratios, and can trade staff positions, positions for $, and $ for positions. Schools have the flexibility to hire teachers whose skills and expertise match school and student needs. Schools have the flexibility to make schedule changes without a contract renegotiation or a full faculty vote. Schools have the flexibility to vary special education service and instructional models as long as they meet IEP requirements. Schools have the flexibility to vary teacher teams, assignments, and schedules with data support in order to provide time for collaboration and match resources to student needs. School SupportStandardsSchool Design Boston Charlotte Lawrence Denver
  36. 36. Looking forward 36
  37. 37. Denver’s 2020 goal is even more ambitious than its already impressive gains 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 DPS 3rd Grade reading Scores Actual Continued 2010-2014 trend Needed to reach goal 37Source: CDE website-DPS student performance data, 2004-2014; ERS projection Goal #2: A Foundation For Success in School. By 2020 80% of DPS third Grade Students will be at or above grade level in reading and writing And that’s before accounting for the switch to PARCC
  38. 38. Reaching DPS’ 3rd grade reading goals will require greater gains than those seen in even the most successful districts 38 80% 53% 60% 88% 73% 45% 60% 39% 51% 65% 59% 41% Denver Aspirations RSD New Orleans Denver 09-10 to 13-14 Aldine, TX Norfolk, VA Lawrence, MA Growth in Elementary Reading Proficiency Start End Gain/year (%) # of Years Enrollment (000) +1 4 14 +1.8 8 34 +2.3 10 65 +2.3 4 90 +2.8 5 30 +3.3 6 90 Source: ERS database, DPS performance data, Denver 2020 plan
  39. 39. And while system-wide efforts have raised performance for all, significant achievement gaps remain 29% 40% 44% 65% 69% 82% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 White,Non-WhitePercentagePointAchievementGap FRL- Non FRL Achievement Gap, ELA Source: 2004-2014 TCAP data for all tested grades from CDE website Note: we limited this view to TCAP data because only one year of PARCC data is publicly available disaggregated by FRL status to date. Non FRL students FRL students 39 pts 38 pts 29 pts 39
  40. 40. Targeting support to high-need schools and students will be key to continuing progress and closing gaps  Focus portfolio management efforts on maintaining and increasing equity as demographics shift Leverage portfolio management and student enrollment processes to maximize opportunities for high-needs students including strategic deployment of proven models and operators and policies that encourage integration in gentrifying neighborhoods.  Leverage talent management to support high need schools Continue work to build structures to help lower performing/higher need schools attract, develop and retain talent, including increasing support for the high number of new teachers in these schools.  Support schools in implementing high-quality strategic school designs Improve support for school leaders to implement strategic school designs and strong professional learning practices in order to turn district-wide systems into on the ground changes that improve student performance. 40
  41. 41. DPS’ journey holds valuable lessons for any district working to transform student outcomes  The importance of creating effective system supports through a sustained and integrated redesign approach DPS’ systematic creation of the enabling structures and conditions for high-quality schools across all of the School System 20/20 areas has steadily improved performance in district- run schools and should continue to drive improvement into the future.  The power of a system-wide approach to human capital management DPS’ has focused on creating the conditions to attract, develop and retain high performing teachers and leaders across all areas of the system including evaluation, compensation and career paths and professional development.  The value of deliberate portfolio management DPS has accelerated overall district performance growth through a deliberate approach to portfolio management coupled with its chartering authority. Notably, this has also avoided the unplanned under-enrollment and performance degradation in district schools that too often accompanies charter growth.  The challenge of driving from enabling conditions through to practice Translating strong enabling conditions into school-level changes in practice and resource use requires active support to build capacity and change behaviors. 41
  42. 42. Thank you! www.erstrategies.org/signup @ERStrategies www.erstrategies.org VISIT SUBSCRIBE LIKE + FOLLOW

×