Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Leveraging Resource Allocation Reviews to Drive Meaningful Change for Students
Similar to Leveraging Resource Allocation Reviews to Drive Meaningful Change for Students (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Leveraging Resource Allocation Reviews to Drive Meaningful Change for Students
- 1. © Education Resource Strategies, Inc. 2018 Leveraging Resource Allocation Reviews to Drive Meaningful Change for Students October 30, 2019
- 2. Objectives Understand basic ESSA resource allocation review requirements Identify how states and districts can use resource allocation reviews to drive meaningful change for students 2
- 3. Agenda 1. What is the ESSA Resource Allocation Review requirement? 2. What are “resources” and why do they matter? 3. What are the design principles for Resource Allocation Reviews that can lead to meaningful change? 3
- 4. Every School. Every Child. Ready for Tomorrow. ERS is a national nonprofit that partners with district, school and state leaders to transform how they use resources (people, time, and money) so that every school prepares every child for tomorrow, no matter their race or income. 4
- 5. 5 What is the ESSA Resource Allocation Review requirement?
- 6. There are 3 separate Resource Allocation Review requirements in ESSA 6 1. States must review resource allocations to support districts with a significant number of schools identified for improvement. ESSA §1111(d)(3)(A)(ii)
- 7. There are 3 separate Resource Allocation Review requirements in ESSA 7 2. Districts with schools identified for improvement must identify and address resource inequities within their district. ESSA§1111(d)(1)(B)(iv)
- 8. There are 3 separate Resource Allocation Review requirements in ESSA 8 3. Schools identified for improvement based on low performance for individual groups of students must identify and address resource inequities within their school. ESSA §1111(d)(2)(C)
- 9. Resource allocation reviews are one part of the larger school improvement process 9 District/school submits improvement plan School Improvement Process Under ESSA Support and Monitoring Escalated Action State identifies schools for improvement State/district assesses school’s progress against exit criteria School implements plan with district support, revising as needed Diagnosis & Planning State/district approves plan 2018-19 2022-23 State, District, and School Resource Allocation Reviews
- 10. Merely complying with the requirement won’t result in transformative change “…the State educational agency…shall…periodically review resource allocation to support school improvement in each local educational agency in the State serving…a significant number of schools identified for comprehensive support and improvement…and…a significant number of schools implementing targeted support and improvement plans.” “…the local educational agency shall, for each school identified by the State and in partnership with stakeholders (including principals and other school leaders, teachers, and parents), locally develop and implement a comprehensive support and improvement plan for the school to improve student outcomes, that…identifies resource inequities, which may include a review of local educational agency and school-level budgeting, to be addressed through implementation of such comprehensive support and improvement plan.” “A plan…that is developed and implemented in any school [identified for improvement based on low performance for individual groups of students] shall also identify resource inequities (which may include a review of local educational agency and school level budgeting), to be addressed through implementation of such plan.” 10 Source: https://www2.ed.gov/documents/essa-act-of-1965.pdf
- 11. State and district leaders have an opportunity to lead and drive change 11 From: Meaningless compliance exercise To: Powerful lever for improvement
- 12. 12 What are “resources” and why do they matter?
- 13. Resources aren’t just dollars…it’s about how much and how well 13 How Much Opportunity and outcome gaps persist, even when funding increases. How well those funds are used is critical to improving student outcomes. Student Outcomes How Well Student Experience
- 14. We can think of each aspect of the student experience as a resource 14 TEACHING QUALITY & DIVERSITY POSITIVE & INVITING SCHOOL CULTURE STUDENT SUPPORTS & INTERVENTION INSTRUCTIONAL TIME & ATTENTION EMPOWERING, RIGOROUS CONTENT
- 15. Let’s talk about equity 15 The highest needs schools too often get shortchanged when it comes to the resources that matter most
- 16. Most equity efforts focus on differences in outcomes or spending 16 Non-CSI school CSI school Outcomes Proficient (78% ELA, 77% Math) Not proficient (24% ELA, 24% Math) Funding & Staffing $7,769 funding 105 teachers & staff $11,056 funding 116 teachers & staff
- 17. Yet this leaves out many resources that matter for student outcomes 17 Funding & Staffing $7,769 funding 105 teachers & staff $11,056 funding 116 teachers & staff Outcomes Proficient (78% ELA, 77% Math) Not proficient (24% ELA, 24% Math) Access to Rigor 39% chance of taking advanced math 6% chance of taking advanced math Teaching Quality 1 of 7 classes with a novice teacher 2 of 7 classes with a novice teacher Time & Attention 32 students in my core classes 25 students in my core classes Extra time in reading. No extra time for math. How Well Non-CSI school CSI school
- 18. 18 What are the design principles for Resource Allocation Reviews that can lead to meaningful change?
- 19. 7 Elements of an Effective Resource Allocation Review 1. Examine all funding from all sources 2. Assess whether individual school spending levels fully reflect their need 3. Review critical dimensions of resource equity beyond funding 4. Identify root causes of resource inequities 5. Check for sustainability 6. Align school funding and planning timelines 7. Engage a wide range stakeholders in the results 19
- 20. 1. Examine all funding from all sources 20 This should include federal, state, and local funding, and not just money dedicated to school improvement. Note: Illustrative example based on real district data $0 $1 $2 $3 $4 $5 $6 $7 $8 $9 $10 $11 Dollarperpupilexpenditure (inthousands) School-reported per pupil expenditures in a large urban district (elementary only) CSI schools
- 21. 2. Assess whether individual school spending levels fully reflect their need “Equal” is not the same as “equitable”—students and schools that need more resources should get them. 21 Equality Districts get comparable resources based on total enrollment and/or other fixed allocation drivers. Equity Districts get resources that are comparable based on student needs and what it will take to reach high learning goals.
- 22. 3. Review critical dimensions of resource equity beyond funding 22 How much is only part of the story—reviews should also capture teaching quality, curricular rigor, whole child supports, and other critical aspects of the student experience. Note: Illustrative example based on real district data 38% 22% 41% 18% 62% 78% 59% 82% CSI Not CSI Highest poverty quartile Lowest poverty quartile Distribution of Teacher Experience by School CSI Status and % FRL Not novice (3+ years) Novice (0-2 years) % Effective / Highly effective 93% 94% 93% 95%
- 23. 4. Identify root causes of resource inequities 23 While it’s important to know if schools lack access to a critical resource, it’s also necessary to know why in order to fix it. Are all schools able to attract strong teachers? Are all schools able to retain strong teachers? Are all schools able to effectively develop and manage the performance of teachers? INEQUITIESROOTCAUSES Compensation: Rates are not competitive / not aligned with goals Recognition and advancement: Opportunities are lacking Learning opportunities: Lack the time or expertise to develop staff Working conditions: Challenging environment to work in Hiring practices: Do not result in the optimal pool of applicants Assignment: Effective teachers are not incentivized to work in high need schools Improvement: The least effective teachers are not improving, Across schools: Are higher-need schools as or more likely to have high-quality teachers? X X X X X X X X X X X
- 24. 5. Check for sustainability 24 Avoid using short-term funding intended for school turnaround to meet the ongoing, underlying needs of students. Once those funds are gone, the needs are unmet. Period of Investment and Support Time School Performance End of Turnaround Support Typical Turnaround School Lifecycle Note: Illustrative example
- 25. 6. Align school funding and planning timelines 25 School system leaders are limited in what they can do to address results of a review if they have already released schools’ budgets and staffing allocations or have already created next year’s master schedules. Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Next Year 1. Assess Needs & Resources 2. Clarify & Communicate Priorities 3. Design the Strategy for 20-21 Master Schedule Job and Teacher Assignment Staffing and Budget Plan Hiring Plan Annual PL Plan Minor Implementation Adjustments for 18-19 Implementation Plan for 20-21 5. Implement and Monitor
- 26. 7. Engage a wide range stakeholders in the results 26 Changes may require difficult trade-offs. Community and stakeholder involvement is not only required by the Every Student Succeeds Act, but can help build support for equity- enhancing changes.
- 27. How States Can Support Districts in the Review Process 1. Provide models, templates, and technical assistance, consistent with these guiding principles. 2. Provide comparative data, including the per-pupil spending levels now required by ESSA and state- calculated analytics that districts can supplement with their own data. 3. Assess similarities and differences in results across districts to inform state policy and allow for tailored support. 27
- 28. What are you going to do differently now? Examine all funding from all sources Assess whether individual school spending levels fully reflect their need Review critical dimensions of resource equity beyond funding Identify root causes of resource inequities Check for sustainability Align school funding and planning timelines Engage a wide range stakeholders in the results 28
- 29. 29 Questions?
Editor's Notes
- About me About ERS About A4RE - EdTrust and ERS have partnered to leverage our organizations’ collective strengths in work to improve resource equity. Advocates & Practitioners are more effective working together. In order to change the resource equity landscape, we must collaborate to create and elevate examples of effective resource use.
- Popcorn: what do you already know about this?
- This is not a -- what are the rules and what do I need to do to follow them -- session. If you’re interested in understanding how to use RARs to drive better resources in schools and better resources for students, you’re in the right place Talking points: This is the sum total of what ESSA says about RARs. In other words, nothing. No guidance has been released. So getting to compliance isn’t hard, particularly at the state level since there is no caveat included there about actually addressing the inequities. But getting to compliance isn’t going to get us the transformative results we’re looking for. Need to go beyond that, which is the focus of our session today.
- Say the talking point and skip the following slide: The highest needs schools too often get shortchanged when it comes to the resources that matter most
- JAM: Conversations around equity to date have mostly focused on either outcomes (think no child left behind and similar policies), or on funding- LCFF aimed to adjust funding with an equity lens. What we often see is a higher investment in low income students of color, but lower outcomes compared to white, higher income peers Risk of just having this information: we’re wasting our money, and not seeing the results we intended. But funding and outcomes aren’t the whole picture
- JAM: How well that additional investment is used, is a critical component in connecting funding to outcomes. Need to understand factors for example…. Often see that even with a higher dollar investment, low income students of color don’t have access to resources
- Talking point: We take as a given that one conversation isn’t going to change outcomes for kids. To do this well requires A LOT of data, A LOT of time, and getting the right people in the room.
- Talking points: Need to see the whole picture. SIG $ makes up only a tiny portion of the total financial resources in a school – maybe 6-8% - so looking only at those funds may skew the picture of what schools actually experience
- What is your goal when allocating resources? Look for: An understanding that “equitable” is not the same as “equal” •• A goal that sufficient resources are allocated to meet the needs of each student and school •• A goal that schools and students with additional needs (e.g. CSI schools and underserved students in TSI schools) have additional resources relative to their peers Watch out for: •• Goals to ensure “equal” resources for all •• Goals based on how much money is available from a particular source (e.g., Title I) instead of student need
- As we saw, dollars can mislead us to think schools are getting what they need, when the resources that matter most may not be there. It’s also important to make sure you’re considering the right metrics. When it comes to measuring teacher quality, evaluation data can sometimes give false positives (as seen here) and so other proxy data such as % novice can paint a more useful picture. Potential pause point: how is this similar/different from how you or the districts/schools you support think about resources?
- This is what RARs are supposed to expose: that underlying funding system couldn’t possibly sustainably fund highest need schools. Use SIG for stabilizing and transitional investments, not ongoing need-based investments Talking points: Turnaround fails b/c we inject temporary resources that meet underlying needs, and when those resources run out we’re no longer meeting the basics for those kids Need to invest in building capacity of leaders, teachers, and coaches
- The point is to make change. Make sure RARs are happening at a time that enables that
- Important to include stakeholders early in the process, not just to endorse afterwards. Providing advocates a seat at the table – early in the process – can improve chances of making real change Engage in deciding which metrics to use at onset This will make it slower at beginning; more likely to lead to real change ** This isn’t the min amount required – it’s how do we actually improve outcomes for students
- Pitch – we at ERS have lots of tools that we can use to support states with this work, and would love to work with you. we could do this work directly with states or in collaboration with equity-minded advocates through our collaboration with ET. We have some subsidy dollars available depending on the scope of the project.
- Want to use this as an opportunity to have participants commit to/reflect on one principle they’re going to focus on
- Also flag that I’m around during lunch to talk more!