Analysis of LA autonomy model

1. Los Angeles
Group 2
LA – Strong Features with Potential Application to RI
District/School State
Policy Language that provides FLEXIBILITY Choice of autonomy/differentiated models
(guided framework)
Practice Teaching and Learning
Curriculum
Professional Development ($)
Budget
Staffing
Bell times
What aspects of this approach have relevance for RI?
o Professional Development
o Budget – Financial Resources
o Staffing
o Waivers
o Choice – viable differentiated models of autonomy
o Required application process
o Clear categories and suggested structures
o Include parents
o Annual Review
o Authority over key decisions about school improvement
o Teachers share their practice to sustain professional collaborative culture
o Flexibility and curriculum to meet requirements
o Decision makers closest to students
What aspects of this approach raised concerns/questions?
o Disparity crisis for minority students, English Language Learners, and special needs students -> Urgent action
needed yesterday
o Autonomy may delay immediate action to address crisis
o Funding does not address high risk communities and poverty stricken students
o Capacity of schools and districts to support various aspects or components (Ex: support for choosing a reading
program and PD)
o Approval process?
o Contractual language to allow for consideration if this work
o Setting policies?
o Fair and equitable bussing of students – extended day?
o Tools to monitor progress
o Staffing (pg. 14) may select and replace
o Modify school days and calendar
Red Flags
o Results? How do we know it’s working?
o Annual/Quarterly reviews – what do these look like?
o Subgroups – how we make choices
o Capacity
o Financial Resources
o Equity – how can we all get autonomy?