University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Reform strategies implemented to increase student achievement: a case study of superintendent actions

(USC Thesis Other)

Reform strategies implemented to increase student achievement: a case study of superintendent actions

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

REFORM STRATEGIES IMPLEMENTED TO INCREASE STUDENT
ACHIEVEMENT:
A CASE STUDY OF SUPERINTENDENT ACTIONS

by

Kristen K. Murphy

________________________________

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2009

Copyright 2009 Kristen K. Murphy
3/31/2009 i
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to my husband, Ken, who was brave enough to
start dating me when I was in year one of this program, spending my weekends with
the LA Weekend Warriors, and crazy enough to marry me during year three when I
was pulling my hair out over the writing of this dissertation. I could not have done
this without his encouragement when I was feeling discouraged, and his support in
doing far more than his share of housework while I was occupied with schoolwork. I
cannot thank him enough for all of the late night dinners when I had class, the
technical support when I was sure I had deleted all of my work or could not get it
formatted correctly, and the willingness to suffer through this process with me from
beginning to end, always reminding me of the great rewards that lay at the end of the
journey.
For these things, for having such an amazing husband, I am eternally grateful.
3/31/2009 ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to acknowledge and thank a number of people for their
contributions to the completion of this dissertation.
First and foremost, I would like to thank my dissertation Chair, Dr. Rudy
Castruita, for his support, assistance, and guidance, the constant reminders that
enabled me to conduct this study and to finish with the writing on schedule. I will
never forget our trip to “Southwest Public School District” to gather data, and I am
confident that he will never again ask me to use my map skills to navigate between
destinations. ☺
To my dissertation co-Chair, Dr. David Marsh, I would like to express my
gratitude for the opportunity to work with him prior to his retirement, and for
providing the encouragement, guidance, and structure that made the formidable task of
writing a dissertation seem “do-able.”
I would also like to thank the third member of my dissertation committee, Dr.
Darline Robles, for her time in reading both the initial draft of this paper for Quals,
and the final draft for my oral defense. I appreciate your input and suggestions, and I
am confident that my study and work product are the better for it.
I would like to express my sincere thanks to my thematic dissertation group for
all of the hard work that they shared so willingly, making the process so much easier,
and for all of the friendship, good humor and encouragement we shared along the way.
I would like to say a special thank you to David H. for all of his tireless technical
support and the outstanding models he was always there to provide that helped me to
get back on track when I was stuck.
3/31/2009 iii
In looking back on my years at USC, I will always remember Dr. Dembo and
the Weekend Warriors, who taught me to love being a doctoral student, even on
Friday nights and Saturday mornings. Because of their enthusiasm and friendship, I
actually looked forward to weekend classes.
Finally, I would like to thank my friends and family, who haven’t seen me
much over the last three years, but still take my phone calls and listen when I need
support. I know how fortunate I am to have so many people care about and believe in
me, and I look forward to seeing them and socializing with them again.
I cannot say it enough; thank you to all of you who never expected any less
from me than that I would someday be called “Doctor.”
Fight On!

3/31/2009 iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION……………………………………………………………….. i

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS……………………………………………………. ii

LIST OF TABLES…………………...……………………………………..… vii

LIST OF FIGURES…………..……………………………………………… ix

ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………….. x

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION……………………...…………………. 1
Statement of the Problem………………………...……………..….. 9
Purpose of the Study…………………………………………..…… 10
Importance of the Study……………………………...………..…… 11
Limitations……………………………………………………..…... 12
Delimitations…………………………………………………..…… 12
Definitions of Terms……………………………………………..… 13
Organization of the Study………………………………………….. 17

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE………………………. 19
Student Achievement Trends in Urban Districts..…………………. 20
The Role of the District in Improving Student Achievement ...…… 24
The Changing Role of the System Leader……………………….… 27
Strategies Employed by System Leaders ..……………………….... 29
Strategic Plan ……………………………………………. 31
Assessment………………………………………………. 31
Curriculum……………………………………………….. 32
Professional Development……………………………….. 33
Human Resources Systems and Human Capital
Management.......................................................................

34
Finance and Budget……………………………………… 35
Communications…………………………….…………… 36
Governance and Board Relations…………….………….. 37
Labor Relations and Contract Management….………….. 38
Family and Community Engagement………….………… 38
Innovation in Leadership Preparation Models…...….…….……….. 39
Conclusion.………………..………………………….…….……… 44

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY……………………… 46
Research Questions ………………...……………………………… 48
Sample………………..………………………………………….… 49
Selected District Profile ………..………………………... 50
Selected Superintendent Profile……..…………………… 52
Instrumentation ……………………..……………………………. 53
3/31/2009 v
Conceptual Framework for Instrument Design …….…… 53
Data Collection Instruments ………………………..…… 58
Data Collection…………………………………………………….. 59
Data Analysis……………………………………………………… 61

CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS, ANALYSIS, AND DISCUSSION………… 63
District Background………………………...……………………… 64
Superintendent Background……………….. ………………..…...... 66
Conditions in the District at the Time of the Superintendent’s
Arrival …………………………………………………….………..

68
Ten Key Reform Strategies ……………………...………………… 78
Strategic Plan…………………………………………….. 80
Assessment………………………………………………. 85
Curriculum……………………………………………….. 91
Professional Development……………………………….. 98
Human Resources System and Human Capital
Management……………………………………………...

104
Finance and Budget……………………………………… 109
Communications…………………………………………. 113
Governance and Board Relations………………………... 116
Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations……………… 121
Family and Community Engagement……………………. 124
Other House Model Elements………………………………............ 126
Conclusions and Analysis/Discussion ………………………..…… 131
Bringing Coherence to the System ……….……….…….. 131
Centralizing Curriculum………....………………………. 133
Human Capital Development.…………………………… 134
Summary…………………………………………………………… 136

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS.. 137
Purpose of the Study………………………………………………. 137
Methodology………………………………………………………. 138
Sample…………………………………………………… 139
Data Collection and Analysis……………………………. 139
Selected Findings………………………………………………….. 142
Research Question #1……………………………………. 142
Research Question #1a…………………………………... 149
Research Question #1b…………………………………... 150
Research Question #1c…………………………………... 154
Conclusions………………………………………………………… 155
Implications for Practice…………...……………………………… 159
School and District Administrators……………………… 159
Local Community Stakeholders and School Board
Members…….......…………………………………..........

160
Policy Makers and Superintendent Preparation Programs. 160
Recommendations for Future Research…………………………… 161
3/31/2009 vi

REFERENCES……………………………………………………………….. 163

APPENDICES……………………………………………………………….. 171
A: Superintendent Interview Guide……....……………………….. 171
B: Key Player Interview Guide……………………………………. 173
C: Specific Dimensions of Reform Interview Guide……………… 174
D: Quality Rubrics………………………………………………… 180
E: Implementation Rubric………………………………………… 200

3/31/2009 vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Relationship of Research Questions to Data Collection Instruments 57

Table 2: Demographics of Southwest Public School District 65

Table 3: Self-rating of Previous Experience in the 10 Key areas of Reform 68

Table 4: Strengths in Southwest Public Schools Upon Arrival 69

Table 5: Challenges in Southwest Public Schools Upon Arrival 71

Table 6: Overall Reform Strategies 74

Table 7: Rubric Ratings of House Model Reform Strategies

80
Table 8: Rubric Scoring of Strategic Plan 80

Table 9: Addressing Change in Strategic Plan 81

Table 10: Strategic Plan Rating by Rubric Component 84

Table 11: Rubric Scoring of Assessment 85

Table 12: Addressing Change in Assessment 87

Table 13: Assessment Rating by Rubric Component 90

Table 14: Rubric Scoring of Curriculum 91

Table 15: Addressing Change in Curriculum 94

Table 16: Curriculum Rating by Rubric Component 97

Table 17: Rubric Scoring of Professional Development 98

Table 18: Addressing Change in Professional Development 100

Table 19: Professional Development Rating by Rubric Component 103

Table 20: Rubric Scoring of HR System and Human Capital Management 104

Table 21: Addressing Change in HR System and Human Capital
Management

105

3/31/2009 viii
Table 22: HR System and Human Capital Management Rating by Rubric
Component

108

Table 23: Rubric Scoring of Finance and Budget 109

Table 24: Addressing Change in Finance and Budget 110

Table 25: Finance and Budget Rating by Rubric Component 112

Table 26: Rubric Scoring of Communications 113

Table 27: Addressing Change in Communications 114

Table 28: Communications Rating by Rubric Component 115

Table 29: Rubric Scoring of Governance and Board Relations 116

Table 30: Addressing Change in Governance and Board Relations 117

Table 31: Governance and Board Relations Rating by Rubric Component 120

Table 32: Rubric Scoring of Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations 121

Table 33: Addressing Change in Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations 122

Table 34: Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations Rating by Rubric
Component
123

Table 35: Rubric Scoring of Family and Community Engagement 124

Table 36: Addressing Change in Family and Community Engagement 125

Table 37: Family and Community Engagement Rating by Rubric Component 126

3/31/2009 ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: The House Model 56

Figure 2: The House Model

78

3/31/2009 x
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study is to discover what actions superintendents are taking
to improve student achievement, and specifically to understand the impact of ten
identified reform strategies on academic achievement and outcomes for students. This
study examines the reform strategies used by an urban superintendent who is a
graduate of The Urban School Leadership Institute (USLI) superintendent preparation
program. It presents findings regarding the superintendent’s responses to the strengths
and weaknesses in his district, the reform strategies implemented by the
superintendent in order to improve student achievement, and the relationship of the
reform strategies used to the background and experience of the superintendent.
3/31/2009 1
CHAPTER ONE
In large urban districts across the United States, student performance continues
to fall short of national targets and national averages, and the achievement gap
between White and non-White students persists (Childress, Elmore, & Grossman,
2006). The demographics of urban school systems are becoming increasingly diverse.
Over the ten-year period from 1993 to 2003, the proportion of minority students
increased significantly, and by 2004 minority students made up 42 percent of the
national enrollment in pre-k-12 public schools (KewalRamani, Gilbertson, Fox, &
Provasnik, 2007). In 2005, urban school districts were likely to enroll predominantly
minority students, the majority of whom were Black or Hispanic. These Black and
Hispanic students were more likely to be eligible for free and reduced lunch, more
likely to attend high-poverty schools, and more likely to attend schools in which the
minority student population was 75 percent or higher of the total enrollment
(KewalRamani, et al., 2007).
Academic achievement of students in urban school districts is in need of wide-
scale improvement. The 2004 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)
shows that between 1975 and 2004, overall Reading achievement increased slightly
for White, Black, and Hispanic students tested at age nine, with minor gains in
Reading achievement for both Black and Hispanic students tested at ages 13 and 17.
Still, achievement gaps of greater than 20 points persist between the achievement
scores of White students and those of Black and Hispanic students at all three age
levels (Perie, Moran, & Lutkus, 2005). Similarly, in Mathematics, between 1973 and
2004, average scores increased for all three groups at age nine, and for both Black and
3/31/2009 2
Hispanic students at ages 13 and 17. While achievement gaps between White and
non-White students have decreased, they continue to range between 23 and 28 points
for Black students, and between 18 and 24 points for Hispanic students (Perie, et al.,
2005).
According to the National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES, 2006),
there is a significant gap between different ethnic groups in their high school
completion and dropout rates as well. A study of 18-24 year olds not currently
enrolled in high school in October of 2003 indicated that 91.9% of the White, non-
Hispanic individuals had completed high school, as compared to 85% of Black, non-
Hispanic individuals, and 69.2% of Hispanic individuals (NCES, 2006). The study
further indicated that while White students accounted for 63.4% of the population
enrolled in the schools, they made up only 49.9% of the dropouts, Black, non-Hispanic
students accounted for 14.2% of enrollment and 17.0% of dropouts. Hispanic students
accounted for only 15.2% of enrollment, but 27.1% of dropouts.
Urban school districts are under tremendous pressure and bear a heavy societal
responsibility for improvement. Academic achievement and completion of high
school have a tremendous impact on students’ future earnings and lifestyles, and a
significant national economic impact (Belfield & Levin, 2007; Blossfeld & Shavit,
1993; Reed, 2003). In the United States, half of the welfare recipients and half of the
prison population in 1995 were individuals who had not completed high school
(Alexander & Entwisle, 2001). Closing the achievement gap and producing high-
achieving students of all races and ethnicities is not only a domestic issue, but also a
3/31/2009 3
global one, given the current international economy. It is imperative at all students are
successful to compete in the world economic market (Hunter & Bartee, 2003).
Although there are multiple systems and societal conditions that play roles in
student performance in the K-12 public school system, school district level factors
have been identified as crucial to increasing student achievement (Childress, et al.,
2006; MacIver& Farley, 2003; McLaughlin, et al., 2002). Historically, educators,
policymakers, and educational reform movements have focused on the actions of
individual teachers and schools, denying the importance of the district. Former
Secretary of Education William Bennett once referred to district and central office
personnel, school board members, and superintendents as a useless “blob” that
consumed resources, but offered little benefit to students or teachers (Education Week,
March 2, 1987 as cited in Walters & Marzano, 2006).
Since that time, research has linked strong district leadership to a positive
impact on student achievement (Walters & Marzano, 2006). Districts and central
offices have increasingly been seen as key elements in the process of increasing
student achievement. Quality instruction and strong leadership at the school site are
crucial to increasing student achievement, however the majority of teachers and school
administrators do not exhibit the traits of teachers and leaders in effective schools
(Elmore, 2000). District leadership in developing effective teachers and site
administrators is a necessary component of instructional improvement and effective
schooling, and the central office has an increasingly important role in improving
instruction and student achievement (Elmore, 2000; MacIver & Farley, 2003; Togneri
& Anderson, 2003). Long-term educational gain on a system-wide scale requires that
3/31/2009 4
school districts and central offices organize themselves to develop, implement, and
support strategies to improve teaching and learning (Childress, et al., 2006; Elmore,
2000).
With the increased focus on the role of the school districts and central offices
in improving student outcomes, the role of the district leader is shifting from that of
system management to that of instructional leadership in increasing student
achievement. The urban superintendency has been considered by many to be an
impossible job. Challenges to authority, inadequate preparation, and frustration with
competing power centers as led to the tenure of many urban superintendents being
short as one year (Fuller, Campbell, Celio, Harvey, Immerwahr & Winder, 2003). No
longer considered managers of resources and personnel, today’s superintendents must
be able to analyze student achievement data to determine areas of need, identify
successful research-based instructional strategies to address those needs, and garner
the support of staff, students, parents, and community members to ensure successful
implementation of those strategies (Byrd & Johnson, 2006).
Research into the role of the school system leadership has identified several
dimensions and elements as crucial to moving student achievement. Some of these
dimensions include the leader as strategic thinker, the leader as driver of change, the
leader as having a teachable point of view, the leader as coach, the leader as creator or
champion of culture, the leader as decision maker, and the leader as driver for results
(Eiter, 2002). Walters and Marzano (2006) found that collaboratively setting non-
negotiable goals for achievement and instruction, working with board members to
negotiate and ensure board alignment with and support of the goals, continual
3/31/2009 5
monitoring of progress toward attainment of the goals, focused allocation of resources
to support the goals, and longevity of the superintendent in the leadership position
were key elements of the evolving district level leader role that were positively
correlated with increased academic achievement for students. Additionally, the Broad
Foundation and the Thomas B. Fordham Institute (2003) found that clear vision, string
leadership, relentless focus, political acuity, personal accountability, effective
management, and fortitude were key characteristics of successful superintendents.
The strategies that district and system leaders develop and carry out in their
first year can be the deciding factors in whether or not they will succeed in their
positions. Having an entry plan has been identified as critical for any new
superintendent, or any superintendent new to his or her position (Jentz & Murphy,
2005; Neff & Citrin, 2005; Watkins, 2003). These entry plans assist superintendents
in avoiding mistakes such as “being isolated” or “coming in with the answer”
(Applebaum, 2007; Watkins, 2004). Researching, creating, and implementing an
entry plan when moving into a new superintendent position is helpful not only for the
opportunity it provides to gain information insight and into the district, but also for the
structure it provides in communicating with the school board, administration, staff and
community (Neely, Berube & Wilson, 2002).
In addition to entry plans, superintendents must develop long-term and
strategic plans for improvement. A study of districts that have won the Broad Prize
for Urban Education for showing a significant increase in student achievement, while
at the same time closing achievement gaps between ethnic and income groups
revealed that although each of the Superintendents had a specific, individualized
3/31/2009 6
approach to increasing student achievement, their plans shared common elements.
Each of the superintendents lead his or her district by laying out clear expectations and
a specific curriculum, providing professional development and support for teachers to
improve practice, and using system-wide data to continuously monitor progress
toward achieving their goals (Zavadsky, 2006). The House Model, developed by the
Broad Superintendents’ Academy, identifies key “reform strategies” that
superintendents must implement in order to affect positive change in urban school
districts, which include curriculum, governance and board relations, budget and
finances, and assessment.
Historically, research in both the field of education administration and in
preparation programs for administrators has been limited in both scope and depth
(Murphy and Vriessenga, 2005). While a number of studies were conducted between
1975 and 2002 on the topic of improving preparation or graduate programs, the
majority of these studies employed surveys and questionnaires on participant
perceptions of quality and personal growth rather than utilizing empirical data on
student achievement results in the schools and districts in which program graduates
are employed to lead (Murphy and Vriessenga, 2005). Recently, however,
organizations such as the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED), the
University of Southern California, the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, and the Broad
Foundation have recognized the need to rethink and improve preparation for education
administrators (Shulman, Golde, Bueschel, & Garabedian, 2006; The Broad
Foundation & The Thomas B. Fordham Institute, 2003).
3/31/2009 7
In order to facilitate the sorts of district-wide changes and improvements in
student achievement called for in today’s urban school districts, educational leadership
preparation programs, and superintendent preparation programs in particular, have
undergone many changes. An example of an innovation in a university-based
preparation program can be seen in the newly revised Education Doctorate (Ed.D.)
program at the University of Southern California’s (USC) Rossier School of
Education. One of the issues hindering the success of doctoral programs in education
has been the lack of clear differences between the mission and curriculum of Doctor of
Philosophy (Ph.D.) programs and Education Doctorate (Ed.D.) programs. In 2001, in
response to a negative academic program review, slow student progress and highly
variable student work, a group of USC professors collaborated to restructure the Ed.D.
program to focus on the needs of educational leaders in urban settings (Dembo &
Marsh, 2007; Shulman, Golde, Bueschel, & Garabedian, 2006).
In the field in general, two opposing viewpoints have come forth from the
literature. The first position is for increasing the rigor of university doctoral and
preparation programs and adding a practice-based or internship component. Bjork,
Kowalski, and Browne-Ferrigno (2005), posit that university programs are superior to
those offered by other organizations based on their core of expert faculty, their ability
to offer advanced degrees, stability, and continuity. Preparation programs offered by
professional organizations, school districts, and private sector organizations are
vulnerable to “changing political priorities, unpredictable markets, uncertain revenue
streams, and challenges to program validity” (p. 88).
3/31/2009 8
Many ideas for restructuring university preparation programs are grounded in
the professional licensure standards developed by the American Association of School
Administrators (AASA) and the Interstate School Leadership Licensure Commission
(ISLLC), and the knowledge and skills associated with five conceptualizations for the
role of the superintendent developed by Callahan (1966), and Kowalski (2001; 2003).
In order to develop district leaders’ knowledge and skills in the areas of teacher-
scholar, manager, democratic leader, applied social scientist, and communicator,
superintendent preparation programs cannot be extensions of principal preparation
programs. Superintendent preparation programs must be collaborative enterprises of
universities and school districts, and must include a practicum or internship
component, in which students are “working with exemplary CEOs, participating in
high-risk activities, and engaging in reflective processes” (Bjork, et al., 2005, p. 87).
The second position, advocated for by the Broad Foundation and the Thomas
B. Fordham Institute, includes deregulating licensing and credentialing requirements,
selecting leaders from outside the education profession, and moving preparation
programs out of the university setting. The Broad Academy developed its
superintendent preparation program based on the philosophy that traditional
certification requirements for superintendents should be greatly reduced, and that the
criteria for becoming a superintendent should stress leadership qualities rather than
experience in education. An example of an innovative non-university preparation
program, the Broad Academy (TBA) believes in recruiting highly-qualified
superintendent candidates not only from within, but also from and outside of the
education field. TBA candidates are then trained the knowledge and skills necessary
3/31/2009 9
to assume a district leadership position. In addition, unlike the traditional view that
holds the University as the primary provider of training, The Broad Academy
advocates that school districts should assume a major role in shaping the training of
their school leaders—and that their leaders should participate in training from many
providers, not just colleges of education (The Broad Foundation & The Thomas B.
Fordham Institute, 2003).

Statement of the Problem
Given the importance of the role of the central office leader in improving
student achievement, information is needed regarding the nature of the reform
strategies that are used by superintendents to affect student achievement and how
these reform strategies are related to the preparation, backgrounds or prior experience
of these leaders. It is important to know how superintendents respond to the strengths
and weaknesses in their respective districts, and how they are improving student
achievement.
At the time of this study, the focus of the research is on superintendents who
have participated in The Urban School Leadership Institute (USLI) superintendent
preparation program. Information is needed regarding the nature of the reform
strategies that are used by these USLI superintendents to affect student achievement
and how these reform strategies are related to the preparation, backgrounds or prior
experience of these leaders. It is important to know how they respond to strengths and
weaknesses in their respective districts, and how they are improving student
achievement.
3/31/2009 10
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this case study is to discover what actions superintendents are
taking to improve student achievement, and specifically to understand the impact of
ten identified reform strategies on academic achievement and outcomes for students.
This study will examine the reform strategies used by an urban superintendent who is
a graduate of The Urban School Leadership Institute (USLI) superintendent
preparation program. It will examine the superintendent’s responses to the strengths
and weaknesses in his district, the relationship of the reform strategies used to the
background and experiences of the superintendent, and the ways in which he is
improving student achievement.
The research study questions are:
1. How are the 10 key reform strategies being used by USLI superintendents
to improve student achievement in their respective districts?
a. How does the quality and implementation of the 10 key reform
strategies correspond to the strengths and challenges of the district
when the superintendent took office?
b. What additional reform strategies (if any) were used? How do they
correspond to the elements of the House model?
c. How does the choice and implementation of the 10 key reform
strategies correspond to the previous background/experiences of the
superintendent?

3/31/2009 11
Importance of the Study
The importance of this study is to provide information regarding effective
preparation programs for and effective practices of urban superintendents in increasing
student achievement and closing the achievement gap. The findings of this study will
have relevance to superintendent preparation programs, both university-based and
non-traditional, aspiring system leaders, and boards of education.
This study will provide superintendent preparation programs with information
regarding the knowledge and skills necessary for urban superintendent to increase
student achievement, and the translation of preparation curricula into on-the-job
actions. Information will be provided regarding urban superintendents’ perceptions of
the effectiveness of their programs in preparing them to take on the role of
superintendent. Additionally, preparation programs will also gain insight into the way
backgrounds and experiences affect performance, and will gain valuable information
for the purpose of recruiting candidates who will ultimately be successful.
Aspiring systems leaders will be provided with information regarding different
types of preparation programs, and the successes attained by program graduates. They
will also learn how their preparation, background and experiences may impact their
job performance. They will be provided with information on reform strategies used by
superintendents to increase student achievement, and the relationships between the
reform strategies and the superintendents’ backgrounds, preparation and districts.
School boards will be provided with information useful in the superintendent
recruitment, selection, and assessment process. They will gain insight into the
3/31/2009 12
differences in the preparation and background of candidates, and the importance of the
match between leader and district.

Limitations
The data for this study was collected from one urban school district run by a
superintendent from The Urban School Leadership Institute superintendent
preparation program. For this reason, the data may not be able to be generalized to
other districts, superintendents, or preparation programs. Interviews were conducted
with the superintendent and key staff and community members from the district being
studied. The interview data may be subject to biases and interpretation of the
interviewer.

Delimitations
This is a qualitative study of superintendent background, preparation, action,
and impact on student achievement. Purposeful sampling was used to choose the
superintendent and district in the case presented in the study. The sampling criteria
included the following:
1. The district must be identified as a large, urban school system;
2. The superintendent must have been in office for at least two
years;
3. The superintendent must be a graduate of The Urban School
Leadership Institute (USLI)

3/31/2009 13
Definition of Terms
For the purpose of this study, the following terms are operationally defined as
specified below:
Accountability: A system under which schools, districts, and school and
district personnel are held responsible for student learning outcomes based on
established goals for performance on state, federal or local assessments of student
achievement
Achievement gap: The disparity in measured outcomes for student
achievement between groups of students based on demographic data (e.g. race,
ethnicity, language proficiency, or gender)
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP): Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is a series
of annual academic performance goals established for each school, local educational
agency (LEA), and the state as a whole. AYP is required under Title I of the federal
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, which states that all students in all
subgroups must be proficient in English Language Arts and Mathematics by 2014
(CDE, 2007)
Assessment: A process of collecting student performance data to measure
student achievement levels.
Benchmark: A stated goal for performance at a given time; an incremental
goal showing progress toward a larger goal; an expected level of quality for
comparison against an accepted standard
Central office: The collective group of educators who work outside of the
school site in support positions
3/31/2009 14
Reform strategy: A strategy used to make improvements. The ten reform
strategies used in this study have been defined by The Broad Superintendents’
Academy as follows:
1. Assessment - Assessment activities enable districts to know whether
students are learning what they are supposed to learn (i.e., the
standards). Common, regularly-scheduled district-wide assessments
should connect directly with standards, the curriculum, pacing guides,
and professional development.
2. Curriculum - Curriculum refers to the materials used to teach.
Classroom materials—textbooks, worksheets, pacing guides, etc.—
should address the scope and sequence of the district’s learning
standards.
3. Professional Development - Professional development is any program
or course intended to improve teachers’ and principals’ effectiveness. It
may center on content (e.g., teaching about force in physics),
instructional techniques (e.g., Cornell note-taking), leadership (e.g., a
workshop for principals and assistant principals), or habits (e.g.,
collaboration among teachers in the same grade-level/subject matter).
In many districts, professional development topics are arbitrarily
chosen. Successful districts have an integrated professional
development strategy that centers on enabling teachers to detect when
students aren’t meeting a certain standard and to adjust their instruction
accordingly, or enables principals and teachers to improve their
knowledge and skills in areas of district focus.
4. Human Resources System and Human Capital Management - Research
indicates that teacher quality is perhaps the primary influence on
student achievement, yet many districts do a poor job of attracting,
selecting, and managing talent, whether at the teacher, principal, or
central office level. Improving the recruiting and hiring processes for
teachers and principals, developing attractive compensation packages,
and processing applications and payments quickly—which a good HR
system should be able to do—can greatly improve the quality of
instruction in schools and classrooms across the district. Districts then
need to develop clever support and retention strategies to keep talent in
the district. Most importantly, districts can proactively improve their
capacity for providing a quality education by examining and refining
their selection process.
5. Finance and Budget - While student achievement is the ultimate bottom
line, more superintendents are fired for poor financial management than
for poor student achievement results. In addition to ensuring that their
budget is balanced and sustainable, superintendents should closely
align their budget with instructional priorities. Some districts have
adopted innovative budgeting approaches such as “zero-based
3/31/2009 15
budgeting” and weighted student funding to bring their budgets into
closer alignment with their priorities.
6. Communications - Effective school districts need to showcase the great
stories in their district and to counteract misinformation or negative
news. Developing a public relations or communications office staffed
with experts on dealing with the media can enable the district to
communicate its vision to the public or proactively build support for an
important initiative.
7. Governance/Board Relations - Most districts are governed by boards
elected from the local population; others answer to appointed boards. In
either case, school boards are responsible for setting the policy
direction for the district; superintendents can take a supporting role in
developing policy but are mainly charged with executing it. Winning
the support of board members, especially elected ones, is a time-
consuming but critical task for most superintendents.
8. Labor Relations/Contract Negotiations - In addition to teachers unions,
superintendents often need to build relationships and negotiate with
several other unions to which various district staff belong. Success in
working with unions requires an upfront investment in building
relationships and understanding the priorities of union leaders. The
content of contracts also requires close attention. Contract language can
restrict or expand the superintendent’s options for replacing and
reassigning staff. This is particularly crucial with teacher contracts, as
teacher quality is one of the most significant influences on student
achievement.
9. Family and Community Engagement - All residents of a school
district’s jurisdiction can be considered its stakeholders, so ensuring
everyone’s satisfaction can be difficult. Districts should offer several
ways for the community and families to interact with the district, from
coordinating volunteer opportunities for parents to partnering with local
organizations in support of student success. It is also important to
gather feedback from the public on the district’s performance. Several
districts take surveys of parents of children and of the community in
general to determine how they view the district and what their priorities
for improvement are. These surveys should be closely linked to the
district’s performance management system and data dashboard.
Increasing stakeholder satisfaction can lead to greater support for bond
measures for the district, significantly increasing its financial resources.
10. Strategic Plan - The strategic plan defines the district’s mission, goals,
and vision. It also assigns performance indicators and work plans to
each of the district’s primary goals and serves as the guiding document
for district decisions and priorities.

Content standards: Content standards are expressions of the core knowledge
that students should have in each subject at each grade level. They answer the
3/31/2009 16
question, “What do we want students to learn?” For example: “Fourth-grade students
will be able to identify the eight parts of speech in compound sentences.” Taken as a
whole, the corps of standards gives teachers a road map for what they should be
covering in the classroom. Each state has its own state standards, but some large
school districts have developed their own standards, which overlap with but are more
specific or rigorous than the standards of the state in which they are located (The
Broad Academy).
Data-driven decision-making: The process of making decisions about
curriculum, instruction, and resource allocation based on information about student
performance
House model: The framework developed by the Broad Academy to identify
important reform strategies superintendents must use to increase student achievement.
Implementation: The translation of a plan or system into action
Instruction: The how of teaching – the way in which teachers deliver the
curriculum. While improving curriculum materials and implementing a consistent
curriculum district-wide may lead to an initial improvement in test scores, deep and
sustained achievement gains require adoption of advanced instructional practices.
Instructors adept at different instructional practices can engage their students in deeper
learning and differentiate their lessons to reach more kids. Improving the level of
instruction district-wide is a steep challenge but is the strongest lever for achieving
deeper learning, particularly for low-performing students (The Broad Academy).
Instructional leadership: The use of influence to improve teaching and
learning in classrooms, schools, and districts
3/31/2009 17
Leadership capacity: The ability to move an organization in a direction toward
a defined goal
Professional development: Opportunities for teachers, administrators, and
other staff to gain new learning and insights that will improve teaching and learning.
School Reform: Changes that are implemented in order to make educational
improvements in schools and districts
Standards-based accountability: Efforts by districts to develop specific grade-
level and/or content area standards against which students, teachers, and school
performance can be measured and understood.
Subgroup: A racial, ethnic, socioeconomic or linguistic or program label by
which students are categorized in order to disaggregate assessment results and monitor
the achievement of all students. For the purpose of determining Adequate Yearly
Progress, these groups are as follows: African American or Black (not of Hispanic
origin), American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Filipino, Hispanic or Latino, Pacific
Islander, White (not of Hispanic origin), Socioeconomically Disadvantaged, English
Learners, and Students with Disabilities (CDE, 2007)
Systemic reform: Coherent change that occurs throughout all aspects and levels
of the educational institution, impacting and requiring the involvement of all
stakeholders (Schmoker, 2003).

Organization of the Study
Chapter One of the study presents the introduction to the study, the statement
of the problem, the purpose of the study, the research questions to be answered, the
3/31/2009 18
importance of the study, the limitations, the delimitations, and the definitions of terms.
Chapter Two is a review of the literature relevant to the topic of the study. It addresses
the status of student academic performance, achievement gaps, and societal
implications; the role of the district or central office in improving student
achievement; the evolving role of the urban superintendent; the strategies used by
superintendents to increase student achievement; and traditional and non-traditional
superintendent preparation programs. Chapter Three defines the research
methodology used in the study, and includes a discussion of the reasons for interest in
the study and relevant background information. It also includes the rationale for
selection of the participants and research subjects. Chapter four details the findings of
the study and includes an analysis and discussion of the data. Chapter Five is a
summary of the purpose, methodology, findings, and conclusions of the study. It also
presents implications for practice and topics for possible future research.
3/31/2009 19
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
A review of the literature pertaining to urban schools and urban school districts
shows that student performance in these schools and districts continues to fall short of
national targets or averages and the achievement gap continues to be evident between
white and non-white students (Childress, Elmore, & Grossman, 2006; Perie, Moran, &
Lutkus, 2005; Hunter, & Bartee, 2003). The urgent need for improvement is evident
not only in the student achievement data, but also in the emergence of new
accountability programs (such as NCLB at the federal level), and new expectations for
school district leaders (Bjork, Kowalski, & Browne-Ferrigno, 2005; Byrd, Drews, &
Johnson, 2006; Fuller, Campbell, Celio, Harvey, Immerwahr, & Winder, 2003).
In order to understand the relevance of the literature to this study, five areas of
current research must be examined. The first area is the specifics of student
achievement data and trends in urban school districts, including trends by ethnicity,
the achievement gap, special dilemmas in urban settings, and the urgent need to
improve. The second area is the role of school districts in improving student
achievement. A third area in need of exploration is the changing role of system
leaders in school districts in facilitating increases in student achievement. The fourth
and fifth areas include research into the strategies school system leaders employ, and
the leadership preparation programs that are necessary to develop the new skills that
system leaders need.

3/31/2009 20
Student Achievement Trends in Urban Districts
Over the past few decades, the clientele of urban schools in the United States
has become a population with increasingly challenging needs. As of the 2003-2004
school year, approximately 64 percent of students in urban schools were considered
“minority” students, while the population of suburban schools was 32 percent
minority. Fifty-six percent of students in urban schools qualified for federal free or
reduced lunch programs, as opposed to 32 percent in suburban schools. More than 17
percent of urban school students were categorized as English Learners, and more than
40 percent received Title I services. Thirty-eight percent of urban schools were
making use of temporary buildings (Jacob, 2007).
By 2005, the minority population of urban school district schools (the majority
of whom were Black or Hispanic) was likely to be 75 percent or higher of the total
enrollment (KewalRamani, et al., 2007). Students living in urban areas and attending
urban schools came from communities with higher poverty rates, higher
unemployment rates, and higher violent crime rates, and attended larger schools than
did their suburban peers (KewalRami, et al., 2007; Jacob, 2007). These conditions, in
conjunction with lower levels of parent education, are powerful predictors of a lack of
future educational success (Reed, 2003).
Not surprisingly, given the factors above, in urban districts across the United
States, student performance continues to fall short of national target and national
averages and achievement gaps between urban and suburban and minority and n on-
minority students persist (Childress, Elmore, & Grossman, 2006; Jacob, 2007). In
2003, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) scores for fourth
3/31/2009 21
grade students showed that only 22 percent of students in urban schools were
achieving at grade level in Reading, versus 30 percent in suburban schools. In
Mathematics, 27 percent of urban students scored at grade-level, versus 32 percent of
suburban students (NAEP, 2003; Jacob, 2007).
According to 2004 NAEP data, between 1975 and 2004, overall Reading
achievement increased slightly for White, Black, and Hispanic students tested at age
nine. Scores for White students increased from a scaled score of 217 to 226, for Black
students scores increased from 181 to 200, and for Hispanic students scores increased
from 183 to 205. In addition, both Black and Hispanic students tested at ages 13 and
17 showed minor gains in Reading. Scores for Back students at age 13 increased from
226 to 244, and at age 17 from 241 to 264. Scores for Hispanic students increased
from 232 to 242 at age 13, and from 252 to 264 at age 17. Still, as of 2004,
achievement gaps of greater than 20 points persisted between the achievement scores
of White students and those of Black and Hispanic students at all three age levels.
(Perie, Moran, & Lutkus, 2005).
Similarly, in Mathematics, average scores increased for all three groups at age
nine, and for both Black and Hispanic students at ages 13 and 17 between 1973 and
2004. At age nine, Math scores for White students increased from a scaled score of
224 to 247, Black students’ scores increased from 190 to 224, and Hispanic students’
scores increased from 202 to 230. Scores for Back students at age 13 increased from
230 to 262, and at age 17 from 270 to 285. Scores for Hispanic students increased
from 239 to 265 at age 13, and from 277 to 289 at age 17. Although achievement gaps
between White and non-White students have decreased during the last three decades,
3/31/2009 22
as of 2004, they continued to range between 23 and 28 points for Black students, and
between 18 and 24 points for Hispanic students (Perie, Moran, & Lutkus, 2005).
According to the National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES, 2006),
there is a significant gap between different ethnic groups in their high school
completion and dropout rates as well. A study of 18-24 year olds not currently
enrolled in high school in October of 2003 indicated that 91.9% of the White, non-
Hispanic individuals had completed high school, as compared to 85% of Black, non-
Hispanic individuals, and 69.2% of Hispanic individuals (NCES, 2006). The study
further indicated that while White students accounted for 63.4% of the population
enrolled in the schools, they made up only 49.9% of the dropouts, Black, non-Hispanic
students accounted for 14.2% of enrollment and 17.0% of dropouts. Hispanic students
accounted for only 15.2% of enrollment, but 27.1% of dropouts. Similar dropout data
exists to compare students in urban and suburban school districts. For urban districts,
the percent of schools in which 90 percent or more of students who reached the 12
th

grade graduated was only 55. In suburban schools, 73.2 percent of schools graduated
at least 90 percent of their 12
th
grade students (Jacob, 2007).
Miller & Malley (2007) conducted a comparison study of the achievement of
students in the United States to that of students in the other G8 countries: the United
Kingdom, Italy, Japan, the Russian Federation, France, Canada, and Germany. When
compared to the other G8 countries, the achievement of students in the United States
consistently ranks in the middle or bottom half of the group, despite having a
relatively higher socio-economic status. Six of the G8 countries participated in the
Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) in 2003: the United
3/31/2009 23
States, England, Scotland, Italy, Japan, and the Russian Federation. Seven of the G8
countries participated in the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), a
series of assessments that measures reading literacy, mathematics literacy, and science
literacy at age 15: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Russian Federation, and
the United States. TIMSS data shows the average scores in Mathematics of United
States fourth grade students to be lower than England, Japan, and the Russian
Federation. In Science, TIMS scores for fourth grade US students are lower than
those in both Japan and England. On a six point scale, PISA mathematics literacy data
shows that only ten percent of students in the United States reach the top two levels, as
opposed to 15 percent of students in France, 16 percent of students in Germany, 20
percent of students in Canada, and 24 percent of students in Japan. Twenty-six
percent of US students rank in the bottom sextile, while only ten percent of students in
Canada, 13 percent of students in Japan, 17 percent of students in France, and 21
percent of students in Germany achieve at the lowest level.
The burden on urban schools in the United States to increase both academic
achievement and graduation rates for students is tremendous. Academic achievement
and completion of high school are determining factors in students’ future earnings and
lifestyles, and have a significant national economic impact (Belfield & Levin, 2007;
Blossfeld & Shavit, 1993; Murnane & Steele, 2007; Reed, 2003). As of 1995, half of
the welfare recipients and half of the prison population in the United States were
individuals who had not completed high school (Alexander & Entwisle, 2001). The
labor market both in the United States and around the world depends increasingly on
strong cognitive skills that students must develop in our schools (Hunter & Bartee,
3/31/2009 24
2003; Murnane & Steele, 2007). Given that 30 percent of students in the United States
attend urban schools (Jacob, 2007), there is a tremendous urgency in the need to make
wide-scale improvements in our urban school districts.

The Role of the District in Improving Student Achievement
Historically in educational research, literature has focused on reform efforts
and strategies at the classroom and local school levels, denying the importance of the
district. Recently, however, research has linked strong district leadership to having a
positive impact on student achievement (Walters & Marzano, 2006). Districts and
central offices have increasingly been seen as key elements in the process of
increasing student achievement. Although there are multiple systems and societal
conditions that play roles in student performance in the K-12 public school system,
school district level factors have been identified as crucial to increasing student
achievement (Childress, et al., 2006; MacIver& Farley, 2003; McLaughlin, et al.,
2002).
While many arguments have been made for the decentralization of public
schooling and more local, school-based control of curriculum, decision-making and
professional development, Elmore (2000), disagrees, stating relying on school-site
teachers and leaders to create or implement reform on their own is asking them to do
something they have not been trained to do. MacIver & Farley (2003) posit the
majority of teachers and school administrators do not exhibit the traits of teachers and
leaders in effective schools, and that district leadership is necessary component of
instructional improvement and effective schooling that yields increased student
3/31/2009 25
achievement. They state that the central office has three major roles in improving
instruction and student achievement: decision-making about curriculum/instruction;
supporting high-quality instruction through Professional Development for school
administrators and teachers; and evaluating results and providing feedback to support
practice.
Rueda (2005) points out that many socio-economically disadvantaged and
minority students are not exposed to the same level of rigor in curriculum or
instruction and do not receive the same quality of teaching as their peers in non-urban
settings. Long-term educational gain on a system-wide scale requires that urban school
districts and central offices organize themselves to develop, implement, and support
strategies to improve teaching and learning (Childress, et al., 2006; Elmore, 2000).
This kind of organization by the central office to support schools is particularly
important in urban districts, where there are a large number of underperforming
schools and struggling students. In these districts, central offices are morally obligated
to students, families, and school communities to intervene in underperforming schools
(Fullan, Betrani & Quinn 2004).
District leadership in developing effective teachers and site administrators is a
necessary component of instructional improvement and effective schooling, and the
central office has an increasingly important role in improving instruction and student
achievement (Elmore, 2000; MacIver & Farley, 2003; Togneri & Anderson, 2003).
Togneri and Anderson (2003) cite the development of a vision at the district level that
includes increasing achievement for all students, improving instructional practice,
maintaining safe and supportive learning environments, and high levels of parent and
3/31/2009 26
community involvement as key elements to successful district office support. They
advocate for the use of data to make decisions at the district level, and professional
development for school leaders in using data to seek solutions rather than to assign
blame. They believe that professional development should involve research-based
principles and strategies and should create and foster “networks of instructionally
proficient principals and teacher leaders” (p. 6).
One of the ways in which school districts “intervene,” on behalf of struggling
schools and students, is by providing professional development to school site
principals, teachers, and other instructional staff (Davis, Darling-Hammond, LaPointe,
& Meyerson, 2005; Elmore, 2000; MacIver & Farley, 2003; Togneri & Anderson,
2003). Increasing the capacity of school and district staff is a key element of the
success of any reform effort, and providing professional development in the latest
instructional strategies and educational reforms is a significant challenge to school
districts (Chrispeels, Gonzalez & Edge, 2006; Elmore & Fuhrman, 2001). In order to
meet this challenge, some districts choose to develop partnerships with universities to
help focus and provide professional development (Chrispeels, Gonzalez & Edge,
2006). Other districts have collaborated with professional associations and
foundations to find both the funding and the expertise to provide research-based
professional development programs for teachers, school leaders, and aspiring school
leaders. The Chicago Public Schools have provided excellent examples of this kind of
collaboration through their CLASS programs for aspiring and first year principals, as
well as experiences principals and other administrative leaders (Peterson, 2002).

3/31/2009 27
In addition to building the capacity of its members, school districts must also
help teachers and administrators to understand state and district reforms and
initiatives, and to understand how their local practices support overarching goals
(Murphy & Datnow, 2003 in MacIver & Farley, 2003). Even in districts that
encourage school-based management and local decision-making, the district must
support schools by providing the training, data, and resources necessary for school
staff to make informed decisions that lead to increases in student achievement.

The Changing Role of the System Leader
With the increasing pressures of societal, local and federal accountability, for
improving student achievement, the role of the school system leader is shifting from
district manager to instructional leader, and greatly increasing in complexity (Broad
Foundation & Thomas B. Fordham Institute, 2003; Bjork, Kowalski, & Browne-
Ferrigno, 2005; Byrd & Johnson, 2006; Waters, Marzano & McNulty, 2003).
Houston (2001) describes the transition as one that moved from a focus on the “Killer
B’s” of buildings, buses, books, budgets, and bonds, to a focus on the “Crucial C’s” of
Connection, communication, collaboration, community-building, child advocacy, and
curriculum.
The role of today’s superintendent is no longer considered a district figurehead
whose job it is to manage resources and personnel; today’s superintendents must be
able to analyze student achievement data to determine areas of need, identify
successful research-based instructional strategies to address those needs, and garner
the support of staff, students, parents, and community members to ensure successful
3/31/2009 28
implementation of those strategies (Byrd & Johnson, 2006). This role transition has
led some to label the job ‘impossible.’ In recent years, trying to move forward as a
new instructional leader faced with challenges to authority, inadequate preparation,
and frustration with competing power centers has led to tenures as short as one year
for many urban superintendents (Fuller, Campbell, Celio, Harvey, Immerwahr &
Winder, 2003).
Research into the role of school system leadership has identified several
dimensions and elements as crucial to moving student achievement. Some of these
dimensions include the leader as strategic thinker, the leader as driver of change, the
leader as having a teachable point of view, the leader as coach, the leader as creator or
champion of culture, the leader as decision maker, and the leader as driver for results
(Eiter, 2002). The Broad Foundation and the Thomas B. Fordham Institute (2003)
found that clear vision, strong leadership, relentless focus, political acuity, personal
accountability, effective management, and fortitude were key characteristics of
successful superintendents.
Walters and Marzano (2006) found several key elements of the evolving
district level leader role that illustrated the new skills system leaders needed to
possess. These elements included the collaborative setting of non-negotiable goals for
achievement and instruction, working with board members to negotiate and ensure
board alignment with and support of the goals, continual monitoring of progress
toward attainment of the goals, and focused allocation of resources to support the
goals. Their study also found that the longevity of the superintendent in the
leadership position was positively correlated with increased academic achievement for
3/31/2009 29
students, suggesting that the frequent turn-over in system leaders needs to be
stemmed.

Strategies Employed by System Leaders
In response to the new demands placed upon them by their new roles, system
leaders employ a variety of strategies to improve instruction and increase achievement
for students. While many strategies produce improved results, one of them most
important ideas system leadership is establishing coherence (Childress, Elmore,
Grossman & King, 2007). The increasing pressures of accountability for student
achievement have led many district to implement a rapidly increasing number of
reforms, initiatives and programs aimed at improving instruction and increasing test
scores (Hatch, 2001). One of the characteristics of a successful school district is the
system-wide coherence it is able to develop in aligning all of these reform efforts and
initiatives (Anderson, 2003; Shannon & Bylsma, 2004).
One of the first steps toward developing the coherence necessary to making
system-wide change is developing an entry plan. Entry plans are critical to the success
of a new superintendent, or any superintendent new to his or her position (Jentz &
Murphy, 2005; Neff & Citrin, 2005; Watkins, 2003). Researching, creating, and
implementing an entry plan when moving into a new superintendent position is helpful
not only for the opportunity it provides to gain information insight and into the
district, but also for the structure it provides in communicating with the school board,
administration, staff and community (Neely, Berube & Wilson, 2002). In addition,
these plans can help superintendents to avoid making missteps that may prevent
3/31/2009 30
coherence and alienate them, such as “being isolated” or “coming in with the answer”
(Applebaum, 2007; Watkins, 2004).
The House Model
The House Model, developed by the Broad Superintendents’ Academy,
identifies several key reform strategies that superintendents must implement in order
to affect positive change in urban school districts, and serves as the framework for this
study. The House Model is represented by a structure that is divided into different
levels, with each level containing several “rooms.” Each of the rooms of the house is
filled with one or more related reform strategies. The first level of the house, the
foundation, is the Superintendent’s Plan of Entry. The Superintendent’s Plan of Entry
includes his or her 90-Day or 100-Day Plan, detailing strategies for immediate
implementation upon beginning his or her assignment, as well as conditions and
stipulations negotiated in the initial contract for employment. The six rooms of the
house represent six overarching areas relating educational reform: Instructional
Alignment, Operational Excellence, Stakeholder Management, Organizational
Assessment and Audits, Organizational and Management Structure, and Strategic
Plan. The final level of the house is the roof, which represents sustainable increases in
student achievement, closing of achievement gaps, and improving college readiness.
Some of the house model strategies examined in this chapter include the following:
assessment; curriculum; professional development; human resource system and human
capital management; finance and budget; communications; governance and board
relations; labor relations and contract negotiations; and family and community
3/31/2009 31
engagement. Following is a brief overview of research pertaining to each of the
House Model elements:
Strategic Plan
In the course of implementing an entry plan, one of the strategies that systems
leaders use to establish coherence is the development and implementation of a
strategic plan. A strategic plan ensures that all programs and initiatives, staffing,
resource allocation, district policy and professional development are aligned with the
goals and vision of the district (Shannon & Bylsma, 2004). According to Newmann,
Smith, Allensworth, and Byrk (2001), providing the district with “unity of purpose, a
clear focus, and shared values for student learning” (p. 298) is an essential
organizational element and leadership factor in bringing coherence to a system.
Having a strategic plan with clearly stated, measureable goals enables stakeholders to
understand the connection between policy and practice, and ensure that all of the
schools, divisions and departments work together in a coordinated, joint effort way to
implement his reform strategies (Childress, Elmore, Grossman & King, 2007; Murphy
& Datnow, 2003 in MacIver & Farley, 2003). Common to many of these strategic
plans is that they lay out clear expectations and a specific curriculum, provide a
framework for professional development and support for teachers to improve practice,
and promote the use of system-wide data to continuously monitor progress toward
achieving their goals (Zavadsky, 2006).
Assessment
Increasing accountability for student achievement has led to increasing
demands on districts to provide comprehensive assessment programs (Earl &
3/31/2009 32
Torrance, 2000; McGhee & Griffith, 2001). Assessment programs allow districts to
measure student achievement in relation to expected student learning outcomes, and
provide information for the purposes of informing instruction and improving teaching
and learning (Jost, 2001; McGhee & Griffith, 2001; Stiggins 2004).
In general, assessment is divided into two genres: formative assessment and
summative assessment. Formative assessment provides an ongoing view of
performance on a periodic basis at specific benchmarks, and is used to provide
feedback for planning and improving programs or instruction (Ainsworth, 2007;
Hamilton, 2003; Institute for Educational Leadership, 2003; Togneri & Anderson,
2003). Summative assessment provides a picture of student learning after the learning
has taken place, and is generally used to set clear expectations of learning goals,
increase accountability for teaching and learning, and establish comparative
proficiency levels (Earl & Torrance, 2000; Institute for Educational Leadership, 2003;
O’Day, Bitter, Kirst, Camoy, Woody & Buttles, 2004; Stetcher, Hamilton, &
Gonzalez, 2003). Best practices in districts include the use of both formative and
summative assessment data to compile as much information as possible in making
decisions and informing instruction (Marzano, 2007).
Curriculum
Another way in which superintendents can provide coherence is through
developing a centralized curriculum (Anderson, 2003; Shannon & Bylsma; Snipes,
Doolittle & Herlihy, 2002). Common frameworks for curriculum, are more likely to
lead to advances in student achievement (Newmann, Smith, Allensworth, & Byrk,
2001). A district’s written curriculum must be aligned to state learning standards and
3/31/2009 33
contain all of the knowledge and skills that students are expected to acquire at each
grade level (Carr, & Harris, 2001; MacIver & Farley, 2003; School Works, 2007). In
addition, curriculum needs to be aligned both vertically and horizontally so that
students receive an program that is coordinated between subjects at the same grade
level, and between grade-levels in each subject area (Carr & Harris, 2001; Newmann,
et al., 2001). Finally, it is important that a system is developed for the curriculum to
be reviewed and updated on a regular basis to ensure that it remains current, and is
both relevant and accessible to all students (Carr, & Harris, 2001; MacIver & Farley,
2003; School Works, 2007).
Decentralization and school-based management policies often lead to a wide
variety of unrelated curricular programs being implemented in the schools, and a
disconnect between classroom instruction and state standards (Snipes, Doolittle &
Hurley, 2002). In order to ensure the implementation of a rigorous, quality curriculum
for all students, superintendents must intervene on behalf of students by centralizing
curriculum (Fullan, Betrani & Quinn 2004).
Professional Development
Providing professional development to increase the capacity of school and
district staff is a key element of the success of any district reform effort (Chrispeels,
Gonzalez & Edge, 2006; Elmore & Fuhrman, 2001). Teaching skill can vary greatly
from individual to individual, which can have a significant impact on student learning
Marzano, Pickering, & Pollock, 2001). School districts must provide quality
professional development for staff that includes research-based principles and
strategies and creates and fosters “networks of instructionally proficient principals and
3/31/2009 34
teacher leaders” (Togneri and Anderson, 2003, p. 6). Professional development
should support the implementation of the curriculum and district initiatives and best
practices, and be part of a system of on-going support (Darling-Hammond, 1999;
Guskey, 1995).
Implementation of a quality professional development program must be
supported by the policies and organizational and fiscal structures of the district, and
should be evaluated for effectiveness and areas to be improved on an ongoing basis
(Guskey, 2000; NCRTL, 2008; Odden, 1998; Worthen & Sanders, 1989). Some
models of implementation which research has shown to have a positive impact on
teacher practice and student achievement include the development of structures such
as Professional Learning Communities for ongoing group study and discussion, and
the use of coaches to work with individuals or small groups (Eaker, Dufour &
Burnetter, 2002; Fullan, 2000; Marshall, 1999). Another way in which districts
provide staff with the most up-to-date research and strategies, is through the creation
of partnerships with local professional organizations and universities (Chrispeels,
Gonzalez & Edge, 2006).
Human Resource System and Human Capital Management
A major focus of human resource systems is attracting and retaining highly
qualified personnel. One way in which some school districts are attempting to do
recruit personnel is through offering targeted bonuses and incentives, which research
shows can lead to higher recruitment and retention rates for both teachers and
administrators (Council of Great City Schools, 2006; Elmore, 2003b; Jacob, 2007;
Hanushek, Kain & Rivkin, 2004; Snipes, Doolittle & Herlihy, 2002). Maintaining a
3/31/2009 35
compensation package of competitive salaries and benefits is also important (Jacob,
2007). Many districts have also begin developing partnerships with universities to
recruit and train highly qualified staff (Chrispeels, Gonzalez & Edge, 2006).
The use of human resource systems and human capital management in
developing effective teachers and site administrators is a crucial component of district
leadership in increasing student achievement (Elmore, 2000; MacIver & Farley, 2003;
Togneri & Anderson, 2003). Providing comprehensive training and support to
teachers and administrators in developing their professional capacities is an important
element of retention (MacIver & Farley, 2003; Thomas & King, 2007; Wong, 2004).
Additional factors in employee retention may include providing staff with
opportunities for advancement, using data to place staff in the positions for which they
are best qualified and most needed, and identifying characteristics of successful
employees to be used in the hiring process (Harvey, 2003; Jacob, 2007; Thomas &
King, 2007).
Finance and Budget
Improving student achievement requires that the superintendent ensure that
budget and resource allocation be aligned with the district’s plan and focused on
student academic achievement (Walters & Marzano, 2006; Shannon & Blysma, 2004).
It is important the district establish a process to gather information from stakeholders
that promotes buy-in for funding of initiatives and programs to improve teaching and
learning (Shannon & Blysma, 2004). One of the strategies adopted by districts to
ensure alignment of resources and mission or strategic plan is zero-based budgeting,
3/31/2009 36
whereby all expenditures and staffing must be justified for their value in moving the
district toward the achievement of its stated goals (Fullan, Bertani, & Quinn, 2004).
A way in which districts leverage funding to support student achievement is
through offering financial incentives and maintaining a compensation package of
competitive salaries and benefits in order to attract and retain highly qualified
personnel (Council of Great City Schools, 2006; Elmore, 2003b; Jacob, 2007;
Hanushek, Kain & Rivkin, 2004; Snipes, Doolittle & Herlihy, 2002).
Communications
An important element of a school district’s internal and external
communications is a formal communications plan that is linked to its strategic plan
and focused on increasing student achievement (Carlsmith & Railsback, 2001;
National School Public Relations Association, 2002). In order to ensure alignment of
the communications plan and the strategic plan, the communications director is often a
member of the superintendent’s cabinet (National School Public Relations
Association, 2002)
This connection ensures that communications, information, and public relations can be
provided to constituents in an manner that promotes coherence and support of the
district’s goals, which can lead to increased participation from parents and community
in furtherance of those goals (Bauch & Goldring, 1995; Howlett, 2003; Shatkin &
Gershberg, 2007).
Two-way communications with staff, students, and community, in which all
parties feel that their input is both heard and valued, can have a positive impact on
community perceptions of the school districts and support for its policies and
3/31/2009 37
initiatives (Carlsmith & Railsback, 2001; Shatkin & Gershberg, 2007). Conversely,
poor or disjointed communications can create dissatisfaction and discomfort among
constituent groups and can become an impediment progress (Shatkin & Gersgberg,
2007).
Governance and Board Relations
The primary role of the school board is to set the vision and direction for
district schools, and to develop measureable goals that are reviewed and updated on an
annual basis (California School Boards Association, 2007; National School Boards
Foundation, 2001). Key to this role, is an effective organizational structure that allows
the board to support and empower the superintendent and carry out the district’s vision
(California School Boards Association, 2007; National School Boards Foundation,
2001; Walters & Marzano, 2006). Another important role of the board revolves
around resource allocation and budget; it is imperative that the board approves a
budget that is aligned with the strategic plan and supports student achievement
(California School Boards Association, 2007; National School Boards Foundation,
2001; Walters & Marzano, 2006).
The final job of the board is to evaluate the superintendent and make decisions
regarding his or her contract (California School Boards Association, 2007; National
School Boards Foundation, 2001). Communication and relationship-building with
board members can occupy a significant amount of a superintendent’s time; the board
and the superintendent can sometimes have a complicated relationship and disgruntled
board members may interfere with the superintendent’s implementation of initiatives
or actions (Fuller, Campbell, Celio, Harvey, Immerwahr & Winder, 2003).
3/31/2009 38
Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations
Relationships, communication, and trust are the foundation on which positive
labor relations and contract negotiations that support the collaboration necessary to
enact district reforms and initiatives are based (Ingram & Snider, 2008). Through
principled negotiation and a joint commitment to focus on improving student
achievement, unions and school district management can form productive
relationships (Hannaway & Rotherham, 2006). From the perspective of the
superintendent, collective bargaining should include goals for increasing achievement
and opportunities for students, maintaining a strong fiscal status, and provide
management with the rights necessary to successfully run the district (Ingram &
Snider, 2008). Over time, however, legal decisions have expanded the rights granted
to unions in collective bargaining, and has created strict rules that can limit system
leaders’ options for management, often to the detriment of students (Ingram, 2008).
In order to have a positive impact on student achievement, it is imperative that
all negotiating teams work together to develop goals that are aligned to the district’s
strategic plan (Hannaway & Rotherham, 2006). Recognition of the impact of
employees on student achievement, and an effort to reach fair and equitable outcomes
are crucial to reaching agreements that benefit students (Hess & West, 2006).
Family and Community Engagement
Family and community engagement with schools and school districts has been
positively linked to increases in student achievement (Epstein & Sanders, 2006;
Henderson & Mapp, 2002; Jeynes, 2003; Lunenberg & Irby, 2002). A high quality
family and community engagement plan has several elements, including parent
3/31/2009 39
training and volunteer programs, and ensures that families and community members
have a voice in decision-making and governance (Henderson & Mapp, 2002; Ingram,
Wolfe, & Leiberman, 2007; Warner, 2002). One of the ways in which districts foster
this voice is through ongoing two-way communication and collaboration regarding
programs, policies, and student achievement, and through collaboration with business
and community agencies to coordinate services for students and families (Henderson
& Mapp, 2002; Warner, 2002).
Parent training and parenting classes provide parents with opportunities to
learn and discus child development, strategies for raising children, and ways in which
they can assist their children to maximize opportunities for learning at home
(Henderson & Mapp, 2002; Ingram, Wolfe, & Leiberman, 2007; Warner, 2002). This
connection and training is important, as meaningful parent involvement has been
shown to increase student attendance and achievement, as well as improve student
behavior and increase the likelihood that students will graduate from high school and
continue their education at the university level (Henderson & Mapp, 2002; Jeynes,
2003; Lunenberg & Irby, 2002).

Innovation in Leadership Preparation Models
In order to facilitate the sorts of district-wide changes and improvements in
student achievement called for in today’s urban school districts, educational leadership
preparation programs, and superintendent preparation programs in particular, have
undergone many changes. Historically, research in the field of preparation programs
for educational administrators and superintendents has been limited in both scope and
3/31/2009 40
depth (Murphy and Vriessenga, 2005). While a number of studies were conducted
between 1975 and 2002 on the topic of improving preparation programs, the majority
of these studies looked not to empirical data on student achievement results in the
schools and districts in which program graduates are employed as instructional
leaders, but instead utilized surveys and questionnaires to determine participants’
perceptions of the program quality and the personal growth they experienced (Murphy
and Vriessenga, 2005).
More recently research in educational leadership has been conducted on the
preparation necessary for the modern role of the superintendent, and the organizations
such as the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED), the University of
Southern California, the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, and the Broad Foundation have
recognized the need to rethink and improve preparation for education administrators
(Bjork, Kowalski & Young, 2005; Shulman, Golde, Bueschel, & Garabedian, 2006;
The Broad Foundation & The Thomas B. Fordham Institute, 2003). Bjork, Kowalski,
and Browne-Ferrigno (2005) examined the changing nature of the work of
superintendents, and the implications for superintendent preparation programs. They
concluded that professional preparation must be in line with the responsibilities and
realities of the job, and promote the acquisition not only of academic knowledge, but
of craft knowledge as well.
Exploration into the field shows that, two opposing viewpoints have come forth
from the literature. The first position is for increasing the rigor of university doctoral
and preparation programs and adding a practice-based or internship component.
Bjork, Kowalski, and Browne-Ferrigno (2005), posit that university programs are
3/31/2009 41
superior to those offered by other organizations based on their core of expert faculty,
their ability to offer advanced degrees, stability, and continuity. They caution that
preparation programs offered by professional organizations, school districts, and
private sector organizations are vulnerable to “changing political priorities,
unpredictable markets, uncertain revenue streams, and challenges to program validity”
(p. 88). Bjork, et al., suggest that the reform should center around restructuring and
improving university programs based on the professional licensure standards
developed by the American Association of School Administrators (AASA) and the
Interstate School Leadership Licensure Commission (ISLLC), and the knowledge and
skills associated with five conceptualizations for the role of the superintendent
developed by Callahan (1966), and Kowalski (2001; 2003).
One of the issues hindering the success of university doctoral programs in
education has been the lack of clear differences between the mission and curriculum of
Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) programs and Education Doctorate (Ed.D.) programs.
An example of an innovation in a university-based preparation program can be seen in
the newly revised Education Doctorate (Ed.D.) program at the University of Southern
California’s (USC) Rossier School of Education. In 2001, in response to a negative
academic program review, slow student progress and highly variable student work, a
group of USC professors collaborated to restructure the Ed.D. program to focus on the
needs of educational leaders in urban settings (Dembo & Marsh, 2007; Shulman,
Golde, Bueschel, & Garabedian, 2006).
In order to develop district leaders’ knowledge and skills in the areas of teacher-
scholar, manager, democratic leader, applied social scientist, and communicator,
3/31/2009 42
superintendent preparation programs cannot be extensions of principal preparation
programs. Superintendent preparation programs must be collaborative enterprises of
universities and school districts, and must include a practicum or internship
component, in which students are “working with exemplary CEOs, participating in
high-risk activities, and engaging in reflective processes” (Bjork, Kowalski, &
Browne-Ferrigno, 2005, p. 87). Harvard University’s Urban Superintendents Program
is another example of an innovative university program that embraces the
collaborative model. Educators are admitted into the program in cohorts of six to
nine, and spend the first year in a full-time course of study in residence at the
university, followed by a full-time six-month internship. During the internship phase,
each participant is assigned to work with a superintendent employed in an urban
district. The program offers fellowships for the first year of coursework, and stipends
for the six months of internship. Following the first two phases of the program,
doctoral students complete their dissertations (Harvard University Graduate School of
Education website 2009; Jackson & Kelley, 2002)
An alternate position to the one that emphasizes preparation through university
programs is advocated for by the Broad Foundation and the Thomas B. Fordham
Institute. Their beliefs includes deregulating licensing and credentialing requirements,
selecting leaders from outside the education profession, and moving preparation
programs out of the university setting (The Broad Foundation & The Thomas B.
Fordham Institute, 2003). The Broad Academy developed its superintendent
preparation program based on the philosophy that traditional certification requirements
for superintendents should be greatly reduced, and that the criteria for becoming a
3/31/2009 43
superintendent should stress leadership qualities rather than experience in education.
An example of an innovative non-university preparation program, the Broad Academy
(TBA) believes in recruiting highly-qualified superintendent candidates who have
demonstrated leadership in a variety of fields, such as business, politics, military
service and education. Broad Academy participants are engaged in a rigorous 12-
month weekend program, and are trained in the knowledge and skills necessary to
assume a district leadership position. In addition, unlike the traditional view that holds
the university as the primary provider of training, The Broad Academy advocates that
school districts should assume a major role in shaping the training of their school
leaders—and that their leaders should participate in training from many providers, not
just colleges of education (The Broad Foundation & The Thomas B. Fordham
Institute, 2003).
Another program that has developed an innovative model that combines
university, state department of education, and professional association sponsorship is
the Missouri Academy for New Superintendents. This program, too, is a 12-month,
cohort-based program whose goals include developing leaders who: “clearly
understand the role of an educational leader in political and social democracy…are
comfortable with a collaborative leadership style…can lead in an instructional
environment…are insightful in change initiation and management…and comprehend
the importance of relationships, timing, reflection, team-building and development,
critical friends, and ethical leadership” (Academy for New Superintendents, St. Louis
University website, 2007). These goals are met through a program of retreats and
regional roundtables as well as the assignment of mentors and coaches and electronic
3/31/2009 44
network groups. Participants must be sitting superintendents with between one and
four years of experience within the state of Missouri, and the program is paid for by
both grants from the state department of education, and a $1500 contribution from
each of the participant’s districts (Academy for New Superintendents, St. Louis
University website, 2007).
Whether preparation takes place through university, non-university, or hybrid
programs, successful preparation will come through innovation in ensuring that
program goals are aligned with the changing role of the system leader (Bjork,
Kowalski & Browne-Ferrigno, 2005; Eiter, 2002; Jackson & Kelley, 2002). Cohorts,
problem-based learning, collaborative partnerships with external resources, and field
experiences are common the many of the models discussed, and are essential elements
of successful programs for educational leaders (Jackson & Kelley, 2002).

Conclusion
A review of the literature in this chapter uncovered trends in student
achievement, the role of the district in increasing achievement, the changing role of
the superintendent, strategies employed by successful superintendents, and
superintendent preparation programs. Given the urgency around the need to improve
achievement for students in our urban districts, further research is needed into the
practices of urban system leaders. More information is needed regarding the ways in
which the reform strategies system leaders choose to implement are related to the
strengths and weaknesses in their districts when they take office, and how they are
related to the system leaders’ prior experiences and backgrounds.
3/31/2009 45
This case study is being undertaken to closely examine the strategies being
employed by one urban superintendent to affect change and improvement in his own
district in order to provide additional information to practitioners and preparation
programs. While the literature contains many examples of reform strategies for the
purposes of this study, the following ten strategies are being studied:
1) Strategic Plan
2) Assessment
3) Curriculum
4) Professional Development
5) Human Resource System and Human Capital Management
6) Finance and Budget
7) Communications
8) Governance and Board Relations
9) Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations
10) Family and Community Engagement.
These ten strategies are elements of the House Model, developed by the Broad
Academy, as discussed in this chapter. Chapter Three provides a description of the
methodology used to conduct the study. Chapter Four presents the findings and an
analysis and discussion of the findings. Chapter Five provides an executive summary,
conclusions, implications, and topics for further research.

3/31/2009 46
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter describes the research methodology used in the study, and
includes a description of and rationale for the choice of sample, sample size, and
population. Techniques for data collection and analysis and instrumentation tools are
also detailed. The framework on which this study is based is the Broad Academy
House Model. The purpose of this study is to discover what actions superintendents
are taking to improve student achievement, and specifically to understand the impact
of the following ten identified reform strategies on academic achievement and
outcomes for students: assessment; curriculum; professional development; human
resource system and human capital management; finance and budget;
communications; governance and board relations; labor relations/contract
negotiations; family and community engagement; and strategic plan. This study
examined the reform strategies implemented by a superintendent who is a graduate of
the Urban School Leadership Institute (USLI). It examined the superintendent’s
responses to the strengths and weaknesses in his district, the relationship of the reform
strategies used to the background and experiences of the superintendent, and the ways
in which he is improving student achievement.
This is a qualitative study of superintendent background, preparation, action,
and impact on student achievement. A case study methodology was used in order to
depict or characterize the actions of the superintendent, and describe the context in
which the reform strategies were implemented (Marshall & Rossman, 1989). An in-
3/31/2009 47
depth case study was conducted to describe the actions taken and reform strategies
used by the urban superintendent to increase student achievement.
The Urban School Leadership Institute (USLI) is an innovative superintendent
preparation program designed to prepare corporate, military, non-profit, and
educational leaders for top positions in urban school districts. Participants are
engaged in a rigorous ten-month weekend program whose purpose is to develop
leaders who will raise student achievement in the largest urban school districts across
the United States (Quinn, 2007).
This study builds upon a Phase I study conducted in 2007 by two professors
from the University of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education, Dr. David
Marsh and Dr. Rudy Castruita, and a member of the Urban School Leadership
Foundation staff, Dr. Jen Takata. The Phase I study investigated two districts headed
by superintendents who were graduates of the Urban School Leadership Institute
(USLI), and who had been in their current positions for at least two years, and whose
districts had shown strong quantitative results during their tenure. The purpose of the
study was not to be published, but to identify the strengths and challenges of the
districts at the time the superintendents assumed leadership, which strategies from the
House Model the superintendents implemented to improve student achievement, and
the ways in which the USLI program had prepared the superintendents for their
leadership positions (Takata, Marsh, & Castruita, 2007).
Several recommendations came from the Phase I study, including the
recommendation that a Phase II study be conducted:
Based on the experiences of Phase I, the research team feels that the
continuation of the project into Phase II would provide meaningful data and
3/31/2009 48
extend the findings to a larger and more diverse sample of districts and USLI
superintendents. The following recommendations should be considered as
possible enhancements to the study:
1. Cross-site comparison of approximately 8 - 10 USLI graduates to confirm and
extend the tentative findings from this study.
2. Extended data collection including observations of a board meeting and/or
classrooms.
3. Evaluation of degree of implementation (high, medium, low) of various House
elements using rubrics.
4. Evaluation of district documents (entry plan, strategic plan, etc.) using rubrics
5. Interview current USLI participants to identify current gaps in curriculum and
training as well as potential, future coaching needs, etc.
6. Analysis of case studies and other USLI materials that would determine
alignment between teaching tools and elements of the House Model (Takata,
Marsh, & Castruita, 2007, p. 24).

This Phase II study evolved to include data collection and instrumentation
development by ten doctoral students at the University of Southern California, in
collaboration with their dissertation advisers, Dr. David Marsh and Dr. Rudy
Castruita. Each of the ten students conducted his or her own case study of a USLI
superintendent. A synthesis of the data collected about the USLI superintendents was
compiled and submitted to the Urban School Leadership Foundation by Dr. Marsh and
Dr. Castruita.
This dissertation study is an in-depth look at one of the case studies and
addressed the following research question and four related sub-questions:
1. How are the 10 key reform strategies being used by USLI superintendents to
improve student achievement in their respective districts?
a. How does the quality and implementation of the 10 key reform
strategies correspond to the strengths and challenges of the district
when the superintendent took office?
3/31/2009 49
b. What additional reform strategies (if any) were used? How do they
correspond to the elements of the House model?
c. How does the choice and implementation of the 10 key reform
strategies correspond to the previous background/experiences of the
superintendent?

Sample
The study design made use of purposeful sampling to choose the
superintendent and district in the case presented in the study. In the case study, the
sampling criteria included the following:
• The superintendent must be a graduate of The Urban School
Leadership Institute
• The district must be identified as a large, urban school system; and
• The superintendent must have been in office for at least two years
Purposeful sampling involves “selecting information-rich cases – case from
which one can learn a great deal about matters of importance and therefore worthy of
in depth study” (Patton, 2002, p. 242). In this case, the specific type of purposeful
sampling that was used in selecting the district and superintendent was “critical case
sampling” (Patton, 2002). Critical case sampling was used because it allows for
“logical generalization and maximum application of information to other cases”
(Patton, 2002, p. 243).
Additional participants in this study included key players identified by the
superintendent as persons with knowledge of the strengths and challenges in the
3/31/2009 50
district at the time that the superintendent took office, and the reform strategies used to
increase student achievement. Both purposeful sampling and “snowball” or “chain
sampling” (Patton, 2002) were used in selecting the additional participants.
Chain/snowball sampling is a method in which additional participants are identified by
sampling “people who know people who know people who know what cases are
information rich, that is, good examples for study, good interview participants”
(Patton, 2002, p. 243). In these case studies, information was gathered from additional
participants who were identified by the previously selected participants as subjects in
possession of information to further the studies.
All participants were volunteers. While the actual positions and titles of the
participants were used in the study, pseudonyms were given to the participants and the
districts in order to safeguard their anonymity.
Selected District Profile
Southwest Public School District (SPSD) is the largest in its state, and the
seventh largest school district in the United States, with more than 199,000 students.
Of these students, 60.3% are Hispanic, 28.4% are African-American, and 8% are
white. In recent years, many schools that had previously been comprised of a
predominantly African-American student body have transitioned so that they are
predominantly Hispanic. The district has a reputation for strong leadership by both
the Superintendent and the school board. The well-being of the Southwest Public
School District area is highly dependent on the oil business, which has been booming
in the past decade.
3/31/2009 51
SPSD serves a diverse population of close to 200,000 students. The district is
comprised of 183 elementary schools, 41 middle schools, 37 comprehensive high
schools, and 32 “combined/other” schools. The district is divided into five regional
districts, each with its own Regional Superintendent. Of the enrolled student
population, 92% are classified as minorities. The largest student demographic group
is Hispanic (60.3%), followed by African-American (28.4%), and White (8%).
Approximately 30% of the students (59,168) are classified as Limited English
Proficient, 9% (18,232) participate in Special Education programs, 12% (23,865) are
classified as Gifted/talented, and 79% (158,307) are Economically Disadvantaged,
qualifying for free or reduced-price lunch.
The SPSD workforce is made up of more than 29,450 full and part-time staff
members. The district employs 12,612 full-time teachers, 261 principals, 350 assistant
principals, 220 counselors, 156 librarians, 316 nurses and psychologists, 292 police
officers and security personnel, and 3,980 teaching assistants, clerks, and aides. In
addition, the SPSD central and regional offices are staffed by 113 administrators. The
remaining 11,150 employees work in part-time support positions in the areas of
substitute teaching services, technology, transportation, food services, crafts, and
trades. In January 2008, the teacher salary scale ranged from $42,745 with a BA to
$69,864 with a doctorate, and salaries accounted for 78.8% of the general fund
budgeted expenditures.. The total general fund expenditures per pupil were $7,811.
On the “Core Ideology” pages of the SPSD website, the district declares the
following purpose: “SPSD exists to strengthen the social and economic foundation of
[our city] by assuring its youth the highest-quality elementary and secondary
3/31/2009 52
education available anywhere.” In order to achieve its purpose, the district outlines six
goals: (1) Increase Student Achievement; (2) Provide a Safe Environment; (3) Increase
Management Efficiency; (4) Improve Public Support and Confidence in Schools; (5)
Create a Positive District Culture; and (6) Provide Facilities-to-Standard Program.
These goals, in conjunction with the districts five core values, Safety Above All Else,
Student Learning Is the Main Thing, Focus on Results and Excellence, Parents Are
Partners, and Common Decency, provide the ideological foundations for SPSD to
achieve its Strategic Intent: “To earn so much respect from the citizens of [our city]
that SPSD becomes their pre-kindergarten through grade 12 educational system of
choice.”
Selected Superintendent Profile
Dr. Antonio Mendez began his employment with Southwest Public School
District in 2001 as a Regional Superintendent. In 2002, he was appointed Executive
Deputy Superintendent. In August of 2004, he became acting Superintendent, and was
officially selected as Superintendent in December of the same year. Dr. Mendez came
from an education background, having served for seven years as Superintendent in
another southwestern school district, as a principal, and an assistant principal, and in a
variety of central office administrative positions in both the instructional and business
divisions. Some of the positions he held in the central offices included Director of
Secondary School Management, Assistant Superintendent for School Management,
Assistant Superintendent for General Education, and Associate Superintendent for
Business Support Services.
3/31/2009 53
Dr. Mendez earned a doctorate in school administration from the University of
Michigan in 1976, and both a B.S. degree (1972) and a M.S. degree (1974) from
Texas A&I University. He was a member of the first Broad Superintendents’
Academy cohort. At the state level, he served as the co-chair of the State Business
and Education Coalition, on the board of directors of the State Academic Decathlon,
as a member of the Governor's Task Force on Juvenile Justice, and as a member of the
legislative committee for the State Association of School Administrators. Locally in
the Southwest Public School District area, Dr. Mendez serves or has served on the
boards of the United Way, the Boy Scouts of America, the Southwest Educational
Research and Development Center, the Southwest Public Broadcasting System, the
Greater Southwest Chapter of the Red Cross, and the March of Dimes. Dr. Mendez
was selected as Superintendent upon the retirement of his predecessor, Dr. Musetta
Malone, whose predecessor was appointed as Secretary of Education in 2001. Dr.
Mendez is the first Latino Superintendent of Southwest Public School District.
Additional Participants
In addition to the Superintendent and the key staff members and a number of
other individuals were identified by the superintendent to participate in semi-
structured group interviews relating to their areas of expertise:

Instrumentation
Framework for Instrument Design
The conceptual framework used in developing the instrumentation in this study
is based on the House Model developed by The Broad Academy. Based on their
3/31/2009 54
experiences and extensive research, The Broad Academy selected ten specific reform
strategies from the House model for this study which are defined below:
1. Assessment - Assessment activities enable districts to know whether students
are learning what they are supposed to learn (i.e., the standards). Common,
regularly-scheduled district-wide assessments should connect directly with
standards, the curriculum, pacing guides, and professional development.
2. Curriculum - Curriculum refers to the materials used to teach. Classroom
materials—textbooks, worksheets, pacing guides, etc.—should address the
scope and sequence of the district’s learning standards.
3. Professional Development - Professional development is any program or
course intended to improve teachers’ and principals’ effectiveness. It may
center on content (e.g., teaching about force in physics), instructional
techniques (e.g., Cornell note-taking), leadership (e.g., a workshop for
principals and assistant principals), or habits (e.g., collaboration among
teachers in the same grade-level/subject matter). In many districts,
professional development topics are arbitrarily chosen. Successful districts
have an integrated professional development strategy that centers on enabling
teachers to detect when students aren’t meeting a certain standard and to adjust
their instruction accordingly, or enables principals and teachers to improve
their knowledge and skills in areas of district focus.
4. Human Resources System and Human Capital Management - Research
indicates that teacher quality is perhaps the primary influence on student
achievement, yet many districts do a poor job of attracting, selecting, and
managing talent, whether at the teacher, principal, or central office level.
Improving the recruiting and hiring processes for teachers and principals,
developing attractive compensation packages, and processing applications and
payments quickly—which a good HR system should be able to do—can
greatly improve the quality of instruction in schools and classrooms across the
district. Districts then need to develop clever support and retention strategies to
keep talent in the district. Most importantly, districts can proactively improve
their capacity for providing a quality education by examining and refining their
selection process.
5. Finance and Budget - While student achievement is the ultimate bottom line,
more superintendents are fired for poor financial management than for poor
student achievement results. In addition to ensuring that their budget is
balanced and sustainable, superintendents should closely align their budget
with instructional priorities. Some districts have adopted innovative budgeting
approaches such as “zero-based budgeting” and weighted student funding to
bring their budgets into closer alignment with their priorities.
6. Communications - Effective school districts need to showcase the great stories
in their district and to counteract misinformation or negative news. Developing
a public relations or communications office staffed with experts on dealing
with the media can enable the district to communicate its vision to the public
or proactively build support for an important initiative.
3/31/2009 55
7. Governance/Board Relations - Most districts are governed by boards elected
from the local population; others answer to appointed boards. In either case,
school boards are responsible for setting the policy direction for the district;
superintendents can take a supporting role in developing policy but are mainly
charged with executing it. Winning the support of board members, especially
elected ones, is a time-consuming but critical task for most superintendents.
8. Labor Relations/Contract Negotiations - In addition to teachers unions,
superintendents often need to build relationships and negotiate with several
other unions to which various district staff belong. Success in working with
unions requires an upfront investment in building relationships and
understanding the priorities of union leaders. The content of contracts also
requires close attention. Contract language can restrict or expand the
superintendent’s options for replacing and reassigning staff. This is particularly
crucial with teacher contracts, as teacher quality is one of the most significant
influences on student achievement.
9. Family and Community Engagement - All residents of a school district’s
jurisdiction can be considered its stakeholders, so ensuring everyone’s
satisfaction can be difficult. Districts should offer several ways for the
community and families to interact with the district, from coordinating
volunteer opportunities for parents to partnering with local organizations in
support of student success. It is also important to gather feedback from the
public on the district’s performance. Several districts take surveys of parents of
children and of the community in general to determine how they view the
district and what their priorities for improvement are. These surveys should be
closely linked to the district’s performance management system and data
dashboard. Increasing stakeholder satisfaction can lead to greater support for
bond measures for the district, significantly increasing its financial resources.
10. Strategic Plan - The strategic plan defines the district’s mission, goals, and
vision. It also assigns performance indicators and work plans to each of the
district’s primary goals and serves as the guiding document for district
decisions and priorities.

Research team members developed conceptual frameworks for each of the
reform strategies to operationalize components of each strategy and to define low,
medium, and high levels of implementation. Care was take to study strength and
challenges of the districts and strategies implemented in each of the districts in order
to provide the researchers with a holistic view of what was going on in the district, and
prevent us from missing any strategies or connections across strategies that would
further our studies.
3/31/2009 56
Figure 1: The Broad Academy House Model

Process
The instrumentation for this study was developed by a team of ten Educational
Doctorate (Ed.D.) students at the University of Southern California, in collaboration
with dissertation seminar advisors Dr. David Marsh, PhD., and Dr. Rudy Castruita,
Ed.D., and Urban School Leadership Foundation staff member Dr. Jennifer Welsh
Takata, Ed.D.. Between March, 2008 and May, 2008, the team developed rubrics to
Instructional Alignment
• Standards
• Assessment
• Curriculum
• Instruction
• Professional
Development
• Program Effectiveness
• Focus on Lowest
Performers
• Student Support Services

Operational Excellence
• HR System and Human
Capital Management
• Finance & Budget
• Resource Alignment
• Facilities
• Performance Management
Systems / Accountability
Plan
• Business Systems
• Other Operations Services

Stakeholder Management
• Communications
• Governance / Board
Relations
• Labor Relations /
Contract Negotiations
• Political Relationships
• Philanthropic and
Institutional Partnerships
• Family & Community
Engagement
• Constituent Service

Superintendent’s Plan of Entry
Sustainability
Increasing Student Achievement
Closing Achievement Gaps
Improving College Readiness

Organizational Assessment and
Audits
Strategic Plan
• Theory of Action
• Data Dashboard
Organizational & Management
Structure
• Leadership Team Effectiveness
- Assessment of Leadership
Team
- Standards of practice /
Protocols
• Organizational Chart
3/31/2009 57
gauge the level and quality of implementation of each of the ten reform strategies
identified in the House Model. Each of the ten Ed.D. students created a rubric for one
of the ten reform strategies, based on relevant research. Rubrics were finalized and
standardized through a collaborative review by all team members prior to their use in
data collection. The ten identified reform strategies were as follows: Assessment;
Curriculum and Instruction; Governance and Board Relations; Professional
Development; HR System and Human Capital Management; Finance and Budget;
Communications Labor Relations/Contract Negotiations; Family and Community
Engagement; and Strategic Plan.
Interview guides for use with each of the participants were developed by the
research team, based in part on those developed by Dr. Marsh, Dr. Castruita, and Dr.
Takata during Phase I of the study. An instrument used to aggregate the data
collected through use of the rubrics and interview guides was created by Dr. Takata.
Table 1 delineates the instruments used to study each of the research questions.

Table 1: Relationship of Research Questions to Data Collection Instruments

RQ:
10 Key
Levers
RQa:
Factors
Context
RQb:
Additional
Levers
RQc:
Background/
Experiences
Superintendent
Interview Guide

X X X X
Key Player
Interview Guide

X X X
Lever-specific
Interview Guide

X X X

3/31/2009 58
Data Collection Instruments
Superintendent Interview Guide. The Superintendent Interview Guide was
developed by the research team, based on the interview guide used in Phase I of the
study, which was developed by Dr. Darsh, Dr. Castruita, and Dr. Takata. It is attached
as Appendix A. The purpose of the Superintendent Interview Guide is to obtain
information regarding the superintendent’s perceptions of the status and context of the
district prior to his or her tenure, the reform strategies he or she chose to implement,
who was involved in the implementation, and his or her perceived success or lessons
learned. The guide consists of four major questions, with sub-questions to probe for
additional information. It includes questions designed to elicit information regarding
the superintendent’s background and preparation. The Guide is intended to be used in
two segments of one hour each at the beginning and the end of the two-day visit.
Key Player Interview Guide. The Key Player Interview Guide developed by
Dr. Marsh, Dr. Castruita, and Dr. Takata during Phase I of the study and modified by
the research team to meet the needs of the Phase II study. It is attached as Appendix
B. The purpose of the Key Player Interview Guide is to obtain information regarding
the perceptions of key staff and community members regarding the status and context
of the district prior to the current superintendent’s tenure, the reform strategies he or
she chose to implement, who was involved in the implementation, and the Key
Player’s perceived successes or lessons learned. The guide consists of two major
questions, each with sub-questions to probe for additional information.
Strategy-specific Interview Guide. The Strategy-specific Interview Guide was
developed by the research team, and was based on the rubrics created for each of the
3/31/2009 59
reform strategies from the House model. The purpose of the Strategy-specific
Interview Guide is to obtain information regarding the implementation in the district
of each of the ten specific reform strategies identified in this study. The guide consists
of one major question, with five sub-questions to probe for additional information, and
is attached as Appendix C.

Data Collection
Data collection for this study took place during July 2008. Data was collected
during a two-day visit to the district in the study. To complete this site visit, the Ed.D.
student traveled with one of the professors to the identified district. The researchers
conducted interviews of the identified participants using the above-described interview
guides. Interviews were digitally recorded and detailed field notes were taken. An
analysis of each interview was conducted in order to assess the quality and degree of
implementation of each of the ten reform strategies using the rubrics. Data was
complied using the Data Aggregation Tool.
Because the staff at the Urban School Leadership Institute had a special
relationship with their superintendents, they made the initial contacts in April, 2008 to
solicit participation in the study. In early May, 2008, Dr. Marsh and Dr. Castruita
followed up with a 10-15 minute phone call to the superintendent to discuss the scope
and purpose of the study, to introduce the researchers, and to identify key players for
the interviews. In mid-May, a follow-up letter was sent by Dr. Castruita to the
superintendent being studied to confirm participation and define a schedule of events
for the two-day visit.
3/31/2009 60
On the morning of the first day of the site visit the researchers conducted a 60-
minute interview with the superintendent and two additional individual 60 minute
interviews with key staff members identified by the superintendent to identify the
strengths and challenges of the district and the strategies the superintendent was
implementing to improve achievement. During the afternoon of the first day and the
morning of the second day, 60-minute small group interviews were conducted with
personnel identified by the superintendent in order to investigate the degree and
quality of district implementation of each of the reform strategies being studied. On
the afternoon of the second day, a follow-up interview was conducted with the
superintendent.
In order to prepare participants to be interviewed, the interview guides and
information regarding the reform strategies being studied were sent to the
superintendents prior to the visit for distribution to the personnel he or she identified
for participation. Multiple interviews were conducted in order to gather as much
information as possible in each district.
In order to encourage full participation in the process and full disclosure of
information, confidentiality and anonymity were guaranteed to participants. All
interviews were recorded and coded, but participants were assured that the tapes
would only used and heard by the research team members and would not be shared
with anyone in the district or outside of the team. In addition, participants were
assured that none of the information they gave would be attributed to them or
discussed with any member of their district. Information gathered through the
interviews was coded and numbered for use at the research level to correlate
3/31/2009 61
interviews with research questions and were kept in a locked file cabinet in the office
of Dr. David Marsh.

Data Analysis
Data analysis took place in several steps. The first step included daily
debriefing sessions during the onsite visit. The two researchers met on the evening of
the first day to go over their interview notes and identify any issues that needed further
study or follow-up during day two. At the conclusion of the final small group
interview regarding reform strategies on day two, the researchers again met to go over
their notes and identify any follow-up questions for the superintendent during the final
meeting on the afternoon of day two. The second step in the analysis of the data took
place upon the researchers’ return home. The digital recordings of the interviews were
analyzed and the information was coded as it corresponded to answers to the research
questions.
Data regarding the case study of the USLI superintendent was collected on
July 20-21, 2008. It was analyzed during July and August, 2008 by the researchers.
Initial rubric ratings were conducted during and immediately following the site visits,
while interviews and experiences were fresh in the mind of the researcher, and reasons
were noted for each of the rubric ratings. Further analysis after analysis and coding of
the digital recording of the interviews led to a more in-depth explanation and a
finalizing of the rubric ratings. The research team discussed the analysis of their data
from the ten USLI superintendents and districts over the summer of 2008, and worked
to create a common metric. In September, 2008, based upon the analysis of data from
3/31/2009 62
the USLI superintendent case study, a five page summary of findings was written and
sent to the Urban School Leadership Foundation.
Reform Strategy Implementation Rubrics.
The Reform Strategy Implementation Rubrics are tools used to assess the
implementation of each of the ten reform strategies defined in the House Model and
identified for the study. They are attached as Appendix D. Each rubric breaks down
the reform strategy into components and operationalizes what that reform strategy
would look like at low, moderate, and high levels and quality of implementation in a
school district.
3/31/2009 63
CHAPTER FOUR
FINDINGS, ANALYSIS, AND DISCUSSION
In this chapter, the findings of the study are presented and discussed. In order
to answer the research questions, an in-depth case study of one large urban district and
its superintendent was undertaken. The context of the district, the background and
previous experience of the superintendent, and the reform strategies implemented by
the superintendent were researched, recorded, and analyzed. Data was collected
through interviews and case-study methodology, and rated using rubrics developed by
the research team to assess the quality and level of implementation of each of the
reform strategies both under the current superintendent and prior to his arrival in the
district.
The purpose of this case study was to discover what actions superintendents
are taking to improve student achievement, and specifically to understand the impact
of ten identified reform strategies on academic achievement and outcomes for
students. The study examined the reform strategies used by an urban superintendent
who is a graduate of the Urban School Leadership Institute (USLI) superintendent
preparation program. It examined the superintendent’s responses to the strengths and
weaknesses in his district, the relationship of the reform strategies used to the
background and experiences of the superintendent, and the relationship to or impact on
student achievement. The study focused on 10 key reform strategies identified by the
Broad Academy’s House Model: 1) strategic planning; 2) assessment; 3) curriculum;
4) professional development; 5) human resource system and human capital
management; 6) finance and budget; 7) communications; 8) governance and board
3/31/2009 64
relations; 9) labor relations and contract negotiation; and 10) family and community
engagement.
Data collected was the study through interviews with the superintendent and
key players and district personnel he identified. In addition, district documents and
artifacts were collected from personnel and through the district website. During the
data collection process, the following five instruments, described in depth in Chapter
3, were used: (1) Superintendent Interview Guide (Appendix A); (2) Key Player
Interview Guide (Appendix B); (3) Specific Dimensions of Reform Interview Guide
(Appendix C); (4) Quality Rubric (Appendix D); and, (5) Implementation Rubric
(Appendix E). Data analysis was conducted by triangulating information from
interviews, documents, and other artifacts as available. This process of triangulation
increased the reliability and validity of the findings. The research team then engaged
in collaborative discussions and analysis of their data from the ten USLI
superintendents and districts..

District Background
Southwest Public School District (SPSD) is the largest in its state, and the
seventh largest school district in the United States, with more than 199,000 students.
Of these students, 60.3% are Hispanic, 28.4% are African-American, and 8% are
white. In recent years, many schools that had previously been comprised of a
predominantly African-American student body have transitioned so that they are
predominantly Hispanic. The district has a reputation for strong leadership by both
the Superintendent and the school board. The well-being of the Southwest Public
3/31/2009 65
School District area is highly dependent on the oil business, which has been booming
in the past decade.
SPSD serves a diverse population of close to 200,000 students. The district is
comprised of 183 elementary schools, 41 middle schools, 37 comprehensive high
schools, and 32 “combined/other” schools. The district is divided into five regional
districts, each with its own Regional Superintendent. Of the enrolled student
population, 92% are classified as minorities. The largest student demographic group
is Hispanic (60.3%), followed by African-American (28.4%), and White (8%).
Approximately 30% of the students (59,168) are classified as Limited English
Proficient, 9% (18,232) participate in Special Education programs, 12% (23,865) are
classified as Gifted/talented, and 79% (158,307) are Economically Disadvantaged,
qualifying for free or reduced-price lunch.
Table 2: Demographics of Southwest Public School District
District Size %
White
%
Black
%
Hispanic
%
Other
%
FRSL
199,534 8.0 28.4 60.3 3.3 79.3
Comments: Southwest Public School District covers 301 square miles and is the 7
th
largest school district in the
United States. The district has experienced a demographic shift in recent years, and many schools that had
previously had a predominantly African-American student body have transitioned so that they are predominantly
Hispanic.

The SPSD workforce is made up of more than 29,450 full and part-time staff
members. The district employs 12,612 full-time teachers, 261 principals, 350 assistant
principals, 220 counselors, 156 librarians, 316 nurses and psychologists, 292 police
officers and security personnel, and 3,980 teaching assistants, clerks, and aides. In
addition, the SPSD central and regional offices are staffed by 113 administrators. The
remaining 11,150 employees work in part-time support positions in the areas of
substitute teaching services, technology, transportation, food services, crafts, and
3/31/2009 66
trades. In January 2008, the teacher salary scale ranged from $42,745 with a BA to
$69,864 with a doctorate, and salaries accounted for 78.8% of the general fund
budgeted expenditures.. The total general fund expenditures per pupil were $7,811.
On the “Core Ideology” pages of the SPSD website, the district declares the
following purpose: “SPSD exists to strengthen the social and economic foundation of
[our city] by assuring its youth the highest-quality elementary and secondary
education available anywhere.” In order to achieve its purpose, the district outlines six
goals: (1) Increase Student Achievement; (2) Provide a Safe Environment; (3) Increase
Management Efficiency; (4) Improve Public Support and Confidence in Schools; (5)
Create a Positive District Culture; and (6) Provide Facilities-to-Standard Program.
These goals, in conjunction with the districts five core values, Safety Above All Else,
Student Learning Is the Main Thing, Focus on Results and Excellence, Parents Are
Partners, and Common Decency, provide the ideological foundations for SPSD to
achieve its Strategic Intent: “To earn so much respect from the citizens of [our city]
that SPSD becomes their pre-kindergarten through grade 12 educational system of
choice.”

Superintendent Background
Dr. Antonio Mendez began his employment with Southwest Public School
District in 2001 as a Regional Superintendent. In 2002, he was appointed Executive
Deputy Superintendent. In August of 2004, he became acting Superintendent, and was
officially selected as Superintendent in December of the same year. Dr. Mendez came
from an education background, having served for seven years as Superintendent in
3/31/2009 67
another southwestern school district, as a principal, and an assistant principal, and in a
variety of central office administrative positions in both the instructional and business
divisions. Some of the positions he held in the central offices included Director of
Secondary School Management, Assistant Superintendent for School Management,
Assistant Superintendent for General Education, and Associate Superintendent for
Business Support Services.
Dr. Mendez earned a doctorate in school administration from the University of
Michigan in 1976, and both a B.S. degree (1972) and a M.S. degree (1974) from
Texas A&I University. He was a member of the first Urban Superintendents’
Leadership Institute cohort. At the state level, he served as the co-chair of the State
Business and Education Coalition, on the board of directors of the State Academic
Decathlon, as a member of the Governor's Task Force on Juvenile Justice, and as a
member of the legislative committee for the State Association of School
Administrators. Locally in the Southwest Public School District area, Dr. Mendez
serves or has served on the boards of the United Way, the Boy Scouts of America, the
Southwest Educational Research and Development Center, the Southwest Public
Broadcasting System, the Greater Southwest Chapter of the Red Cross, and the March
of Dimes. Dr. Mendez was selected as Superintendent upon the retirement of his
predecessor, Dr. Musetta Malone, whose predecessor was appointed as Secretary of
Education in 2001 Dr. Mendez is the first Latino Superintendent of Southwest Public
School District.
During the interview process, Dr. Mendez was asked to rate his previous
experience with the 10 reform strategies. His responses, which may be seen in Table
3/31/2009 68
3, indicated that he felt most confident in the areas of Finance and Budget, HR System
and Human Capital Management, Governance and Board Relations, Labor Relations
and Contract Negotiations, and Family and Community Engagement. Many of these
strengths are evident in Dr. Mendez’ implementation of the ASPIRE program, in
which he capitalized on his strengths in Budget and Finance, HR, Governance and
Board Relations, and Labor Relations to implement a “Pay for Performance” system to
reward schools and staff for growth in student academic performance. Dr. Mendez
rated himself as having less experience in the areas of Strategic Planning, Assessment,
Curriculum, Professional Development, and Communications. In interviews, he spoke
of the importance of hiring “the best Chief Academic Officer you can find,” and
giving that person authority over and accountability for many of those areas.

Table 3: Self-rating of Previous Experience in the 10 Key areas of Reform
Ratings (5=high, 1=low)
Dimensions of Reform 5 4 3 2 1
Strategic Planning X
Assessment X
Curriculum X
Professional Development X
HR System and Human Capital Management X
Finance and Budget X
Communications X
Governance and Board Relations X
Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations X
Family and Community Engagement X

Conditions in the District at the Time of Superintendent’s Arrival
Southwest Public School District had many strengths and many important
challenges at the time Dr. Mendez became Superintendent. According to interviews,
his primary goal was to reignite the push for student achievement that had waned for
several reasons in the three years prior to his appointment. The district’s strengths
3/31/2009 69
were robust and comprehensive and covered many dimensions of school district
functioning, from school board politics to district office organization to success with
improving student performance. The strengths had been true in the district for almost
a decade and had become institutionalized as expectations and procedures within the
district.
Dr. Mendez was the first Latino superintendent in SPSD, and experienced both
strong support and serious challenge in a community that had been undergoing
dramatic shifts in pupil demographics and political partnerships. SPSD had also been
entangled in some legacy issues such as concerns about misrepresenting high school
dropout data, which were amplified by the fact that President Bush’s educational
reform strategy was based so explicitly on the experience in Southwest Public School
District. At the same time, the district research and evaluation office was under-
utilized and adrift. SPSD had also lost its firm use of accountability and data as well
as the organizational structure to drive student improvement after the departure of the
superintendent who became Secretary of Education.

Table 4: Strengths in SPSD upon Superintendent’s Arrival
Strengths: Eastern Seaboard County
• Strong previous gains in student achievement under old state testing/accountability system—the district
won The Broad Prize in 2002.
• History and success with district reform efforts.
• A competent school board that was growing restless with the lack of new progress in student
performance.
• Strong financial base and a very strong district financial officer.
• Competent central office administrators and strong infrastructure.
• Strong history of partnership with the business community in support of the district.

When Dr. Mendez began as superintendent, Southwest Public School District
had experienced a number of relatively recent successes and recognitions. Student
3/31/2009 70
achievement had increased and the district had received local, state, and national
recognition. The district had won the Broad Prize, and a recent superintendent had
been chosen for a national position in education policy. There was a spirit of pride
and satisfaction within the community and the district, despite the recently lagging
improvement rate. During the interview process the former board president referred to
the sense of “SPSD Can Do Pride.” That both bolstered the district’s spirits and
contributed to its complacency or lack of urgency to continue improving.
Southwest Public School District’s recent history of success with school
reform efforts allowed the new superintendents to “stand on the shoulders of those
who came before them,” according to the former board president. This strength was
also a challenge for Dr. Mendez as he took office. Instilling a sense of urgency and
the need to do more to increase student achievement would involve making some
changes to the structures put into place by his predecessors. Fortunately, the district
also had a history of having a strong board that valued student achievement and was
growing restless with the lack of recent progress in growth in achievement.
The decentralization of the district into 13 regional offices was also seen by
many as a strength. Interviews revealed that decentralization had brought a
“philosophy of empowerment” and a sense of “freedom and ownership” to which
some of the “entrepreneurial success” was attributed. Additionally, the central and
regional district infrastructure and many of the district staff had long been in place and
were considered to be solid foundations on which much of the previous success had
been built. These perceived SPSD strengths would also prove to be challenges to Dr.
3/31/2009 71
Mendez as he worked to implement new structures and organization in the district to
further his reforms.
A final strength of the district at the time of Dr. Mendez’ arrival was the
district’s sound fiscal condition, and strong CFO. Dr. Mendez, as well, had a strong
background in business that he had acquired through his previous positions, and
working in partnership with the CFO and financial team, was able to leverage
resources to implement new reforms.

Table 5: Challenges in SPSD upon Superintendent’s Arrival
Challenges: Southwest Public School District
• Responding to the recent plateau in student performance—a lacking sense of urgency in the district
especially in the context of a new and more demanding state testing/accountability system.
• Making the district organization better able to drive the improvement of student achievement while also
promoting greater cost efficiency and performance accountability.
• Managing an impatient school board with differing expectations among its members and a need of
school board members to get credit for district accomplishments.
• Fragmentation and lack of clarity about curriculum/instruction, a need to centralize some curriculum
decisions, and creating stronger district leadership for curriculum/instruction/assessment.
• Revitalizing the district research/evaluation office and leadership after it was used extensively by a
former superintendent, but fell into marginal use in recent years; shift focus of accountability to a value-
added methodology to enable lower-performing schools to be recognized for their improvement.

When Dr. Mendez arrived, the district was lacking both coherence and a
district-wide sense of urgency for improvement. The previous superintendent, who
was well-respected, but was also considered an “insider,” had provided a climate of
collaboration and an opportunity for schools and offices to “regroup” after the “hard
push” under her predecessor. As a result, though staff liked and respected the
administration, the “breathing time” led to a stagnation in growth in achievement and
the beginnings of a feeling of complacency with recent achievements.
During that time, the thirteen regional offices into which the school district was
divide had become “worlds onto themselves” with large staffs, large budgets, and a
3/31/2009 72
variety of foci on teaching, learning and student achievement. This decentralization,
that some claim fostered a spirit of ownership and entrepreneurialism at the local
school level, led to the lack of a singular vision or direction from the central office and
contributed to an overall sense of fragmentation.
Additionally, the new superintendent had to manage an impatient school board
with differing expectations among its members and a desire to receive credit for
district accomplishments. Since the receipt of The Broad Prize, student performance
had hit a plateau, which was of concern to the board and some leaders in the district.
Dr. Mendez’ previous job as a superintendent provided him with experience in
superintendent-board relations, which helped him to navigate this particular challenge
as he implemented strategies to move the district forward. He was described by the
former board president as some one who could “stand up and take bullets better than
anyone else” she knew, and this strength would serve him well in the months and
years to come.
Under the decentralized system prior to Dr. Mendez’ arrival, curricular choices
had been left to schools and regional districts. The implementation of a coherent
curriculum in SPSD had become a significant challenge, as the central office had lost
capacity and effectiveness to shape curriculum in key instructional areas. While there
had been a district-authored curriculum for some time, it was considered fragmented
and not teacher-friendly, and under decentralization, schools could choose whether or
not to implement it. At the same time, the state testing/accountability system required
student performance in new subjects, new types of student performance, and new
curriculum alignment patterns. The state test also required higher student performance
3/31/2009 73
with more focus on thinking/problem-solving, and the district was not responding in
its teaching strategies and, consequently, in its performance.
Finally, a challenge that Dr. Mendez faced as he stepped into the
superintendent position was breathing new life into the office of research and
evaluation. What was once a thriving and much-used office had fallen into underuse
during the administration immediately prior. Dr. Mendez and his team were looking
to use data not only to improve instruction and achievement, but also to implement a
value-added system under which individual student growth and growth an
improvement in schools could be recognized and rewarded.
3/31/2009 74
Table 6: Reform Strategies Implemented in the Southwest Public School District
Areas of Reform
Specific Reform Strategies
1) Reemphasized student
achievement in a value-
added system
- Gave important speech to district and school administrators about significance of
new era of student achievement
- Launched internal and external campaign that created urgency around
student improvement
- Launched annual campaign to get high school dropouts back into school
- Placed an emphasis on growth in student achievement, identifying
successful schools as those who achieved the greatest increases in
achievement, versus those who had the highest achievement
2) Restructured and
revitalized organizational
layers in the district

- Reduced regional offices from 13 to 5 to improve efficiency around focus on
student achievement
- Centralized authority over regional offices to create common district-wide vision
and direction
- Hired energetic new regional office leaders
- Created new role of executive principal to supervise instructional improvement in
assigned schools
- Changed the hiring process so that he made the final decision about all new
principal hires
- Changed the interaction with principals to direct all effort toward student
achievement
- Created a new pay-for-performance system to enforce accountability for student
achievement
3) Curriculum:
Revised role of CAO

- Empowered CAO with sole authority to drive improvement in student achievement
- Centralized key curriculum decisions to central office
- Created a new comprehensive standards/curriculum/instruction/accountability
program called “ASPIRE”
- Established annual two week institute for school leadership teams to coordinate
roll-out of ASPIRE
4) Restructured research
and evaluation office

- Revived the role of R&E office in providing data reports to schools
- Reorganized office divisions to enable delivery of data to schools.
- Directed district research office to create methodology for value-added analysis of
schools
5) Governance and
Board Relations:
Engaged school board as
partner in the
improvement of student
achievement

- Dramatically increased time spent informing school board including weekly written
report to board
- Provided board access to superintendent’s direct reports to keep communication
lines open
- Worked to reach consensus within board about key decisions
- Structured superintendent’s contract to give superintendent control over personnel
matters
- Made sure that credit for success is shared with the board
6) Human Resources:
Implemented ASPIRE
systemic approach to
school reform

- Emphasis on : (1) Developing human capital; (2) Informing practice; (3)
Recognizing excellence; and (4) Improving teaching and learning
- Implemented Pay for Performance incentive program, offering financial incentives
of up to $10,000 recognizing growth in student achievement

One of Dr. Mendez’ primary goals upon taking office was to create a sense of
urgency around increasing student achievement. All of the major reforms he
implemented were in support of this initial goal. One of the first things he did was to
gather school and district administrators together and speak to them about the
3/31/2009 75
importance of student achievement. To emphasize this philosophy, he made sure that
his actions followed his words. Following the speech, he launched both internal and
external campaigns that emphasized the need to improve student achievement, and the
urgency with which it needed to be done. He also launched what would be come an
annual “Reach out to Dropouts” campaign in which he and other district staff
members personally went door-to-door to get high school dropouts back into school.
As another way to place an emphasis on growth in student achievement, he
worked with district stakeholders to come up with a method of identifying successful
schools as those who achieved the greatest increases in achievement, versus those who
had the highest achievement. In this way, he sought to shift accountability to a value-
added methodology so that lower-performing schools would be recognized for
improvement, and the growth in achievement of all students would become a priority
for all teachers and schools.
Dr. Mendez stated during an interview that, “The only way to change a system
is to take a risk.” Examples of this philosophy in action are the bold steps he took in
restructuring and making staffing changes in the regional offices. The first thing he
did was to reduce the number of regions (and thus regional offices) from 13 to five, in
an effort to improve efficiency and sharpen the focus on student achievement. In
making this change, he also centralized authority over the new regional offices to
create a common district-wide vision and direction. He made some changes in
staffing, choosing to dismiss the majority of the previous regional superintendents, and
hiring energetic new regional office leaders. In furtherance of his focus on teaching,
learning, and student achievement, Dr. Mendez created a new position called
3/31/2009 76
“Executive Principal” whose role was to supervise instructional improvement in a
small number of assigned schools.
Dr. Mendez also changed the hiring process, so that he made the final decision
about all new principal hires, and he began meeting with the principals at their
monthly meetings. This change in interaction with principals to a more hands-on
approach centralized and streamlined communication of the superintendent’s vision,
and emphasized to principals the importance of directing all effort toward student
achievement. In addition, he worked with stakeholders to create a new pay-for-
performance system to enforce accountability for student achievement.
Dr. Mendez identified the fragmented curriculum as a challenge that needed to
be addressed in order to improve student achievement. To this end, he hired a new
Chief Academic Officer (CAO), and empowered her with sole authority to drive
improvement in student achievement. Working with his CAO, Dr. Mendez
centralized key curriculum and assessment decisions to central office, and is working
to enforce the implementation of a district-wide curriculum. As part of this effort, he
created a new comprehensive standards/curriculum/instruction/assessment/
accountability program called “ASPIRE,” which includes a value-added model for
measuring student achievement and a pay-for-performance incentive for school staff.
In order to communicate these new programs, he established an annual two-week
institute for school leadership teams.
Data-driven decision-making was a big part of Dr. Mendez leadership and
instructional philosophies, and in order make sure that all schools and offices were
empowered with the information they needed, he revitalized the role of the district’s
3/31/2009 77
Research and Evaluation office. He reorganized office divisions in order to enable the
delivery of data to all schools and offices, and he directed district research office to
create methodology for value-added analysis of schools and student achievement.
To capitalize on the strength of the interest in leadership of the school board,
and to address the challenge of its restlessness and dissatisfaction with the current
levels of student achievement, Dr. Mendez engaged the school board members as his
partners in improvement. He dramatically increased the amount of time he spent each
week in informing school board members of current conditions and strategies, and he
provided them with a weekly written report. In order to increase and improve
communication, he provided board members with direct access to his direct reports.
He worked hard to reach consensus within board about key decisions, and he made
sure that credit for all successes was shared with the board. Through his negotiations,
he was able to structure his superintendent’s contract to give him control over
personnel matters, which would allow him to hire and fire his own staff without
approval from the board.
Perhaps the most salient reform strategy Dr. Mendez brought to the Southwest
Public School District was the creation and implementation of ASPIRE. ASPIRE is a
comprehensive approach to school reform with emphasis on: (1) Developing human
capital; (2) Informing practice; (3) Recognizing excellence; and (4) Improving
teaching and learning (ASPIRE Portal on SPSD website). As part of this reform, Dr.
Mendez implemented a pay-for-performance incentive program that recognized
growth in student achievement and offered financial incentives of up to $10,000 to
teachers and administrators.
3/31/2009 78
Ten Key Reform Strategies
The research question this study was undertaken to answer is: How are the 10
key reform strategies being used by the Urban School Leadership Institute (USLI)
superintendents to improve student achievement in their respective districts? Data
was collected through a two-day, on-site visit during which interviews were conducted
with the superintendent and key players he identified as knowledgeable about the
reform strategies he had implemented in general, and specifically in the areas of the
ten identified reform strategies. In addition, documents and artifacts were collected
and reviewed to find further information about reform strategies the superintendent
implemented to affect systemic change. This data regarding strategies was compared
to the Broad Academy’s House Model (Figure 2), the conceptual framework that
served as the basis of the study.
Figure 2: The House Model

3/31/2009 79
In the House Model, the “house” is divided into different rooms on different
levels, each containing one or more reform strategies, all covered by a roof. The first
level of the house, the foundation, is the Superintendent’s Plan of Entry. The
Superintendent’s Plan of Entry includes his or her 90-Day or 100-Day Plan, detailing
strategies for immediate implementation upon beginning his or her assignment, as well
as conditions and stipulations negotiated in the initial contract for employment. The
six rooms of the house are divided into six overarching areas relating to Instructional
Alignment, Operational Excellence, Stakeholder Management, Organizational
Assessment and Audits, Organizational and Management Structure, and Strategic
Plan. The roof represents sustainable increases in student achievement, closing of
achievement gaps, and improving college readiness. The House Model was developed
by the Broad Academy through a review of current literature and research-based best
practices. Their research identified 10 key reform strategies superintendent implement
to affect systemic change that leads to increases in student achievement.
The following section details the data collected on each of the 10 identified
reform strategies through the interviews and review of the documents. The specific
interviewees and/or artifacts are cited where appropriate. Rubric scores, where
referenced, are based on the Quality Rubrics (Appendix D) and the Level of
Implementation Rubric (Appendix E).

3/31/2009 80
Table 7: Rubric Ratings of House Model Reform Strategies
House Elements Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Implementation
Level
Strategic Planning 1 5 5
Assessment 3 5 5
Curriculum 2 5 3
Professional Development 3 5 5
HR System and Human Capital
Management
3 5 4
Finance and Budget 4 4 5
Communication 3 3 3
Governance and Board Relations 3 5 3
Labor Relations and Contract
Negotiations
2 2 3
Family and Community Engagement 3 3 1

Strategic Plan
Table 8: Rubric Scoring of Strategic Plan
House Elements Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the Difference
Between Pre and Post
Implementation
Strategies / Action Steps
Strategic Plan 1 5 Previously, SPSD did not
have a formal, written
Strategic Plan. Previous
“Board Monitoring System”
was more reactive than
proactive.
• Formal Strategic Plan
developed by superintendent,
senior staff, and board
• January Board retreat used
to set goals, objectives, strategies
and accountability
• Proactive focus on value-
added model for growth in student
achievement

Prior to Dr. Mendez becoming superintendent, the district did not have a
formal Strategic Plan. Southwest Public Schools had developed their “Beliefs and
Vision” 1990’s and the board did work to create “Board Monitoring System” to
identify goals and priorities. These identified priorities included, among other things,
student achievement, safety, and efficiency. According to interviews, however, in the
area of student achievement, programs drove instruction, and it was believed that
having the right program, or being in the right school, was the key to student
achievement. Under Dr. Mendez’ tenure, there was shift in focus from having the
right program to having a quality teacher.
3/31/2009 81
Interviews with staff members identified by the superintendent as
knowledgeable about the history and current strategies of strategic planning in SPSD
also revealed that, under the previous administration, there was more of a focus on
reaction, than on proactive strategy. Key staff members would meet on an annual
basis and “look at what needed to be fixed” based on data from Board Monitoring
System, rather than looking forward at what could be done with a long-range plan.

Table 9: Addressing Change in Strategic Planning
Strengths Challenges
• Long history of focus on student achievement
• Development in the 1990’s of SPSD Beliefs and
Vision
• Board Monitoring System that served as a
framework for district priorities

• Size and complexity of district
• Unclear definition of what student achievement
looked like or how it was achieved
• Focus on “fixing mistakes” versus long-range
planning
• Prior focus on test scores had challenged the integrity
of some staff
• Communicating a clear, common message to all
district stakeholders
Strategies
• Superintendent meets with cabinet in the fall before the January Board retreat to discuss potential
critical areas of priority.
• Plan developed at January Board retreat with superintendent and senior staff, led by superintendent and
board president.
• Extensive data analysis to provide value-added focus and make decisions regarding programs and
instruction.
• Focus on teaching and learning, not just student achievement.
• Shift in focus from programs to teacher quality.
• Goals and priorities clearly communicated to stakeholders

When Dr. Mendez took office, his primary goal was to increase student
achievement and to ensure that all stakeholders felt a sense of urgency about the need
to do so. In order to work efficiently on this goal, Dr. Mendez recognized the need to
have a formal strategic plan that defined student achievement and used data to set
specific goals and strategies for achieving those goals. A Regional Superintendent
who was interviewed spoke about Dr. Mendez’ assumption of the superintendent
position and his affect on developing a strategic plan:
3/31/2009 82
“Dr. Mendez came in and put words to everything – I think
‘student achievement’ became something a little bit different for us. I
think he helped us to see that you can’t just look at test scores, and that
that’s not a true indicator of student achievement, but that we needed to
be able to view more clearly how every student was learning so that the
things that he has put in place has been a clarifying of the lens in
saying, ‘This is what it looks like. We can maintain the focus on
student achievement, but do we really have a clear picture of what that
looks like? Who’s learning and how are they learning and how much
are they learning, and is every student learning?’”

Part of developing this plan included a new shift in focus from choosing the best
programs to implement to improving teaching and learning. The Chief of Staff
described the difference as follows:
“Previously, you knew it was about student achievement, but rarely
was the connection made about teaching and learning. Under [Dr.
Mendez’] leadership, you heard more of the conversation becoming
about how are we teaching, and how are our students learning, and how
can we get better at that?”

Dr. Mendez implemented a process for developing a strategic plan for SPSD
based on the district’s beliefs and vision, and for monitoring the progress made toward
achieving the goals. Each year, he meets with cabinet in the fall before the January
Board retreat to discuss potential critical areas of priority. These priorities are then
further discussed and formally adopted at the January Board retreat. This retreat
includes the board members, the superintendent and senior district staff, and is jointly
led by the superintendent and board president.
Currently, a major area of focus that has been identified in the strategic plan is
human resources/human capital development. As part of the strategic planning in the
area of human resources and human capital development, the focus on teaching and
learning, not just student achievement has resulted in a shift in focus from programs to
teacher quality. Value-added data has been used to analyze the factors that affect
3/31/2009 83
teacher performance. Analyses have been undertaken to determine the specific
university or alternative certification programs from which the most (and least)
successful teachers received their training and preparation. Studies have been
undertaken to determine what factors might assist in attracting and retaining the
highest quality teachers and administrators, and a marketing team has been hired to
implement some of those strategies. One of the interview subjects described this focus
as follows: “The goal of the plan includes taking human resources to the next level,
and turning it into human capital development.”
These human resources and human capital development goals are tied to
Southwest Public School District’s ASPIRE program, which has four primary goals:
(1) Developing human capital; (2) Informing practice; (3) Recognizing excellence;
and (4) Improving teaching and learning, using a value-added approach. In line with
Dr. Mendez’ push for data-driven decision-making, data analysis is conducted in each
of the ASPIRE components to determine the value-added nature of teaching and
professional development, and to make decisions regarding programs, hiring, and
instruction. The connection and alignment between the strategic plan and ASPIRE are
similar to those that can be seen in the other reform strategies implemented by Dr.
Mendez and his team.
The focus that the strategic plan brings to the district, the schools, and the
regional offices is providing some much needed coherence. Interview subjects
reported that one of the keys to the district’s success in implementing the strategic
plan is communication. They feel that communication to staff has increased
dramatically, both in amount and in clarity. Communication of vision, mission and
3/31/2009 84
goals is consistent from region to region, school to school, and office to office. Dr.
Mendez has high expectations of his Regional Superintendents, principals, teachers,
and district staff, which he clearly communicates. According to the chief of staff, the
message that the district receives is, “College-bound culture, student achievement,
teaching and learning, and value-added.”
Under Dr. Mendez, the Strategic Plan has become an important part of the
fabric of SPSD. The goals are well known to stakeholders, having been clearly
communicated and well-defined. This differs from the previous climate of the district,
when the mission and vision were written statements that were to be committed to
memory. A Regional Superintendent describes the difference: “We were beaten pretty
hard about it…It was ‘get in line, tow the line, and this is the way it goes’… We had to
carry the goals and the vision around with us and we were afraid that he would ask us
about it.” Under Dr. Mendez, these written statements and goals have come to life.

Table 10: Strategic Plan Rating by Rubric Component
Rubric Components
Previous Quality
1
Current Quality
5
Level of
Implementation
Vision 1 5
Mission 1 5
Objectives (goals) 1 5
Strategies 1 5
Action Plan 1 5
Theory of Action 1 not observed
Data Dashboard 1 5
5

The ratings in table 10 reflect the quality and level of implementation of
strategic planning in SPSD. Southwest Public School District has a strategic plan that
developed from the district’s mission and vision. The plan includes specific goals and
measurable objectives. While an explicitly labeled “Theory of Action” was not
3/31/2009 85
observed, the plan does outline the specific strategies and the resources necessary to
reach its stated goals. The plan also identifies the data used to determine the goals,
and the areas for improvement. The strategic plan is consistent with the district’s core
values, purpose, and strategic intent. Because the strategic plan contained all of the
elements detailed in the rubric, and met the highest level for each component, the plan
was rated as a 5 (high). Because evidence of the implementation of the plan is evident
throughout the district and the areas of reform being implemented, it has also been
scored as a 5 (high) in implementation level.

Assessment
Table 11: Rubric Scoring of Assessment
House
Elements
Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the Difference
Between Pre and Post
Implementation
Strategies / Action Steps
Assessment 3 5 More emphasis has been
placed on improvement,
rather than strictly on
achievement. There is a new
focus on data analysis at to
ensure that all students
improve under a value-added
incentive system.
• Comprehensive Criterion and norm-
referenced summative assessment
program
• Formative Curriculum Based
Assessments created by curriculum
department
• PD department provides extensive
training on use of data to inform
instruction
• ASPIRE program incorporates value-
added data analysis to track student
growth
• Focus on student academic growth
versus student academic achievement

SPSD has always had a strong focus on assessment. Students are assessed
using a number of summative tests, including required state criterion reference tests in
reading and math for all students in grades 3-11, state mandated criterion-referenced
tests in science, social science and writing at selected grade levels. In addition,
students in grades 1-11 are assessed in reading and math using national norm-
3/31/2009 86
referenced tests such as the Stanford 10, the Aprenda, the SAT and the ACT. Student
achievement data has always been used to make decisions about program participation
(e.g. Special Education, Gifted and Talented Education, and programs for English
learners). Recently, under Dr. Mendez’ administration, however, the focus has shifted
from assessment that measures student achievement to assessment that measures
student growth, and a there is a new emphasis on formative data and assessment to
inform instruction. Curriculum Based Assessments have been created by the
curriculum department and are being used to benchmark student achievement and to
monitor student academic growth and areas in need of additional instruction or
intervention on a regular basis.
This shift in focus to the use of data to inform instruction has had a major
impact on assessment. According to district assessment staff interviewed, “The
previous administration was less data driven and more people-focused.” The
assessment program that was in place was described in interviews as the “seeds” of the
current assessment program. With the shift in focus from academic achievement to
academic growth, there has also been a shift in focus from “looking at data” to
learning how to use data in facilitating the growth of all students. This is directly
connected to the “Informing practice,” and “Improving teaching and learning” goals of
ASPIRE.

3/31/2009 87
Table 12: Addressing Change in Assessment
Strengths Challenges
• Competent, organized staff working in
cooperation with regional offices
• Variety of summative assessments
• Tradition of emphasis on student achievement
results
• Providing assessment results to teachers in a timely
manner
• Small staff responsible for entire assessment
program
• Inconsistent implementation of new Curriculum
Based Assessments
• Prior focus on summative achievement data
• Previous history of testing irregularities / allegations
of cheating
Strategies
• Continued implementation of the comprehensive criterion and norm-referenced summative assessment
program
• District-wide focus on student academic growth versus student academic achievement
• Extensive training for teachers and administrators on use of data to inform instruction
• Electronic, on-line rosters of student achievement results available to teachers and administrators in timely
manner
• Implementation of the ASPIRE reform, which provides financial rewards to teachers, administrators, and other
school personnel for student academic growth
• Implementation of value-added database of student achievement results
• Implementation of a new formative Curriculum Based Assessment program created by curriculum department

Since the early 1990’s, SPSD has provided an extensive summative assessment
system for its teachers and students. During the time period that followed, student
achievement data was utilized to rate schools on a scale of “exemplary,” “recognized,”
“acceptable,” and “unacceptable.” Formative assessments were not required as part of
classroom instruction. Data analysis at the school site or classroom level to affect
instruction and growth of each individual student was not an area of emphasis.
Since Dr. Mendez has been in office, he has directed his staff not only to take a
variety of new actions, but also to continue those actions that had been successful.
One of the things that SPSD has continued is the implementation of the
comprehensive criterion and norm-referenced summative assessment program. Test
scores are still used to categorize school performance by the state, and the results are
still used as one measure of student achievement data. Dr Mendez, however, stated
during interviews that he makes it a practice not to pay attention to accountability
3/31/2009 88
ratings based on these tests during the year, but to focus on a value-added data
analysis approach that provides information about the growth of every student. This
one of the philosophies to which Dr. Mendez attributes the tremendous increase in the
numbers of schools that have been classified as “recognized” and “exemplary” since
he took over as superintendent.
Dr. Mendez was planning for a press conference regarding the tremendous
improvement SPSD had made as measured by the state accountability system when
the team arrived to interview him. He shared his thoughts on assessment and on the
improvement SPSD has been making on the state accountability measures:
“[Increasing the number of recognized and exemplary schools] is a
tremendous accomplishment. We’re going to celebrate. We’re going to
have a great time with this, but during the year, I’ve tried to shift the
culture of the district away from just accountability ratings. I’ve
shifted it to a value-added system, in which, of course, the growth of
every kid becomes important. You heard me talk about the AP and the
SAT - we’re emphasizing higher-level performance. And so, when you
lift the ceiling, the floor comes up with it. Accountability ratings are
based on minimum standards, and to me, that’s the floor. And if you
concentrate on that, that’s what you’re going to get. But if you
concentrate at the upper levels of performance, you’re going to get
some great results… We don’t have any new magic reading program
or math program or technology program… We just basically do what
everyone else does, but the main emphasis is pushing the growth of
every kid, and that’s what I attribute [our increased scores] to.”

Dr. Mendez has turned his personal philosophy and strategy into a district-
wide focus on student academic growth versus student academic achievement.
“Assessment” no longer refers to the standardized tests that students take at the end of
the year, but is not a vital part of the curriculum, and an important element in the
teaching and learning process. The term “value-added” was used by virtually all of
the interview subjects across all of the reform strategy focus groups when speaking of
3/31/2009 89
student achievement, teacher and administrator practice, program evaluation, and
district activities. Assessment office staff interviewed also credited the increase in
student achievement results to, “a shift in focus from achievement to growth.”
As part of the transformation, Dr. Mendez and his staff have provided and
secured extensive training for teachers and administrators on use of data to inform
instruction. The assessment office has been tasked with making sure that data is easily
accessible to all schools and offices. As a result of their efforts, electronic, on-line
rosters of student achievement results are available to teachers and administrators from
their schools and classrooms as well as in reports. Data are collected, reported, and
provided to teachers for instructional purposes in a timely manner after the assessment
instruments are administered, so that instruction may be tailored to individual student
need.
In order to reinforce and reward this focus on formative data and assessment
as a vital part of the cycle of teaching and learning, Dr. Mendez and his Chief
Academic Officer worked with the board and other stakeholder groups to ensure the
implementation of the ASPIRE reform, one aspect of which is a pay-for performance
program that provides financial rewards to teachers, administrators, and other school
personnel for student academic growth. Awards of up to $10,000 are given based on
the academic growth of all students with which the teacher has responsibility for
teaching. This has provided teachers with extrinsic motivation to carefully monitor
student assessment results and to modify or supplement instruction to ensure that all
students are making significant academic growth.
3/31/2009 90
Another step in the assessment to improve teaching and learning philosophy in
the implementation of a new formative Curriculum Based Assessment program
created by curriculum department. The Curriculum Based Assessments (CBA’s) were
developed by district staff in collaboration with teachers and administrators, and are
aligned to the standards and curriculum being taught in every school at each grade
level. They are designed to provide teachers with on-the-spot information as to which
recently-taught concepts and standards have been mastered, and which may need
additional support or re-teaching. These CBA’s are at the beginning stages of
implementation, and are currently being used by about one half of the schools.

Table 13: Assessment Rating by Rubric Component
Rubric Components
Previous Quality
3
Current Quality
5
Level of
Implementation
Summative Assessments 5 5
Formative Assessments 1 5
Data Management, Information,
and Reporting System
3 5
Analysis, Interpretation, and
Utilization of Assessment Data
3 5
Professional Development 1 5
Fiscal Support and Resources 5 5
5

Assessment is an area of strength for the Southwest Public School District.
Students are assessed using a variety of criterion-referenced (State Tests) and norm-
referenced (Stanford-10, ACT, SAT, PSAT) summative tests. Formative curriculum-
based assessments have been developed and are being implemented in schools
throughout the district. Two years ago, the district began the ASPIRE program, which
emphasizes a growth model of student achievement, based on assessment data and
offers financial rewards to teachers and staff whose students perform in the top two
quartiles of student growth rates. The system of accessing and analyzing student data
3/31/2009 91
is comprehensive, and extensive Professional Development is provided to teachers and
administrators in order to ensure that the data is utilized effectively to promote the
growth of every student. Having high levels of attainment in all components of the
rubric, a score of 5 (high) was given for the current quality of the assessment program
in SPSD. Although implementation of the current formative assessment program was
uneven across schools, occurring in only about half, the program is new and systemic
approach ensures full implementation is on the horizon. In addition, implementation
of all of the components of the summative assessment program is evident across all
schools. For these reasons, a rubric score of 5 (high) was also given in the area of
implementation.
Curriculum
Table 14: Rubric Scoring of Curriculum
House Elements Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the Difference
Between Pre and Post
Implementation
Strategies / Action Steps
Curriculum
2 5
Previously, curricular choices
had been left to schools and
regional districts under the
decentralized system. While
many aspects of SPSD remain
decentralized, curriculum is
now centralized and
mandated.
• Hired new CAO
• Mandated centralized curriculum
• Created “executive principal”
positions
• Provided Leadership PD focused
on instruction and connected to
student achievement
• All curricular reform connects to
ASPIRE

Southwest Public Schools has always had a quality, centralized curriculum, but
under “decentralization,” the choice of implementation of the central curriculum or
any another curriculum had been left to the school. In addition, the centralized
curriculum that existed when Dr. Mendez took office, although considered to be of
“quality” because it was aligned to standards, was also considered to be difficult for
teachers to access, understand, and implement. Because of the lack of a central office
3/31/2009 92
mandate, and the difficulty in understanding or accessing the district materials, most
teachers and schools chose not to implement the district curriculum. At that time, here
was no conversation about implementing a required curriculum, and there was no
pressure to do so.
During interviews, a district-level curriculum administrator described the state
of curriculum when Dr. Mendez became superintendent, and some of the steps the
department took under his leadership to reduce fragmentation and create the coherency
that the district needed to move forward:
“The district had this high-quality, written document that a lot of
money had been spent writing it to match it to state standards, and
some were using it and some were not. So when Dr. Mendez came,
that began what I would call a shift - not away from decentralization,
but a shift to high standards of best practices and operations across the
school district, and that was probably no more apparent anywhere than
it was in the academic division. One thing he did was to do away with
the traditional separation of school admin and curriculum. If you look
across many large urban districts, they separate school admin and
curriculum. We joined those under one chief, and in my mind, that
helped undo what were some of the territorial battles that developed
naturally when you have multiple departments in a central office and
you’re trying to get the message across to 300 schools. The CAO used
to like to say that there was a myriad - I called it a gerbil ring - of
innovations, programs, initiatives just out across the campuses. An
extreme example was that a principal could be sold a reading program
or a writing program from a vendor and it could have no alignment to
standards. That’s what decentralization can do in its extreme, without
some standards and coherency and alignment. I think Dr. Mendez’
intent and vision was to bring that alignment.”

In order to begin implementing reform in the area of curriculum Dr. Mendez
followed his own advice to new superintendents: “Hire the best CAO you can find.”
Dr. Mendez spent six months looking for the best person for the job, stating that “It is
better to leave a position vacant than to fill it with the wrong person.” Once his new
3/31/2009 93
Chief Academic Officer was on board, she and her team set about making Dr.
Mendez’ vision of a centralized curriculum a reality.
One of the things that Dr. Mendez and his CAO did to reduce fragmentation
was to create “executive principal” positions. These executive principals work under
the direction of the chief academic officer, in collaboration with the regional
superintendents, to support principals and supervise curriculum at a small number of
assigned schools. Executive principals spend the majority of their time in schools and
classrooms, working with principals to provide professional development, coaching,
and leadership in supervision of instruction.
In alignment with the goals in the strategic plan, executive principals also
provided support for regional superintendents, and helped to close the communication
gape by bringing the message directly from Dr. Mendez and his CAO to the regional
offices and the schools. Professional development (human capital development) was
provided to teachers and administrators to assist them in understanding and
implementing the new, centralized curriculum and it’s connection to student
achievement in a value-added system. And, to further provide the coherence that the
district seemed to be missing on his arrival, Dr. Mendez and his team ensured that all
reform was connected to the four stated goals of ASPIRE. Specifically, the reforms in
the area of curriculum and curriculum based assessments connected to the “Informing
practice,” and “Improving teaching and learning” goals of ASPIRE.

3/31/2009 94
Table 15: Addressing Change in Curriculum
Strengths Challenges
• Quality, centralized curriculum
• Under decentralization, implementation of the
centralized curriculum was not mandated
• Previously existing written curriculum was difficult
to access
•
Strategies
• Hired new CAO
• Divided k-12 into elementary and secondary divisions
• Re-wrote the written curriculum in collaboration with teachers to make it more accessible to teachers and
students.
• Identified “Power Objectives” within standards
• Developed new Curriculum-based Assessments to be used for benchmarking every 6 weeks
• Created “Executive Principal” role to supervise instruction
• Implemented “Summer Leadership Conference” to foster discussion of curriculum, delivery, and assessment.
• Implemented system to bring together department chair and one additional teacher from each school four
times per year to review and update curriculum
• Linked curricular reform to ASPIRE

As mentioned above, Dr. Mendez credits much of the progress made in
curriculum reform to the new CAO he hired to run Curriculum, Instruction, and
Assessment at the executive level. For her part, the CAO divided the district up not
into regions, but into elementary and secondary divisions. She doubled the staff in the
central office curriculum department in order to gather as much expertise as possible
at each level. Working with content and instructional experts in these divisions the
Chief Academic Officer and her staff worked to re-write the curriculum, and change
the delivery system. Subject matter curriculum was aligned and mapped both
vertically across grades and horizontally across the school year (i.e. in a pacing plan).
The teams identified “Power Objectives” within standards and made the curriculum
more accessible for teachers so that it could be easily implemented. Using a
collaborative model, teams of teachers and administrators and the “superintendent’s ad
hoc committee” of teachers and instructional support staff worked together to create
3/31/2009 95
something that was standards-aligned and user-friendly. Dr. Mendez and his CAO
then mandated that it be used in all schools for all students.
In order to support the implementation of this new, centralized curriculum,
extensive professional development was provided through Summer Institutes for
school teams, principals’ meetings and leadership conferences, and site-based support.
The chief academic officer attributes the success of implementation and the culture
change to “Systems, systems, systems.” All of the professional development was part
of the superintendent’s vision for human capital development, and inextricably linked
with the “Informing practice,” and “Improving teaching and learning” goals of
ASPIRE. Professional development in the area of curriculum for teachers and
administrators focused on teaching and learning in a value-added system, connecting
instruction to assessment and to student achievement.
As part of the link between curriculum and assessment, The CAO and her team
also ended the administration of what had been known as nine-week “snapshot”
assessments. The previous nine-week assessments were described as follows by a
district curriculum office staff member:
“The electronic packages and houses and assessments for the
curriculum just weren’t very good. That added to teachers not using
them because they weren’t easy to access. They had nine-week
benchmarks that went out – they were called benchmarks – and it took
anywhere from a few days to two weeks to get the results back to the
campuses. So you had what I call the activity of central office sending
out a test and forcing people to give it, and then send it back to central
office and wait a long time for the results. It was a mess. Anyway,
they weren’t being used, so one of the first things [the CAO] did was to
dispense with the nine-week “snapshot” system. Well, if you don’t
have a curriculum benchmarking system, then you really don’t have
people using your written curriculum, so we launched off on creating
something better.”

3/31/2009 96
In the place of the nine-week snapshot assessments, the teams created new six-week
Curriculum Based Assessments, or CBA’s to be used in benchmarking student
achievement. The new CBA’s come sooner in the semesters, are based on smaller
chunks of curriculum, and the results are delivered to the schools in a timely manner,
for use in planning instruction. In addition, SPSD is in the process of purchasing an
electronic system that will allow teachers to create web-based common assessments
based on the centralized curriculum to supplement the district CBA’s.
At the time of this study, the new Curriculum Based Assessments (CBA’s) had
been fully developed but were being implemented in only about 50% of secondary
schools. The implementation of the curriculum in schools and classrooms was
uneven, but was a focal point for the district in PD and in staffing. The newly created
executive principals were responsible for ensuring the implementation of the
curriculum and the CBA’s in schools and supervision of instruction in designated
feeder patterns. Additionally, to increase buy-in, quality, and implementation rates,
Dr. Mendez and the CAO developed a system to bring together the department chair
and one additional teacher from each school four times per year to review and update
curriculum in each subject area.
In order to, as the CAO described, “frame curricular reform in the larger
context of student learning,” a concerted effort has been made to link all curricular
reform to ASPIRE. During the interviews a curriculum office staff member described
the challenge and strategy of linking the implementation of the curriculum to ASPIRE:
“So now we’re really under the challenge of ‘how do we get schools to
use [the CBA’s and centralized curriculum] after years of
decentralization? What’s out there other than the superintendent telling
them to do it or the principals telling them to do it when we are in a
3/31/2009 97
state environment that is highly driven by state test scores?’ So we still
are challenged with urban kids who are behind at every grade level, and
we still are challenged with what I call the “drill and kill” mentality –
you know – four or five months before the tests let’s stop teaching any
kind of curriculum and just kill ourselves to make sure that the kids
pass the test. If you’ve heard anything about our value-added system, I
think slowly over the next three years teachers are going to see that it’s
going to pay them to teach a broad-based curriculum because kids are
going to have that improvement yearly, and it’s going to be more about
true college readiness than it is about just passing the test.”

As with other areas, Dr. Mendez’ focus on providing coherence, developing human
capital, using data-driven decision-making, and a emphasizing a value-added approach
to looking at student achievement is evident in the curriculum reform he has
implemented.

Table 16: Curriculum Rating by Rubric Component
Rubric Components
Previous Quality
2.2
Current Quality
5
Level of
Implementation
Alignment to Learning
Standards and Assessments
3 5
Equal Access to Learning
Standards
3 5
Fidelity in Implementation 1 5
Sufficiency of and
Appropriateness of Materials
3 5
Clear and Regular Procedures
to Review and Update the
Curriculum
1 5
3

The quality of the curriculum in Southwest Public School District was score 5
(high), based on the rubric level of each on the five components. The curriculum is
based on content standards and aligned to assessments. The district provides pacing
plans and sufficient books and materials, both required and supplemental, that are
appropriate for and culturally relevant to students. This curriculum is designed to
optimize learning and access to learning standards for all students, including English
Learners and students with disabilities. A system has been put in place for teams to
3/31/2009 98
regularly review and update the curriculum and related assessments. While fidelity in
implementation of the curriculum still has a degree of variability form school to
school, at the systemic level, the district clearly communicates, provides adequate
funding for, and demonstrates a long-term commitment to full implementation through
its support of schools and professional development. In the area of extent of
implementation, however, the variability in implementation from school to school
earns the district a score of 3 (medium).

Professional Development
Table 17: Rubric Scoring of Professional Development
House Elements Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the Difference
Between Pre and Post
Implementation
Strategies / Action Steps
Professional
Development
3 5 Under “fee for service”
model, district PD providers
have improved the quality,
variety, and availability of
services. Due to demand from
schools, the department has
expanded from 25 to 150
members.
• Strong focus on leadership
development
• Dramatic shift toward use of data
• Balance of systemic approach to
PD with decentralized “fee for
service” model
• “Summer Institute,” for teachers
and administrators sets tone/focus
for school year
• All PD connects to ASPIRE

Under previous administrations, after decentralization, Professional
Development on a specific topic or from a specific provider, such as the central office
staff, was not mandatory. In addition, the system for providing, sharing, and tracking
Professional Development was not systemic. In 2002, under Dr. Mendez’
predecessor, Professional Development became a “fee for service” program. This
meant that schools could choose to use or not use the district’s professional
development team. The Assistant Superintendent in charge of professional
development describes the situation as follows:
3/31/2009 99
The district had decentralized other services like the print shop and the
post office, and other business services, and they decided they wanted
to decentralize and academic department, and we were the lucky folks
who got chosen. It was after a whole year of study that we all went in
and shared our budgets and it was decided that we were the ones. It
probably was the best thing that ever happened to the central
professional development department because we really learned very
quickly that we had to focus on the needs of schools and respond. They
were our customers and we really needed to respond to them and we
couldn’t just deliver canned sort of trainings. We became experts in
customization…our existence depends on us meeting the needs of the
schools and departments… If a school or department wants us to
provide training, they have to pay for it. It makes us very, very
accountable because it’s each one of those responsibilities that we are
hired to do and we have to be responsive.

Under Dr. Mendez’ administration, while many aspects of professional
development have remained decentralized, certain kinds of professional development
have been mandated, and paid for by the central office. He and his staff have created a
balance of a systemic approach to professional development while maintaining the
decentralized “fee for service” model. Dr. Mendez has created a strong focus on
leadership development and a dramatic shift toward use of data. He has implemented
a “Summer Institute,” for teachers and administrators which sets tone/focus for school
year, and has made sure that, like with other reforms, professional development
connects to and supports the four goals of ASPIRE.

3/31/2009 100
Table 18: Addressing Change in Professional Development
Strengths Challenges
• Fee for Service model ensures quality & focus on
needs of schools
• Talented PD providers

• History of decentralization and lack of mandated PD
• Finding adequate funding to implement all desired
changes
• Meeting the needs of the schools & staying current
in research and pedagogy
Strategies
• Strong focus on leadership development
• Dramatic shift toward use of data
• Balance of systemic approach to PD with decentralized “fee for service” model
• Mandate certain PD for all schools (e.g. Academic Literacy or Marzano’s High-yield Strategies) funded
by district
• All PD connects to ASPIRE systemic approach to school reform: (1) Developing human capital; (2)
Informing practice; (3) Recognizing excellence; and (4) Improving teaching and learning

Under the current administration, professional development has undergone
many significant changes. Dr. Mendez and his Chief Academic Officer have sought to
build on the strengths on the district professional development division, while bringing
additional emphasis and coherence by connecting professional development to district
initiatives and reforms. One of the biggest changes under Dr. Mendez has been the
“dramatic shift” toward the use of data. Data has become both a topic of professional
development and a tool used as a means of determining what professional
development is needed to further the goals of the district. The professional
development staff describe the some of the shifts when Dr. Mendez came onboard:
A shift in terms of what we were doing since [Dr. Mendez] got here
was a stronger focus on leadership development, and a dramatic shift
toward the use of data. That was almost like a fire hydrant – it was just
data, data, data, so there was a huge shift in terms of what we included
in our training, and how we used data…Another of the biggest
differences is an obvious focus on the system, as opposed to, in a
decentralized environment when everyone operated under a general
framework, but people were pretty much their own little ships.

Dr. Mendez has been described by staff as, “a strong supporter of professional
development,” who has, “an unwavering focus on student achievement.” Under his
3/31/2009 101
leadership, the chief academic officer has implemented a balance of a new, district-
wide, systemic approach to professional development, while maintaining the
decentralized “fee for service” model. One of the ways in which she has done this is
to mandate certain professional development for all schools. Specific curricular topics
and research-based best practices identified by the district, such as Academic Literacy
or Marzano’s High-yield Strategies, are required to be implemented throughout the
district’s schools to improve teaching and learning. This professional development is
funded by district, so that schools do not need to dip into their own professional
development budgets.
Schools still have the option to hire the central office professional development
staff or any other outside providers to deliver other professional development as
determined by local school needs. Under this model, due to the increasing excellence
in the quality of professional development provided by the central office staff, and the
high demand for their services from the schools, the professional development
department has expanded from 25 to 150 staff members/providers. The fee for service
program has allowed this increase in staffing has been funded by the professional
development budgets at the schools, keeping more of the funding within the district,
and less going to outside agencies or providers.
To support the improvement of teaching and learning, Dr. Mendez has brought
a strong focus on leadership development to the professional development department.
He has created a position specifically to be in charge of leadership development
programs. One of these programs is the new Aspiring Principals’ Institute. This
institute was developed in partnership with Harvard University. It is a competitive,
3/31/2009 102
one year, full-time internship program in which those who desire to become principals
can gain training and on-site experience in school leadership. In the most recent year
of the program, there were more than 250 applicants, of whom 28 were accepted and
enrolled in the program.
In addition recruiting and training new principals, the new leadership
development programs and specific professional development for administrators have
strengthened recruitment and support for assistant principals, academic deans, and
other administrators. All new administrators now attend “Survival Camp,” and have
mentors and support providers assigned to them. The additional support and training
has lead to higher retention rates among staff.
In order to do the same for new or aspiring teachers, the professional
development department has created similar programs for teachers. One of these
programs is the tuition-based Alternative Certification Program for teachers coming
from other careers. This program was created to make the transition to teaching as a
second career more manageable, and to encourage talented individuals to join the
ranks of SPSD’s teaching force. In addition, to support, develop and retain new
teachers once they have been hired, Southwest Public Schools has created the
ABRAZO new teacher professional development and support system, which provides
two years of mentoring for teachers in their first or second years of teaching.
Professional development is one of the main vehicles Southwest Public
Schools is leveraging to implement the goals of Dr. Mendez’ ASPIRE systemic
approach to school reform: (1) Developing human capital; (2) Informing practice; (3)
Recognizing excellence; and (4) Improving teaching and learning. Professional
3/31/2009 103
development is now provided in a systemic way that is allows the district to improve
the development of human capital through the new leadership and certification
programs, teach teachers and administrators to use data to inform their practice, and
provide new strategies and techniques to improve teaching and learning.

Table 19: Professional Development Rating by Rubric Component
Rubric Components
Previous Quality
3
Current Quality
5
Level of
Implementation
Designing Professional
Development
3 5
Implementing Professional
Development
3 5
Evaluating and Improving
Professional Development
3 5
Sharing Professional
Development Learning
3 5
5

Southwest Public School District’s reforms and strategies implemented in the
area of professional development were scored as 5 (high) in both quality and
implementation. This has been an area of focus for Dr. Mendez, building on the
strengths of the strategies implemented by the previous administrations, and adding
new programs and coherence. SPSD’s professional development plan includes
budgeted, incorporates the most current, research-based strategies and best practices,
is based on a needs assessment using data, and is aligned to district-wide goals.
Professional development is an integral part of the district culture, and supports the
district’s organizational structures and policies. Professional development is evaluated
to improve teaching and learning, increase student achievement, and make necessary
modifications to programs or plans on an on-going basis.

3/31/2009 104
HR System and Human Capital Management
Table 20: Rubric Scoring of HR System and Human Capital Management
House Elements Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the Difference
Between Pre and Post
Implementation
Strategies / Action Steps
HR System and
Human Capital
Management
3 5 SPSD has implemented “pay
for performance” incentive
systems under the “ASPIRE”
program. The Board has
placed a high priority on HR,
and on attracting, supporting,
retaining personnel.
• Marketing team employed to
attract teachers and staff
• Comprehensive approach to human
resources through ASPIRE
• Performance pay as part of
ASPIRE
• Sign-on bonuses for teachers in
hard-to-staff fields
• Teacher and Leadership
professional development and
support

Southwest Public Schools has always had difficulty attracting and retaining
qualified teachers. Previous human resources plans were described by a human
resources staff member as, “more operations-focused and less strategic.” Under
previous administrations, SPSD has had a recruiting plan, an example of which was a
recruiting campaign of “Will you be my teacher?” The phrase, along with pictures of
SPSD students, was posted on billboards and in newspapers. Efforts have also been
made for Southwest Public School District to make their salary scale competitive with
surrounding districts.
Southwest Public Schools human resources staff had tried a variety of other
strategies to recruit, retain, and reward staff at different times. During a prior
administration, SPSD had implemented a performance incentive program called
“Second Mile,” which rewarded teachers and administrators for student achievement,
but because of the way the program was structures, the financial awards went to the
staff of high performing schools, regardless of individual performance, and morale in
the district decreased. Another incentive program had also been implemented, under
which teachers received compensation for remaining at Title I schools. Despite the
3/31/2009 105
considerable expenditures, neither program was found to have a positive, lasting
impact on either recruitment or retention.
During the course of this study, evidence of the existence of a comprehensive
plan of support or development for either new teachers or new administrators under
previous administrations was not found.

Table 21: Addressing Change in HR Systems and Human Capital Management
Strengths Challenges
• History of achievement in the district
• “Can Do Pride” in Southwest Public School
District
• Intense focus on Human Resources

• Competition with suburban districts for “best”
teachers
• Baby boomers reaching retirement age and leaving
the district
Strategies
• Board placed priority on HR – attracting, supporting, retaining personnel.
• Performance pay as part of ASPIRE value-added system – potential to earn additional $10,000 per year
• Sign-on bonuses of $6,000 over two years for teachers in hard-to-staff fields
• Marketing team employed to take advantage of ASPIRE awards and attract teachers and staff
• Data system employed to track qualifications, qualities, preparation of successful and unsuccessful
teachers
• One-year performance contracts for principals

While Dr. Mendez has been in office, the Board has placed a heavy emphasis
on human resources, with the strategic plan including goals around human capital
development in attracting, supporting, retaining personnel. The emphasis by the
board and in the strategic plan, as well as the development and implementation of
ASPIRE have led to significant improvements and innovations on the human
resources front. Interview subjects on the human resources staff credit the ASPIRE
model for human capital development for much of the improvement in the district.
As part of the resource alignment that is evident in the reforms that Dr.
Mendez has implemented, human resources reforms have been funded to achieve
3/31/2009 106
stated goals. Southwest Public School District has set aside funds in the budget create
and hire a marketing team whose job is to recruit highly qualified teachers.
Partnerships have been developed with universities and industry so that an alternative
certification program can offered to make teaching an attractive second career choice
for potential teachers coming from private industry. Personnel resources have been
allocated to build relationships with universities so that recruitment can happen prior
to and outside of job fairs. Funding has been set aside to attract teachers in hard to
staff subject areas. These teachers are given sign-on bonuses of up to $6,000 over two
years. In addition, the ASPIRE program offers financial rewards of up to $10,000 to
teachers whose students show outstanding academic growth. The HR staff feel that all
of these programs and incentives, especially ASPIRE, will pay off by helping to
recruit teachers from the suburbs. When asked about the impact of the pay-for-
performance aspect of ASPIRE in retaining teachers, however, one of the interviewees
responded: “That seems to be the single component that most people associate with
the entire program, but it’s important to recognize that it’s a full program and that’s
just one piece of it.”
Another piece of the ASPIRE program, which is designed to help retain
teachers, is the extensive professional development. According to human resources
staff, “The human resources components of ASPIRE reside in professional
development.” Teachers and administrators receive professional development in
curriculum, instruction, leadership and best practices, designed to develop human
capital and improve teaching and learning. Additional professional development is
3/31/2009 107
provided in data analysis to help teachers and administrators better use data to inform
practice.
To further address the issues of teacher and administrator retention, mentoring
and support is provided for both groups. Administrators may apply and be selected for
the “Aspiring Principals’ Academy” where they complete a one-year internship, and
all new administrators attend “Survival Camp” and are assigned mentors and support
providers. New teachers participate in the ABRAZO program, in which they are
assigned mentor teachers, and provided with certification classes if necessary. The
new systems Dr. Mendez has put into place are already having positive effects; here
were 125 fewer resignations during the 2007-2008 school year than there were during
2006-2007.
To study the recruitment and retention phenomena in relation to success in
improving teaching and learning, and to inform human relations recruiting practice,
Dr. Mendez has turned once again to his model of data-driven decision making. A
data system has been developed and employed to track qualifications, qualities, and
preparation of both successful and unsuccessful teachers. In this way, human
resources staff are able to determine which programs and universities prepare the most
successful teachers, and they are able to adjust recruiting and preparation programs
within the district.
Everything in human resources and human capital management is connected to
ASPIRE systemic approach to school reform: (1) Developing human capital; (2)
Informing practice; (3) Recognizing excellence; and (4) Improving teaching and
learning
3/31/2009 108
Table 22: HR System and Human Capital Management Rating by Rubric Component
Rubric Components
Previous Quality
3
Current Quality
5
Level of
Implementation
Recruitment, Selection and
Placement of new
Administrators
3 5
Recruitment of Highly
Qualified Teachers

3

5
Teacher Support and
Development
3 5
Salaries, Wages and Benefits 3 5
Use of Incentives 3 5
4

In the area of human resources and human capital management, the quality of
Southwest Public School District’s reforms were scored as a 5 (high) in all of the five
component areas. Data was used in the recruitment of employees and in developing
programs to meet their needs. Compensation and incentives were used in the
recruitment process. The district provides support programs for new teachers and
administrators, and on-going professional development for all staff, and SPSD works
to maintain competitive salary and compensation packages. In level of
implementation, due to the recency of the implementation of the ASPIRE program and
some of the new leadership and professional development programs, as well as the
new programs that have yet to be implemented, SPSD’s implementation of its human
resources reform was scored as a 4, indicating a high, but not full level of
implementation.

3/31/2009 109
Finance and Budget
Table 23: Rubric Scoring of Finance and Budget
House Elements Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the Difference
Between Pre and Post
Implementation
Strategies / Action Steps
Finance and
Budget
4 4 A modified version of zero-
based budgeting has been
implemented by Dr. Mendez.
Divisions must demonstrate
how programs & FTE’s will
further progress toward the
five goals each year.
• All programs and expenditures
must meet one of the five goals of
the district
• Implemented “modified zero-
based budgeting,”
• On-going budget workshops
provided on legislature and current
issues for board
• Collaborative effort – CFO &
fiscal staff meet with division
chiefs & direct reports

Due to his experiences as a superintendent, and an assistant superintendent in
business services, Dr. Mendez is very knowledgeable in the area of budget and
finance. According to budget and finance staff, the district’s budget is very “healthy.”
Under Dr. Mendez’ leadership, all budgetary decisions are made jointly by the Chief
Financial Officer, the controller, and upper and middle management, in collaboration
with the superintendent and the board of education. In order to ensure that everyone is
up to date on the latest laws and requirements, on-going budget workshops provided
on legislature and current issues for board and other staff members. Under the current
model, to be approved, all allocations expenditures must be tied to one of the district’s
five goals, as set by the board. Dr. Mendez has implemented a modified version of
zero-based budgeting, and divisions must demonstrate, on an annual basis, how all
programs, expenditures, and positions will further the district’s progress toward one or
more of its stated goals in order to maintain funding.

3/31/2009 110
Table 24: Addressing Change in Finance and Budget
Strengths Challenges
• Experienced, strong staff with long institutional
memory
• Superintendent experienced, knowledgeable in
budget & finance

• Declining enrollment leading to limited resources
• Competing interests of divisions, schools, offices for
same pool of funds
• Funding structure from state changes every two
years
• Decentralization
Strategies
• Modified zero-based budgeting implemented
• All expenditures approved or denied based on alignment with and furtherance of district goals
• With board approval, funds set aside each year for ASPIRE awards/incentives

Even prior to Dr. Mendez’s administration, Southwest Public School District
had a strong fiscal team, many of whose members had considerable experience and
institutional memory. According to the CFO, however, previous superintendents did
not have as much knowledge or understanding of the budget as Dr. Mendez, and so
had less involvement in some of the technical areas. “We get a different tone of
questions from Dr. Mendez. He keeps finance on its toes,” stated one interviewee. In
this way, Dr. Mendez is also able to assist the board and the finance team in
understanding and working with the state funding structure, which changes every two
years with the legislature.
Upon his arrival, Dr. Mendez was also able to use his knowledge and
experience to make some changes in the already strong department. One of the things
he did was to implement a modified version of zero-based budgeting, requiring all
schools and offices to justify their expenditures and staffing. The district budget and
finance staff described the current process for making decisions about funding
programs and initiatives under Dr. Mendez’ data-driven decision-making model:
3/31/2009 111
You just can’t come in and say “I need $100,000 for this program and I
don’t have it.” We go back and we look at [the school or department’s]
previous budget and see if they’re leaving money on the table or what’s
happening. The we ask, “Ok, this program that you want to bring in -
how does it contribute to the goals of the district?” And so, each time
we’re bringing a program in, they have to show how it will contribute
to the goals of the district… The whole premise of what the district
functions on is our goals and objectives, as set forth by the board, and
so there’s not a lot of point in trying to address something if it’s not
going to help us accomplish our goals. So, from that standpoint,
everything we do is geared toward accomplishing the goals that this
board and Dr. Mendez have set for the district, and so we, on an annual
basis, examine the budget and say, “Ok, if we have a program that’s
being introduced that we think is going to further our goals and
objectives, then how can we drive the money to that purpose?”
Sometimes it’s repurposing money in the budget, and sometimes it’s a
matter of having to cut something, so we look at what’s not being
effective, and try to weed out the things that are not accomplishing our
goals and put the money toward something new.

One of the goals of Dr. Mendez, the budget and finance department, and the
board is to funnel as much funding as possible to the schools. Increasing costs and
state mandates have increased demand on the general fund, forcing SPSD to cut
funding to divisions and offices. Getting adequate funding to the schools has become
increasingly challenging as well with increasing home prices in the city forcing more
and more families to the suburbs. Declining enrollment in the schools has precipitated
school closures and consolidation in order for the district to remain solvent and able to
offer the best programs in the most modern schools for all students. Dr. Mendez and
his staff worked to help pass a bond measure to fund the school modernization, and
hope that increasing the quality of education provided will bring more students back to
the public schools, and increase the available pool of funds. These challenges in fully
funding schools lend even more importance to the rule that all expenditures further
achievement of the district’s goals.
3/31/2009 112
In concert with the requirement that all expenditures align with and further
district’s stated goals, Dr. Mendez has worked with the board to leverage funding for
the pay-for-performance incentive portion of ASPIRE. When, for example, in 2006,
the district had funds to give the teachers a three percent raise for the 2007-2008
school year, Dr. Mendez was able to put aside one third of that funding to pay for the
ASPIRE awards. Finance and budget, as with all of the reforms Dr. Mendez has
implemented, has direct ties to the goals of ASPIRE.

Table 25: Finance and Budget Rating by Rubric Component
Rubric Components
Previous Quality
3.7
Current Quality
4.3
Level of
Implementation
Strategic Budget Planning 3 5
Organizational Culture 3 3
Operational Procedures 5 5
5

Southwest Public Schools scored 4.3 (high) as an overall score in the area of
budget and finance. Strengths were noted in strategic budget planning and operational
procedures, which were both scored as 5 (highest). In the area of strategic budget
planning, the highest score was attained because of the close alignment of the budget
to the district’s mission, vision, instructional goals, and instructional priorities.
Exemplary organizational procedures included explicit training and procedures for
schools and offices, the use of annual reviews and audits to make operational
improvements, and effective controls for resource management. In the area of
Organizational culture, SPSD was scored as a 3 (medium) due the fact that
participation in the budget process is largely limited to upper and middle management.
Implementation of the district’s financial reforms was rated as a 5 (highest).

3/31/2009 113
Communications
Table 26: Rubric Scoring of Communications
House Elements Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the Difference
Between Pre and Post
Implementation
Strategies / Action Steps
Communication 3 3 The district has hired a
marketing team to improve
the community’s perception
of the SPSD, to encourage
public school attendance, and
to recruit highly qualified
teachers.
• Three Prong approach: Press
Office, Instructional Media Office,
Web Portal
• E-news letter with message from
superintendent for internal and
external audience
• Positive stories written broadcast
style for use by print and television
media
• Marketing team and
Communications offices frontload
positive SPSD news stories

The Southwest Public School District has been working to improve
communications for several years. In response to the district receiving some bad
press, under a previous superintendent’s administration, a press secretary was hired to
head up the division and the district began hiring journalists, rather than educators, to
work in its press office. This allowed positive stories to be written broadcast style for
use by print and television media outlets. This same previous superintendent also
established a cable news channel for SPSD and began producing the district’s
coverage of its own positive stories for the community. Under Dr. Mendez’
administration, use of the internet for the district website and both internal and
external electronic communications, has increased, and a marketing team has been
hired to continue the district’s efforts to improve its image.
3/31/2009 114
Table 27: Addressing Change in Communications
Communications Strengths Challenges
• A variety of communication methods are used
• Communications staff have journalism
backgrounds
• Communication is delivered in many languages
• Public sentiment about the district is not always
positive
• Family and community communication is not
optimum
• Two way communication remains a challenge
Strategies
• Establishment of marketing team
• Extensive use of website and electronic publications
• Print and audio-visual media stories are produced by district staff and sent to external media outlets
• Connect-Ed voice messages sent en masse to parents and/or staff
• Town hall meetings have recently been implemented

Southwest Public School District has a three-prong approach to its
communications plan. These three prongs are the press office, the instructional media
office, and the web portal. The Press Office handles outside print and television
media; the Instructional Media group runs an internal television program, and shares
information with outside media as well; and the web portal, which has recently
undergone many changes and upgrades, is used for both internal and external
communications. Press Office and Instructional media personnel have journalism
backgrounds, and have been working hard to pitch positive stories to the external
media. Through it’s tracking system, the communications office has calculated that
60% of the stories about SPSD are positive, which demonstrates a marked increase.
In addition to improving test scores and accountability progress reports, one of
the things contributing to the recent increase in positive stories under Dr. Mendez is
the recently-established marketing committee. This committee is working to improve
SPSD’s public image in order to attract more students to the district, as well as to
attract more highly qualified teachers in alignment with the goals of the board and
ASPIRE. In addition, much recent work has been focused on electronic
communications. The SPSD website includes free, subscription-based “e-news”
3/31/2009 115
publications for internal and external communication, posted information and notices
for parents, students, staff and community, and streaming video and other professional
development vehicles for teachers.
Communication with families and the community continues to be a challenge.
In addition to the strategies mentioned above, the district has implemented the
“Connect-Ed” telephone voice message system, which allows a recorded message to
be sent out to specified groups of staff or parents in multiple languages. Despite the
variety of ways in which SPSD attempts to communicate with its constituents, it has
failed to establish enough meaningful two-way communication to satisfy the
community. Increasing and improving communication continues to be a goal for the
communications office, the superintendent, and the board.

Table 28: Communications Rating by Rubric Component
Rubric Components
Previous Quality
3
Current Quality
3
Level of
Implementation
Communications Plan 3 3
Communications Office 3 3
Communication of District
Vision to the Community
3 3
Build Support for District
Initiatives
3 3
Two-way Communications
with Community
3 3
3

In the area of Communications, SPSD scored a 3 (medium) in all of the
components of communication, and in the implementation of those components. The
communication plan is aligned with the strategic plan, and it attempts to address the
needs of all stakeholders. Office staff are available to assist schools and offices with
their communication needs. The office seems to be adequately staffed, and it staff
regularly contact constituents with news of upcoming events, initiatives and decisions.
3/31/2009 116
Schools are encouraged to communicate through newsletters and notices to parents.
The district is beginning to implement focus groups and town hall meetings on a
periodic basis in order to improve two-way communication with staff, students,
parents, and community.

Governance and Board Relations
Table 29: Rubric Scoring of Governance and Board Relations
House Elements Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the Difference
Between Pre and Post
Implementation
Strategies / Action Steps
Governance and
Board Relations
3 5 Board members communicate
with superintendent’s direct
reports. Formal “Strategic
Plan” developed &
implemented.
• Annual Board retreat to set
vision, goals, priorities for district,
write Strategic Plan
• Working groups established in
the areas of the board priorities
• Extensive training for all board
members, especially new
members

Governance and the school board play a large role in the functioning of the
Southwest Public School District. A senior staff member describes the role of
governance and the board:
Governance is the foundation of what the board does, and what makes
this district tick. It’s the largest entity of its type in this city, and we
have policy that’s in place, that’s updated periodically, that’s based on
the state Association of School Boards policy…Governance is the
raison d’etre [of the board]. It’s what they’re there to do. They don’t
micromanage. We don’t have a lot of board committees; in fact we
maybe have one or two board committees. Some urban school boards,
I think, have many committees. The thought several years ago was that
they did not want to micromanage the district. They wanted to be
involved in the larger issues.

In being involved in “the larger issues” in SPSD, the nine-member, elected
school board has an annual retreat with the superintendent and senior staff, during
which they define the district’s vision and set the district’s priorities for the year.
3/31/2009 117
Under a previous superintendent’s tenure, the district established what they called the
“Board Monitoring System” and the “Superintendent Assessment Tools” to monitor
and assess the progress of the district and the performance of the superintendent.
Although the board has traditionally steered away from committees, as part of its
desire to refrain from micromanagement, recently working groups have been
established in the board priority areas.

Table 30: Addressing Change in Governance and Board Relations
Strengths Challenges
• Active and interested board
• History of establishing goals and monitoring
progress
• A nine-member board is difficult to keep together
• Consolidation affects different members’ regions
differently
• Recent retirements have led to new board members
who are not supportive of the superintendent
Strategies
• Focus by superintendent on spending time with, communicating with, and collaborating with board
members
• Superintendent has weekly meeting with board president
• Superintendent sends weekly written communication to all board members
• Increased training for all board members in areas of priorities
• Working groups established by Dr. Mendez and the board in the areas of board priorities to improve
communication and partnership
• Directs access for board members to senior staff in order to improve communication

For the first few year of his tenure, Dr. Mendez enjoyed a good – if
challenging and time-consuming – relationship with his nine-member school board.
Under his guidance, the board moved from using only its Board Monitoring System to
the implementation of a strategic plan to develop and assess progress toward goals. Dr
Mendez invested in copious amounts of training for the board in current research and
pedagogy as well as budget and finance, policy, and the legislative process. He
increased communication with and the flow of information to and from the board by
sending members a weekly written communication and allowing members direct
access to senior staff. Senior staff arranged meetings, workshops, and “board
3/31/2009 118
activities” at least once a week to keep members updated on current issues, board
interests, and initiatives.
Dr. Mendez encouraged the board to take an active role in researching areas of
priority. Working with the board, he established work groups – not committees – to
research and develop recommendations to be shared with the other members in the
areas of priority that had been established at the January retreat. An example of this
was the recent rip that one of the board members took with Dr. Mendez to New York
to learn what another district was doing in the SPSD propriety area of human capital
development. The information gained could be used to support and further develop
ASPIRE, and to evaluate the progress SPSD was making in developing human capital.
Dr. Mendez not only encouraged the board to take an active, informed role in
the district priorities, but also gave them credit for doing so. His skill in collaboration
and working with the board was evident during interviews regarding the
implementation of ASPIRE, and specifically on the pay-for-performance incentive
aspect. Dr. Mendez spoke of the hours and hours of working with the board and
studying the reform with them, in an effort to persuade them that this reform would
bring about positive change for the district. When the former board president spoke
about the planning and implementation process, she described a board that had so
completely bought in to the idea, that they believed it was their own:
[Pay-for-performance] was board-driven. That was the whole thing, so
the board had to stand and take the hit. The way performance pay came
about was that Dr. Mendez had announced a three percent across the
board pay increase. And the board - several board members - held out
for some percentage for performance pay and that became one percent.
It was not [Dr. Mendez’] recommendation. So there you had it, so [Dr.
Mendez] said ‘alright.’ …That’s one way to make a board stand there
and take it, is when it’s their idea. So not only was it our idea to do it,
3/31/2009 119
but it was also our idea not to do what Denver and other people had
done, which was to spend four years planning it.

Due to recent retirements among board members, for school year 2008-2009,
the SPSD school board has two new members and a new president. The new board
has been described by a senior staff member as “extremely indecisive,” with a need to
be “more together” on issues. This change in board membership and leadership has
been extremely challenging for Dr. Mendez and his staff. A senior staff member
describes the situation:
I have a huge, immense amount of admiration for Dr. Mendez in what
he has to put up with. He’s trying to manage the biggest business in the
city, and [the board members] all have different needs, and they all
have different expectations, and some of them are more outspoken than
others, and something makes it to the press, and it blindsides him.
There’s been some rough goings, in spite of the progress that the
district is making. I think from Dr. Mendez’ standpoint, it must be a
little aggravating. But I look to Dr. Mendez as the leader that he is, and
he’s taking us in the right direction…I’ve developed a real appreciation
for the role of the board president and the importance of that role in
helping other board members and keeping other board members in a
direction…The level of focus and the level of control in the area of
managing conversations, where we spend our time, how things function
is critical to the role of the president. And I think for Dr. Mendez,
every time the president changes, it’s a new ballgame. It’s a whole new
dynamic when you get a new president and two new board members…

Under the new leadership and with the new membership, board members are
not all following protocols, and are challenging Dr. Mendez’ leadership. The two new
members have announced that they will not be attending the January board retreat, and
ran for their seats on a promise to remove Dr. Mendez from his position based on
community concerns regarding a perceived inequity in which areas of the city that are
most affected by consolidation. The majority of schools that will be closed are in
areas that are predominantly African American. The bond measure supporting the
3/31/2009 120
consolidations and modernization passed in the city despite the resistance form the
white mayor and the African American community. Dr. Mendez faults insufficient,
ineffective communication regarding the issues behind consolidation for the
dissatisfaction in the community.
Board relations can make or break the tenure and success of any
superintendent. Dr. Mendez offered the following advice to new superintendents: “The
status quo is not acceptable; the system must change. The amount of change a system
can take is based on the relationships that you establish early on. Make the changes,
and survive as long as you can.” The former board president offered the following
advice for survival: “Keep your board together, and never move on anything that
results in a split board or negative votes for board members.

Table 31: Governance and Board Relations Rating by Rubric Component
Rubric Components
Previous Quality
3
Current Quality
3.8
Level of
Implementation
Setting the Direction for the
Community’s Schools
3 5
Establishing an Effective and
Efficient Structure for the
District
3 3
Providing Support and
Resources
3 3
Ensuring Accountability to the
Public
3 5
Actions as Community
Leaders
3 3
3

Southwest Public School District was scored as a 3.8 (medium) in the area of
the quality of its governance and board relations strategies and reforms. Some
exemplary practices in SPSD include the following: the board’s leadership in
establishing a vision and specific goals for the district and for student achievement;
implementing a system for monitoring student achievement and evaluating progress
3/31/2009 121
made toward district goals; and the board’s alignment and allocation of resources and
budget to the goals and instructional priorities. While many of the rubric components
of governance and board relations were scored as 5 (highest), two of the areas were
scored as 3 (medium), due to recent changes in the membership of the board. These
changes have led to a lack of full support for the superintendent, and an occasional
lapse in professional demeanor, such as refusing to attend the January board retreat.
Implementation was scored as a 3 (medium) due to the ongoing challenges at the time
of this study in bringing all nine board members together on the same page to establish
and accomplish new goals.

Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations
Table 32: Rubric Scoring of Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations
House Elements Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the Difference
Between Pre and Post
Implementation
Strategies / Action Steps
Labor Relations
and Contract
Negotiations
2 2 Although SPSD is located in a
right to work state, the
superintendent has directed
CBO to design and implement
a formal appeals process for
unions
• HR recommends salary &
increases, to be approved by the
board
• Unions bring issues to monthly
“Consultation “ meetings with
CBO and management staff –
superintendent not included, but
has open door policy
• CBO working with committee to
develop a formal appeals process
for union issues

Southwest Public School District is located in a “right to work” state, which
means that the state has laws that prohibit employers and unions from making
agreements to collect dues as a requirement of employment. Collective bargaining,
therefore, does not play a role in labor relations or contract negotiations. The human
resources department in SPSD is responsible for hiring and firing employees, as well
as making recommendations for compensation. Compensation structures and salary
3/31/2009 122
increases are then approved by the school board. Prior to Dr. Mendez becoming
superintendent, a system was established through which unions were involved in a
“consultation” process to discuss any concerns shared by their membership, though
there existed no formal appeals process if decisions were not amenable to the
employees.

Table 33: Addressing Change in Labor Relations
Strengths Challenges
• Good relationships between management staff
and union leaders
• “Consultation” process in place to discuss
concerns and disagreements
• Union leadership is not always in agreement with
management decisions
• There is no formal collective bargaining agreement
that outlines the process for dispute or conflict
resolutions that are not solved during “consultation”
process, so many issues come up repeatedly
Strategies
• Continue Consultation process
• Add an appeals process to provide union leadership with direct access to the superintendent to resolve
conflicts and disputes that are not resolved during the first level of the consultation process

Southwest Public School District is located in a right to work state, so unions
do not have collective bargaining rights. In lieu of collective bargaining, SPSD has
developed a process called “consultation.” The consultation process is guaranteed to
employees as a part of Southwest Public School District school board policy.
Consultation allows union leaders to meet monthly with the Chief Business Officer
(CBO) and upper-level management staff to discuss a variety of issues, including
employment-related concerns.
Despite decisions being made by the CBO and management staff through the
consultation process, the same issues often come up at multiple meetings throughout
the year. In order to decrease this now common occurrence, Dr. Mendez has directed
the CBO to work with a committee to develop a formal appeals process. This formal
appeals process would require that all appeals would go to the superintendent for a
3/31/2009 123
final decision. Currently, the only real recourse that unions have when they disagree
with decisions made through the consultation process is to go to the board, the public,
or the media. Dr. Mendez’ prior position as a superintendent in the same state
provided him with extensive experience in a similar labor relations process. Interview
subjects stated that he hopes to bring to SPSD the same model for conflict resolution
that he used in his previous district.

Table 34: Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations Rating by Rubric Component
Rubric Components
Previous Quality
1.5
Current Quality
2.0
Level of
Implementation
Relationships,
Communications and Trust
3 3
Negotiation Principles and
Objectives
1 1
Strategies for Negotiation 1 1
Fair and Equitable Outcomes 1 3
3

In the area of labor relations and contract negotiations, Southwest Public
School District was scored as 2 (low) in overall quality, though it had relative
strengths in the components of relationships, communications and trust, and fair and
equitable outcomes. The district has some structures in place to ensure positive
relationships and credibility between management and the unions, and it places value
on employees and their impact on the district. In the components of negotiation
principals and objectives and strategies for negotiation, however, the lack of collective
bargaining prevents the district from receiving more than a score of 1 (lowest) in these
areas. Implementation of the strategies the district does have in place was scored as a
3 (medium), as the appeals process mentioned above is in the process of being
developed and is not yet fully implemented.

3/31/2009 124
Family and Community Engagement
Table 35: Rubric Scoring of Family and Community Relations
House Elements Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the Difference
Between Pre and Post
Implementation
Strategies / Action Steps
Family and
Community
Engagement
3 3 The district has recognized the
need for two-way
communication with parents
and the community and is
taking measures to improve in
this area.
• Implement “Reach Out to
Drop-outs” campaign
• Reorganize Parent /
Community Liaison Office
• Design & Implement Parent
Prep Academy
• Conduct Town Hall
meetings

Parent and community involvement has long been an area of need for the
Southwest Public Schools. In 1996, a committee was established to overhaul parent
and community involvement for SPSD, and some programs were established to
increase engagement. Throughout the last several administrations, schools and or
divisions within the district have established a some partnerships with community
organizations, though not at a systemic level. When asked for an example of the kinds
of community outreach that existed prior to Dr. Mendez becoming superintendent,
district staff offered the example of the “Principal for a Day” exchange program.
Since Dr. Mendez has taken office, efforts have been made to increase
involvement through a reorganization of the Parent/Community Liaison office, and
community outreach through the “Reachout to Dropouts” campaign, in which district
staff, including Dr. Mendez himself went door-to-door to try to bring high school
dropouts back into the schools, and additional training for and public meetings with
parents and community members.

3/31/2009 125
Table 36: Addressing Change in Family and Community Relations
Strengths Challenges
• Well-developed and popular volunteer program
• Lack of two-way communication with parents and
community members
• Limited number of staff
• Dissatisfaction in the community with school
consolidations and closures
Strategies
• Established new team of coordinators
• Began to conduct town hall meetings
• Established “Parent Prep” academy to increase engagement
• Developed system to leverage support from corporations, foundations and universities and match with
individual school needs

While Southwest Public School District has a strength in its volunteer program
(they currently have more than 70,000 registered and approved volunteers who passed
criminal background checks), staff report that family and community relations overall
is an area in need of improvement. Recently (in the last two years), a systemic
approach has been taken to recruiting community support from corporations,
foundations, and universities and to match available resources with school needs.
Much other community relations work, however, has been fragmented, and
communication with parents and community groups has been identified as an area of
need.
Following backlash against a recent bond measure that allows for
consolidation of some small schools to modernize as many schools as possible, a team
of five coordinators has been established to listen and gather input through venues
such as town hall meetings. The superintendent realizes that he needs to get out into
the community and listen more, as well as to promote and communicate district
successes and needs. A “Parent Prep Academy” has been formed recently to assist
parents in understanding their roles as stakeholders and on decision-making bodies.

3/31/2009 126
Table 37: Family and Community Engagement Rating by Rubric Component
Rubric Components
Previous Quality
3.3
Current Quality
3.3
Level of
Implementation
Parenting 3 3
Communication 3 3
Volunteerism 3 3
Learning at Home 3 3
Decision Making 5 5
Collaboration with the
Community
3 3
1

The current quality Southwest Public School District’s family and community
engagement strategies were scored as a 3.3 (medium), based on the information
learned during interviews and a review of artifacts and documents. In general, the
district has been relying on schools to encourage two-way communication and provide
training for parents and community members. As a result, parent and community
involvement in decision-making is highly variable across the district. In an effort to
address the areas in need of improvement, new positions have been created, new staff
members have been hired and new plans have been created to improve the district’s
efforts in the topics listed in Table xxx above. Based on the recency of the
reorganization, though, and the fact that very few of the plans had been put into effect
at the time of the study, the implementation rating was determined to be a 1 (low).

Other House Elements
Plan of Entry
Upon being assigned as interim superintendent, Dr. Mendez developed and
implemented a 100-Day Plan, treating his “acting” position as though it were
permanent, and indeed it became so. This plan was indicative of the focus and
determination that Dr. Mendez has brought to his position as superintendent and
3/31/2009 127
subsequent strategic plans he and the board have developed, reviewed, and revised on
an annual basis. It included five areas of focus for the new superintendent, with
specific goals and actions in each area: (1) increase student achievement; (2) increase
management efficiency; (3) improve public support and confidence in schools; (4)
create a positive district culture; and (5) provide facilities-to-standard program.

Organizational Assessment and Audits
Dr. Mendez restructured many of his divisions to improve organizational
efficiency. He created ad hoc committees and distributed surveys to explore areas
such as curriculum, and facilities. Using his strong background and experience in
budget and finance, he worked with his Chief Financial Officer to implement a
modified version of zero-based budgeting, so that all divisions had to justify all
expenses and staff positions.

Leadership Team Effectiveness
In order to assemble the best possible leadership team, Dr. Mendez hired an
new Chief Academic Officer and restructured many of his divisions, including
Curriculum, Research & Evaluation, Professional Development, and Human
Resources. He addition, reduced the number of Regions and Regional
Superintendents and Offices from thirteen to five, and created executive principal
positions. The regional superintendents work with the CAO and the executive
principals to provide a coherent leadership team in support of schools.

3/31/2009 128
Organizational Chart
Dr. Mendez restructured many of his divisions, including Curriculum,
Research & Evaluation, Professional Development, and Human Resources. In
addition, he reduced the number of Regions and Regional Superintendents and Offices
from thirteen to five, in order to streamline the focus on student achievement. He
created new executive principal positions to supervise instruction, and he moved these
executive principals, as well as regional superintendent, and all curriculum instruction,
and assessment staff under the supervision of the Chief Academic Officer to intensify
the focus on student academic achievement.

Standards
Dr. Mendez has hired a new Chief Academic Officer, who has worked with
teams of teachers and administrators to ensure that the mandated curriculum is aligned
to state standards. In addition, new Curriculum-based Assessments (CBA’s) have
developed and are being implemented to measure student achievement of the
standards on a periodic (every six weeks) basis.

Instruction
Dr. Mendez has made many changes to support the improvement of instruction
in the district. He hired a new Chief Academic Officer and executive principals to
supervise instruction in feeder patterns. He worked with his CAO, to align
professional development, curriculum, and assessment, and placed an emphasis on
instruction that leads to the academic growth of all children. Through ASPIRE, he has
3/31/2009 129
deemphasized programs and turned the district’s focus to teaching and learning,
working to develop teachers to provide the best possible instruction for students.

Program Effectiveness
Dr. Mendez reorganized the research and evaluation office and increased the
data available to teachers and staff in order to evaluate the effectiveness of programs,
curriculum, and instruction. Programs are now evaluated from a value-added
perspective using performance data. Programs, however, have become less of a focus
than improving teaching and learning and developing human capital.

Focus on Lowest Performers
Under the ASPIRE model of reform, which emphasizes a value added model,
the academic growth of all students is considered equally important. Dr. Mendez
spoke specifically about the danger in focusing on any one group of students in lieu of
valuing and striving for the growth and improvement of every student.

Resource Alignment
Dr. Mendez worked with the Chief Financial Officer and the board to align all
resources in support of ASPIRE. Staff, new positions, and funds have been allocated
in support of improving teaching and learning, developing human capital, and
recognizing achievement. This intense focus can be seen throughout the district and in
all of the areas of reform.

3/31/2009 130
Facilities
Dr. Mendez and his staff are now facing some school closures and
consolidation due to declining enrollment. A bond measure has recently passed and
the money is to be used to close some schools and renovate others in an effort to
modernize school facilities for students. Dr. Mendez has also moved the district office
into new facilities.

Performance Management Systems/Accountability Plan
Dr. Mendez has worked with an outside provider to increase the types and
amounts of data available to school and district staff. This data will be used to
monitor and evaluate the performance of schools, teachers, and administrators under a
value added, pay for performance system.

Business Services
Dr. Mendez is working with the CBO to increase communication between
district management and the business services divisions. Increasing and improving
communication is a stated goal in the strategic plan, and an area of focus for Dr.
Mendez in order to bring coherence to all aspects of the district.

Philanthropic and Institutional Partnerships
SPSD has had a long history of many partnerships with outside agencies,
universities and corporations. Dr. Mendez and his team have been working to find
new ways to connect the district with agencies and universities in support of the goals
3/31/2009 131
of ASPIRE in developing human capital, increasing student achievement, and
recognizing and rewarding achievement. The new Aspiring Principals’ Institute was
developed in partnership with Harvard University, and there is a current focus in the
on increasing these partnerships to benefit the staff, students and community.

Conclusions and Analysis
Discussion
The findings presented in this study were developed and presented by
reviewing the data collected in the context of the conceptual framework of the House
Model (Appendix F). The purpose of this section was to make sense of the findings in
ways that provide purpose and meaning to the actions under study.

Bringing Coherence to the System
The increasing pressures of accountability for student achievement have led
many districts to implement a rapidly increasing number of reforms, initiatives and
programs aimed at improving instruction and increasing test scores (Hatch, 2001).
One of the characteristics of a successful school district is the system-wide coherence
they develop in aligning all of these reform efforts and initiatives (Anderson, 2003;
Shannon & Bylsma, 2004). This characteristic is evident in the reform strategies
being implemented by Dr. Mendez in the Southwest Public School District, and has
provided a foundation for improvement of student achievement.
An example of a strategy to develop system coherence that Dr. Mendez has
brought to SPSD is the implementation of a strategic plan. SPSD uses its strategic
3/31/2009 132
plan to ensure that all programs and initiatives, as well as staffing, resource allocation,
district policy and professional development are aligned with the goals and vision of
the district (Shannon & Bylsma, 2004). This alignment was evident in the interviews
conducted on site, as subjects referred to the district’s goals and vision as the reasons
for their departments’ existence, policies, and practices.
The ASPIRE program that Dr. Mendez implemented is based on and aligned
with the strategic plan, bringing forth four goals on which all other strategies connect:
(1) Developing human capital; (2) Informing practice; (3) Recognizing excellence;
and (4) Improving teaching and learning. These four, clearly-stated program goals
provide a vehicle for the Dr. Mendez to communicate district reforms and initiatives to
teachers, administrators and other staff and stakeholders. In this way, everyone is able
to understand how district policies and their own practices support the district’s
overarching goals (Murphy & Datnow, 2003 in MacIver & Farley, 2003).
Dr. Mendez was described by his staff as having, “an unrelenting focus on
teaching and learning,” and this focus is evident in the district’s goals and vision, the
strategic plan, and the ASPIRE program. According to Newmann, Smith,
Allensworth, and Byrk (2001), providing the district with “unity of purpose, a clear
focus, and shared values for student learning” (p. 298) is an essential organizational
element and leadership factor in bringing coherence to a system. Dr. Mendez has
demonstrated this leadership factor in all of the reforms he has brought to the
Southwest Public School District, ensuring that all of the schools, divisions and
departments work together in a coordinated, joint effort way to implement his reform
strategies (Childress, Elmore, Grossman & King, 2007).
3/31/2009 133
Centralizing Curriculum
Another way in which school districts provide coherence for stakeholders, and
improve achievement for students, is through centralizing and curriculum and best
practices for instruction, and (Anderson, 2003; Shannon & Bylsma; Snipes, Doolittle
& Herlihy, 2002). Instructional coherence, through which all programs are
interrelated and are guided by common frameworks for curriculum, instruction, and
assessment are more likely to lead to advances in student achievement (Newmann,
Smith, Allensworth, & Byrk, 2001). Decentralization and school-based management
policies that allow schools autonomy in making curricular decisions often lead to a
wide variety of unrelated curricular programs, and a disconnect between instruction
and state standards (Snipes, Doolittle & Hurley, 2002). This lack of coherence in the
instructional program can lead to “professional fatigue” and frustration among
teachers and staff who dedicate themselves to one or more of the multiple initiatives,
dividing their efforts and failing to produce the expected gains in student achievement
(Newmann, et al., 2001).
When Dr. Mendez became superintendent of the Southwest Public School
District, he found a definite lack of coherence between the state standards and the
curriculum implemented, and a large number of programs and initiatives being
implemented at the school sites under SPSD’s decentralized model of governance.
While allowing many aspects of decentralization to continue, he and his chief
academic officer recognized the need to intervene on behalf of students to ensure the
same rigorous quality curriculum was delivered to all of the districts’ students (Fullan,
Betrani & Quinn 2004).
3/31/2009 134
As part of their intervention, Dr. Mendez and his CAO brought together groups
of teachers and administrators to review the written curriculum to ensure that it was
aligned to state learning standards and that contained all of the knowledge and skills
that students were expected to acquire at each grade level (Carr, & Harris, 2001;
MacIver & Farley, 2003; School Works, 2007). Further work was done to ensure
horizontal and vertical alignment of the curriculum so that students receive an
education that is coordinated between subjects at the same grade level, and between
grade-levels in each subject area (Carr, & Harris, 2001; Newmann, et al., 2001). In
addition, Dr. Mendez and his staff have developed a system for the curriculum to be
reviewed and updated on a regular basis to ensure that the curriculum remains current,
relevant and accessible to all students (Carr, & Harris, 2001; MacIver & Farley, 2003;
School Works, 2007).

Human Capital Development
A focus for the Dr. Mendez, the district and the Southwest Public School
District board of education is developing human capital. District leadership in
developing effective teachers and site administrators is a crucial component of system-
wide improvement and increasing student achievement (Elmore, 2000; MacIver &
Farley, 2003; Togneri & Anderson, 2003). Togneri and Anderson (2003) cite the
development of a vision at the district level that includes increasing achievement for
all students, and improving instructional practice as a key element of success.
Increasing the capacity of school and district staff is a key element of the
success of any reform effort, and providing professional development in the latest
3/31/2009 135
instructional strategies and educational reforms is one way in which districts can do so
(Chrispeels, Gonzalez & Edge, 2006; Elmore & Fuhrman, 2001). Some examples of
innovation in professional development in the Southwest Public School District are the
Aspiring Principals’ Institute that the district has developed in partnership with
Harvard University, and the Alternative Certification Program that has been developed
in partnership with local universities in order to facilitate the transition from industry
to the teaching profession (Chrispeels, Gonzalez & Edge, 2006).
Togneri and Anderson (2003) call for districts to provide quality professional
development for that includes research-based principles and strategies and creates and
fosters “networks of instructionally proficient principals and teacher leaders” (p. 6).
One of the ways in which Dr. Mendez and the Southwest Public School District
provides quality professional development for teachers and administrators is through
the fee-for-service model under which their professional development branch operates.
Competing with outside providers for school and district dollars ensures that the
professional development branch personnel are knowledgeable in the latest research-
based pedagogies and strategies, and can deliver them to clients with skill.
Another aspect of The Southwest Public School District’s efforts to develop
human capital development is its focus on attracting and retaining highly qualified
teachers and administrators. SPSD has taken many innovative steps to accomplish this
goal. Research shows that targeted bonuses and incentives can lead to higher
recruitment and retention rates (Council of Great City Schools, 2006; Jacob, 2007;
Hanushek, Kain & Rivkin, 2004; Snipes, Doolittle & Herlihy, 2002). SPSD makes
every effort to ensure its compensation package is equal to or better than surrounding
3/31/2009 136
districts, and offers teachers in hard to staff subject areas sign-on bonuses. As a
reward for achieving high levels of student academic growth, SPSD teachers and
administrators are eligible to earn ASPIRE pay-for performance bonuses of up to
$10,000.
In order to support new teachers, Dr. Mendez and his staff created the
ABRAZO induction and support system. Teachers who participate in ABRAZO are
provided with professional development in district policies, best practices, and
initiatives, and are assigned mentors. This new teacher support is an important element
of teacher retention (Wong, 2004).

Summary
This chapter reviewed the findings of the study, based on the data collected in
the through interviews and artifacts, and was followed by a detailed discussion and
analysis of how the findings relate to the each of the research questions, and their basis
in the research presented in Chapter 2. This chapter also reported the quality and level
of implementation by the superintendent of the each of the ten designated reform
strategies intended to improve student achievement. The findings presented in this
study were based on multiple sources of data, which were triangulated to increase
reliability and validity. Chapter 5 will present the summary, conclusions, and
implications of this study.

3/31/2009 137
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS

Given the importance of the role of the system leader in improving student
achievement, information is needed regarding the nature of the reform strategies that
are used by superintendents to affect student achievement. It is important to know
how superintendents respond to the strengths and weaknesses in their respective
districts, and how the strategies they choose to implement in order to improve student
achievement relate to those strengths and weaknesses. It is also of note to discover
how these reform strategies are related to the preparation, backgrounds or prior
experience of these leaders.

Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this case study was to discover what actions
superintendents are taking to improve student achievement, and look at the system
leader’s approach to district-wide reform. Specifically, this study sought to
understand the impact of ten identified reform strategies on academic achievement and
outcomes for students. This study examined the reform strategies used by an urban
superintendent who is a graduate of Urban School Leadership Institute (USLI)
superintendent preparation program. It examined the superintendent’s responses to the
strengths and weaknesses in his district, the relationship of the reform strategies used
to the background and experiences of the superintendent, and the ways in which he is
improving student achievement.
3/31/2009 138
The research study questions were:
How are the 10 key reform strategies being used by large urban school superintendents
to improve student achievement in his or her respective district?
a) How does the quality and implementation of 10 key reform
strategies correspond to the strengths and challenges of the district
when the superintendent took office?
b) What additional reform strategies (if any) were used? How do they
correspond to the elements of the House Model?
c) How does the choice and implementation of the 10 key reform
strategies correspond to the previous background/experiences of the
superintendent?
Methodology
This was a qualitative study of superintendent background, preparation, and
action. A case study methodology was used in order to depict the actions of the
superintendent, and describe the context in which the reform strategies were
implemented (Marshall & Rossman, 1989). An in-depth case study was conducted to
describe the actions taken and reform strategies used by the urban superintendent.
The primary data gathering method selected for this study was a series of
interviews with the superintendent and other key staff members. Individual and small
group interviews were conducted and recorded to gather information regarding the
selection and implementation by the USLI superintendent of the 10 key reform
strategies identified in this study to increase student achievement. The Urban School
Leadership Institute (USLI) is an innovative superintendent preparation program
3/31/2009 139
designed to prepare corporate, military, non-profit, and educational leaders for top
positions in urban school districts. Participants are engaged in a rigorous ten-month
weekend program whose purpose is to develop leaders who will raise student
achievement in the largest urban school districts across the United States. The unit of
analysis for this study included one large urban school district, the district
superintendent, and other district staff who were identified by the district
superintendent.

Sample
The study design made use of purposeful sampling to choose the
superintendent and district in the case presented in the study. In this case, the specific
type of purposeful sampling that was used in selecting the district and superintendent
was “critical case sampling” (Patton, 2002). Critical case sampling was used because
it allows for “logical generalization and maximum application of information to other
cases” (Patton, 2002, p. 243). Study participants included the district superintendent,
and key players identified by the superintendent as persons with knowledge of the
strengths and challenges in the district at the time that the superintendent took office,
and the reform strategies used to increase student achievement, including the chief
academic and financial officers, district-level administrators, and one board members.

Data Collection and Analysis
Data collection for this study took place during July 2008. Data was collected
during a two-day visit to the district in the study. The conceptual framework that this
3/31/2009 140
study used as its basis was the House Model, which was developed as by the Urban
School Leadership Foundation for their Urban School Leadership Institute. The
House Model is represented by a structure that is divided into different levels, and
each level contains several “rooms.” Each of the rooms of the house is filled with one
or more related reform strategies. The first level of the house, the foundation, is the
Superintendent’s Plan of Entry. The Superintendent’s Plan of Entry includes his or
her 90-Day or 100-Day Plan, detailing strategies for immediate implementation upon
beginning his or her assignment, as well as conditions and stipulations negotiated in
the initial contract for employment. The six rooms of the house represent six
overarching areas relating educational reform: Instructional Alignment, Operational
Excellence, Stakeholder Management, Organizational Assessment and Audits,
Organizational and Management Structure, and Strategic Plan. The final level of the
house is the roof, which represents sustainable increases in student achievement,
closing of achievement gaps, and improving college readiness.
The House Model was developed by the Urban School Leadership Institute
through a review of current literature and research-based best practices. Their research
identified the following 10 key reform strategies superintendent implement to affect
systemic change that leads to increases in student achievement: strategic plan,
assessment, curriculum, professional development, human resources systems and
human capital management, finance and budget, communications, governance and
board relations, and labor relations and contract negotiations, and family and
community engagement.
3/31/2009 141
In undertaking this study, the USC research team developed the following five
instruments to be used in the data collection and analysis process:
1. Superintendent Interview Guide (Appendix A) which aligned the interview
questions to the research questions;
2. Key Player Interview Guide (Appendix B)
3. Specific Dimensions of Reform Interview Guide (Appendix C)
4. Quality Rubric (Appendix D) which measured the quality of relevant
actions for each of the 10 key reform strategies, utilizing a 5 point Likert
scale indicating high (5), moderate (3), or low (1) quality. The components
in the Curriculum Rubric, for example, included; recruitment and selection
of new administrators, placement of site administrators, recruitment of
highly qualified teachers, classroom teacher evaluations, teacher support
and development, use of incentives, and salaries, wages, and benefits.
5. Implementation Rubric (Appendix E) was designed to measure how each
reform strategy was implemented utilizing a 5 point Likert scale indicating
high (5), moderate (3), or low (1) levels in terms of four criteria including;
1) the external challenges to full implementation; 2) the extent that each
component of the reform strategy is fully implemented in practice; 3) the
level of shared understanding, values, and expectations; and, 4) the
sustainability of staff and fiscal resources.
In order to support validity, a variety of data collection tools and a diverse
group of study participants were engaged to support methodological and data
triangulation from multiple sources.
3/31/2009 142
Selected Findings
The data collection processes relating to the research question produced
several key findings. This section summarizes those findings and relates each finding
to the instrumentation and primary sources of data collected.
Research Question 1: Ten Key Reform Strategies
Research question 1 asked “How are the 10 key reform strategies being used
by large urban school superintendents to improve student achievement in his or her
respective district?”
The following section summarizes the findings relating to each of the ten key
reform strategies. Interviews and district documentation were the primary sources of
data collected for analysis. This process was supported by the Superintendent
Interview Guide, the Key Player Interview Guide, and the Strategy Specific Interview
Guide.
Strategic Plan
Strategic planning is an important element of the coherence that is central to
the successes of The Southwest Public School District. Dr. Mendez recognized the
need to have a formal strategic plan that defined student achievement and used data to
set specific goals and strategies for achieving those goals. Part of developing this plan
included a new shift in district focus from choosing the “best programs” to
implementing strategies to improve teaching and learning. Under Dr. Mendez, the
Strategic Plan has become an important part of the fabric of SPSD. The goals are well
known to stakeholders, having been clearly communicated and well defined. This
3/31/2009 143
differs from the previous climate of the district, when the mission and vision were
written statements that were to be committed to memory.
Assessment
SPSD has always had a strong focus on assessment. Students are assessed
using a number of summative norm-referenced and criterion-referenced tests as part of
the state testing and accountability system. Dr. Mendez makes it a practice not to pay
attention to accountability ratings based on these tests during the school year,
however, focusing instead on a value-added data analysis approach that provides
information about the growth of every student. Under Dr. Mendez’ administration, the
focus of assessment has shifted from measuring student achievement to measuring
student growth, and a there is a new emphasis on formative data and assessment to
inform instruction. Curriculum Based Assessments have been created and are being
used to benchmark student achievement and to monitor student academic growth. In
order to reinforce this focus on formative data and assessment as a vital part of the
cycle of teaching and learning, Dr. Mendez implemented the ASPIRE reform, one
aspect of which is a pay-for performance program that provides financial rewards of
up to $10,000 to teachers, administrators, and other school personnel for student
academic growth.
Curriculum
Dr. Mendez credits much of the progress made in curriculum reform to his
Chief Academic Officer. The CAO and her staff centralized authority over and
rewrote the curriculum. Subject matter curriculum was aligned and mapped both
vertically across grade levels and horizontally across the school year (i.e. in a pacing
3/31/2009 144
plan). Teams of teachers and administrators identified “Power Objectives” within the
standards and made the curriculum more accessible for schools so that it could be
easily implemented. Dr. Mendez and his CAO then mandated that the centralized
curriculum be used in all schools for all students. In order to support the
implementation of this new, centralized curriculum, extensive professional
development was provided through Summer Institutes for school teams, principals’
meetings and leadership conferences, and site-based support. As with other reform
areas, a concerted effort has been made to link all curricular reform to ASPIRE.
Professional Development
In order to support the implementation of this new, centralized curriculum,
extensive professional development was provided through Summer Institutes for
school teams, principals’ meetings and leadership conferences, and site-based support
from newly hired executive principals. The SPSD professional development division
operates under a “fee for service” model as part of decentralization. Under the
leadership of Dr. Mendez, professional development is provided in a systemic way
that allows the district to improve the development of human capital through new
leadership and certification programs, teach teachers and administrators to use data to
inform their practice, and provide staff with new strategies and techniques to improve
teaching and learning. Professional development is one of the main vehicles
Southwest Public Schools is leveraging to implement the four goals of ASPIRE: (1)
Developing human capital; (2) Informing practice; (3) Recognizing excellence; and
(4) Improving teaching and learning.

3/31/2009 145
Human Resources and Human Capital Development
Under Dr. Mendez’ leadership, the Board has placed a heavy emphasis on
human resources, and human capital development in order to attract, support, and
retain highly qualified personnel. This emphasis can be evidenced by the strategic
plan, as well as the development and implementation of ASPIRE, which have led to
significant improvements and innovations in human resources. SPSD has hired a
marketing team to recruit highly qualified teachers, and partnerships have been
developed with universities and industry so that an alternative certification program
can be offered to make teaching an attractive second career. Financial incentives are
offered to attract teachers in hard to staff subject areas. The ASPIRE program offers
financial rewards of up to $10,000 to teachers whose students show outstanding
academic growth.
In order to develop human capital and retain employees, teachers and
administrators receive professional development in curriculum, instruction, leadership
and best practices, and mentoring and support is provided for both groups.
Administrators may apply and be selected for the “Aspiring Principals’ Academy”
where they complete a one-year internship, and all new administrators attend
“Survival Camp” and are assigned mentors and support providers. New teachers
participate in the ABRAZO program, in which they are assigned mentor teachers, and
provided with certification classes if necessary. The new systems Dr. Mendez has put
into place have led to 125 fewer resignations during the 2007-2008 school year.

3/31/2009 146
Budget and Finance
In the area of budget and finance, all decisions in SPSD are made jointly by the
Chief Financial Officer, the controller, and upper and middle management, in
collaboration with the superintendent and the board of education. In order to be
approved, all allocations expenditures must be tied to one of the district’s five goals,
as set by the board. Dr. Mendez has implemented a modified version of zero-based
budgeting. To receive funding, all divisions must demonstrate, on an annual basis,
how their programs, expenditures, and positions will further the district’s progress
toward achieving one or more of its stated goals.
Communications
Southwest Public School District has a three-prong approach to its
communications plan: the press office, the instructional media office, and the web
portal. Press Office and Instructional media personnel are required to have journalism
backgrounds, in order to effectively pitch positive stories to the external media.
Recently, Dr. Mendez has established a marketing committee to work with the
communications team to improve SPSD’s public image and attract more students and
staff to the district. Communication with families and the community continues to be
a challenge. Despite the variety of ways in which SPSD attempts to communicate with
its constituents, it has failed to establish enough meaningful two-way communication
to satisfy the community. Increasing and improving communication continues to be a
goal for the communications office, the superintendent, and the board.

3/31/2009 147
Governance and Board Relations
Governance and board relations play an important role in the Southwest Public
School District. Each January, the nine-member, elected school board has an annual
retreat with the superintendent and senior staff, during which they define the district’s
vision and set the district’s priorities for the year. Dr. Mendez has invested in copious
amounts of training for the board in current research and pedagogy as well as budget
and finance, policy, and the legislative process. He has increased communication with
board by sending members a weekly written communication and allowing them direct
access to senior staff. Dr. Mendez has encouraged the board to take an active role, and
has established work groups to research and develop recommendations. The credit Dr.
Mendez gives the board for decisions and initiatives is evidence of his considerable
collaboration skills.
Due to recent retirements among board members, for school year 2008-2009,
the SPSD school board has two new members and a new president. This change in
board membership and leadership has been extremely challenging for Dr. Mendez and
his staff. Under the new leadership and with the new membership, board members are
not all following protocols, and are challenging Dr. Mendez’ leadership. The two new
ran for their seats on a promise to remove Dr. Mendez from his position, based on
community concerns regarding a perceived inequity in which areas of the city that are
most affected by consolidation.
Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations
Southwest Public School District is located in a “right to work” state, so
collective bargaining does not play a role in labor relations and contract negotiations.
3/31/2009 148
The human resources department in SPSD is responsible for hiring and firing
employees, as well as making recommendations for compensation, which must be
approved by the school board. In lieu of collective bargaining, SPSD has developed a
process called “consultation,” which allows union leaders to discuss issues and
concerns with senior management staff. Dr. Mendez is working with his Chief
Business Officer to expand the consultation format to include an appeals process
which would require that all appeals that were not resolved during consultation would
go to the superintendent for a final decision. Currently, the only real recourse that
unions have when they disagree with decisions made through the consultation process
is to go to the board, the public, or the media.
Family and Community Relations
Dr. Mendez and his staff have identified family and community relations as an
area in need of improvement. They have begun to implement a systemic approach to
recruiting community support from corporations, foundations, and universities and to
match available resources with school needs. A “Parent Prep Academy” has also
been established to teach parents about their roles in decision-making. Following
recent community backlash against school consolidation plans, a team of five
coordinators has been established to gather input and conduct town hall meetings.
The primary sources of data collection for this analysis were on-site interviews
and artifacts provided by the district. The data collection and analysis process was
supported by the Superintendent, Key Player, and Strategy Specific Interview Guides,
and the Quality and Level of Implementation Rubrics.

3/31/2009 149
Research Question 1a: Strengths and Challenges of the District
Research question 1a asked “How does the quality and implementation of 10 key
reform strategies correspond to the strengths and challenges of the district when the
superintendent took office?”
When Dr. Mendez became superintendent, Southwest Public Schools was in
need of both coherence and a sense of urgency in its efforts to increase student
achievement. In the last four years, he has established a culture of coherence of all
district programs, policies and initiatives and created urgency in a district-wide focus
on improving teaching and learning. He has been able to balance building on
successful strategies implemented in previous administrations, such as bringing a
value-added perspective to a strong assessment program and expanding the fee-for-
service professional development division by mandating training on certain topics,
with innovations of his own, such as the implementation of ASPIRE.
One of the areas of fragmentation in the Southwest Public School District was
curriculum. SPSD had been operating under a decentralized governance model that
allowed schools to make their own choices around curriculum and instruction. Dr.
Mendez hired a new chief academic officer, re-centralized curriculum and instruction,
and rewrote the district’s curriculum in alignment with state standards.
Staffing the schools and offices with highly qualified staff was another area of
need of improvement for SPSD when Dr. Mendez became superintendent. Working
with the strong budget and finance department, he was able to leverage funding to
create a marketing team and new incentives and supports to assist the human resources
division in improving hiring and retention rates for both teachers and administrators.
3/31/2009 150
When Dr. Mendez became superintendent, one of his goals was increasing the
district’s waning sense of urgency around student achievement. He capitalized on the
school board’s interest in leadership and restlessness and dissatisfaction with the
current levels of student achievement, to engage members as his partners in
implementing ASPIRE. The ASPIRE program, which offered pay-for-performance
incentives of up to $10,000 brought a sense of urgency through its four goals: 1)
Developing human capital; (2) Informing practice; (3) Recognizing excellence; and
(4) Improving teaching and learning.
The primary sources of data collection for this analysis were on-site interviews
and artifacts provided by the district. The data collection and analysis process was
supported by the Superintendent, Key Player, and Strategy Specific Interview Guides,
the House Model, and the Quality and Level of Implementation Rubrics.

Research Question 1b: Other Reform Strategies
Research question 1b asked “What additional reform strategies (if any) were
used? How do they correspond to the elements of the House Model?”
Several other House elements were evident in the reform strategies
implemented by Dr. Mendez in SPSD. Following is a brief summary of those
elements:
Plan of Entry
Upon being assigned as interim superintendent, Dr. Mendez developed and
implemented a 100-Day Plan, treating his “acting” position as though it were
permanent, and indeed it became so. He outlined five areas of focus for his first 100
3/31/2009 151
days in office, with specific actions and goals in each area: (1) increase student
achievement; (2) increase management efficiency; (3) improve public support and
confidence in schools; (4) create a positive district culture; and (5) provide facilities-
to-standard program.
Organizational Assessment and Audits
Dr. Mendez restructured many of his divisions to improve organizational
efficiency. He created ad hoc committees and distributed surveys to explore areas
such as curriculum, and facilities. Using his strong background and experience in
budget and finance, he worked with his Chief Financial Officer to implement a
modified version of zero-based budgeting, so that all divisions had to justify all
expenses and staff positions.
Leadership Team Effectiveness
In order to assemble the best possible leadership team, Dr. Mendez hired a new
Chief Academic Officer and restructured many of his divisions, including Curriculum,
Research & Evaluation, Professional Development, and Human Resources. He
reduced the number of Regions and Regional Superintendents and Offices from
thirteen to five, and created executive principal positions to provide a coherent
leadership team in support of schools.
Organizational Chart
Dr. Mendez restructured many of his divisions, including Curriculum,
Research & Evaluation, Professional Development, and Human Resources. He created
new executive principal positions to supervise instruction, and he moved these
executive principals, as well as regional superintendent, and all curriculum instruction,
3/31/2009 152
and assessment staff under the supervision of the Chief Academic Officer to intensify
the focus on student academic achievement.
Standards
Dr. Mendez and his CAO have worked with teams of educators to ensure that
the mandated curriculum is aligned to state standards. In addition, new Curriculum-
based Assessments (CBA’s) have developed and are being implemented to measure
student achievement of the standards on a periodic (every six weeks) basis.
Instruction
Dr. Mendez, his CAO, and executive principals supervise instruction in feeder
patterns. Under his leadership, SPSD has aligned professional development,
curriculum, and assessment, to place an emphasis on instruction that leads to the
academic growth of all children. The focus on teaching and learning has deemphasized
“programs” and turned the emphasis to best practices in instruction.
Program Effectiveness
Dr. Mendez reorganized the research and evaluation office and increased the
data available to teachers and staff in order to evaluate the effectiveness of programs,
curriculum, and instruction using a value-added focus.
Focus on Lowest Performers
Under the ASPIRE model of reform, the SPSD focus is on all learners, not just
the lowest performers. The academic growth of all students is considered equally
important. Dr. Mendez spoke specifically about the danger in focusing on any one
group of students in lieu of valuing and striving for the growth and improvement of
every student.
3/31/2009 153
Resource Alignment
Dr. Mendez worked with the Chief Financial Officer and the board to align all
resources in support of improving teaching and learning, developing human capital,
and recognizing achievement. Staff, new positions, and funds have been allocated in
support of improving teaching and learning, developing human capital, and
recognizing achievement. This intense focus can be seen throughout the district and in
all of the areas of reform.
Facilities
Dr. Mendez and his staff are now facing some school closures and consolidation due
to declining enrollment. A bond measure has recently passed and the money is to be
used to close some schools and renovate others in an effort to modernize school
facilities for students. Dr. Mendez has also moved the district office into new
facilities.
Performance Management Systems/Accountability Plan
Dr. Mendez has worked with to increase the categories and amounts of data
available to staff to monitor and evaluate the performance of students, schools,
teachers, and administrators under a value added system.
Business Services
Dr. Mendez is working with the CBO to increase communication between
district management and the business services divisions. Increasing and improving
communication is a stated goal in the strategic plan, and an area of focus for Dr.
Mendez in order to bring coherence to all aspects of the district.

3/31/2009 154
Philanthropic and Institutional Partnerships
Dr. Mendez and his team have been working to find new ways to connect the
district with agencies and universities in support of the goals of ASPIRE. The new
Aspiring Principals’ Institute was developed in partnership with Harvard University,
and there is a current focus on increasing these types of partnerships to benefit the
staff, students and community of SPSD.
The primary sources of data collection for this analysis were on-site interviews
and artifacts provided by the district. The data collection and analysis process was
supported by the Superintendent, Key Player, and Strategy Specific Interview Guides,
the House Models, and the Quality and Level of Implementation Rubrics.

Research Question 1c: Relationship to the previous Background/Experience of
Superintendent
Research question 1c asked “How does the choice and implementation of the
10 key reform strategies correspond to the previous background/experiences of the
superintendent?”
Dr. Mendez came to the Southwest Public School District with a strong
background in education, having served for seven years as Superintendent in another
southwestern school district. Prior to becoming superintendent, he held positions as
principal, assistant principal, and central office administrator, in both business and
instruction. During the interview process, Dr. Mendez indicated that he felt he had
strengths in the areas of finance, human resources, governance and board relations,
3/31/2009 155
and labor relations and contract negotiations. Many of these strengths are evident in
the reform strategies Dr. Mendez implemented.
In working with the board of education and the budget and finance division,
for example, Dr. Mendez was able to capitalize on his experiences as Superintendent
and as Associate Superintendent for Business Support Services to implement the
ASPIRE program, which included a controversial pay-for-performance incentive to
reward schools and staff for growth in student academic performance. Incorporating
his previous experiences in labor relations and contract negotiations, Dr. Mendez
brought an appeals process for resolving labor issues and concern to SPSD that
mirrors the one he had developed in his previous district.
Dr. Mendez was acutely aware of the areas in which he had vision for
improvement, but less experience and skill. During interviews, he had rated himself
as having less experience in the areas of curriculum, assessment, and professional
development. In order to effectively implement his reforms in these areas, he hired
“the best Chief Academic Officer [he could] find,” and worked with her to redesign
and improve these aspects of the district.
The primary sources of data collection for this analysis were on-site interviews
and artifacts provided by the district. The data collection and analysis process was
supported by the Superintendent Interview Guide.

Conclusions
Based on the data collected, and as a result of the methodologies utilized, the
study resulted in several conclusions relating to the district leader and the strategies
3/31/2009 156
that were implemented to improve student academic performance. The most salient
changes Dr. Mendez made were to tie together all reforms through the implementation
of the strategic plan and the ASPIRE program, to centralize the curriculum, to develop
increased human capital through professional development and supports, and to focus
the district on data-driven decision-making with a value-added perspective. By
acknowledging and honoring the district’s previous strengths, and the aspects of which
staff, students, and community were proud, Dr. Mendez was able to build on the
successes of his predecessors and move the district to new heights in student
achievement.
The following six specific actions taken by the new superintendent have had a
significant impact on the direction of the district:
1. The implementation of a data-driven strategic plan to guide all district
actions and resource allocations
2. The implementation of ASPIRE to provide a framework for reform in
the areas of curriculum, instruction and assessment, professional
development, and human resources
3. The centralization of and mandate to teach the district’s core
curriculum
4. The expansion of professional development to support teachers and
administrators and to improve teaching and learning and develop
human capital
5. The emphasis on the use of data to inform practice and monitor student
academic growth in a value-added system
3/31/2009 157
6. The implementation by the human resources department of new
incentive and support programs to recruit and retain teachers and
administrators, including pay-for-performance awards
The key factor is found was the Superintendent’s commitment to a coherent
strategic plan that links all district activities to measurable outcomes and ensures that
all programs and initiatives, as well as staffing, resource allocation, district policy and
professional development are aligned with the goals and vision of the district.
The ASPIRE program that Dr. Mendez implemented is based on and aligned
with the strategic plan. Its four goals, developing human capital, informing practice,
recognizing excellence, and improving teaching and learning help to communicate the
goals of the strategic plan to stakeholders, and coordinate the efforts of all schools,
divisions, and offices. Dr. Mendez’ consistent focus on teaching and learning, the
strategic plan, and ASPIRE have helped bring to SPSD the coherence that it was
lacking when he arrived.
Another way in Dr. Mendez has brought coherence to SPSD is through
centralizing the curriculum and best practices for instruction. Decentralization had
produced a definite lack of coherence between the state standards and the curriculum
delivered to students in SPSD schools. The alignment to state standards and the
horizontal and vertical articulation of the curriculum that Dr. Mendez and his staff
have worked to develop ensures that all teachers in all schools are supplied with a
receive a rigorous, high-quality program to teach to students. To further develop
coherence, Dr. Mendez and his staff have built in a system for the curriculum to be
3/31/2009 158
reviewed and updated on a regular basis to ensure that it remains current, relevant and
accessible to all students.
Under the goals of ASPIRE and the strategic plan, an additional focus for the
Southwest Public School District is developing human capital. One of the ways in
which this focus has been implemented in SPSD is through professional development.
Dr. Mendez has placed emphasis professional development that promotes improved
teaching and learning and leadership development. He has created the Aspiring
Principals’ Institute in partnership with Harvard University, and an Alternative
Certification Program for teachers coming from other industries, developed in
partnership with local universities. In addition, he has built upon the successes of the
fee-for-service model under which the SPSD professional development branch
operates. While certain professional development topics have been mandated for staff,
and funded by the district, schools continue to have a professional development budget
over which they have discretion. The fee-for-service model forces the professional
development division to compete with outside providers for school and district dollars
and ensures personnel remain knowledgeable in and skilled at delivering the latest
research-based pedagogies and strategies.
Another aspect of SPSD’s focus on human capital development is attracting
and retaining highly qualified teachers and administrators. In its efforts to do so, the
district’s strategies cover both financial incentives and support for employees. SPSD
makes every effort to ensure its salary and benefits are equal to or better than the
surrounding districts, and offers sign-on bonuses of up to $6000 to teachers in hard to
staff subject areas. Under ASPIRE, teachers and administrators are eligible to earn
3/31/2009 159
pay-for performance bonuses of up to $10,000. In the area of support for new
employees, Dr. Mendez created the ABRAZO induction and support system, which
provides new teachers with professional development and assigned mentors.
District staff interviewed credit Dr. Mendez and ASPIRE for the improvements
in SPSD over the last four years. Data-based decision-making and a value-added
approach to all programs and initiatives have become part of the fabric of the district.
The sense of complacency after the district’s receipt of the Broad Prize in 2002 has
been replaced with a sense of urgency to provide a coherent program and quality
teaching that leads to the growth of all students.

Implications for Practice

School and District Administrators
1. Bringing coherence to all programs and reform efforts through the
implementation of a strategic plan is critical to the success of the
superintendent and the reform efforts.
2. Developing human capital is in order to attract and retain highly qualified staff
is essential to improving teaching and learning.
3. Data-driven decision making and a value-added approach to evaluating
programs, resource allocation, and student achievement results will contribute
to the overall coherence of district reforms as well as promote a focus on the
academic growth of all students.
3/31/2009 160
4. A centralized curriculum that is standards-aligned, rigorous, and accessible to
students and teachers will provide a foundation for coherence in programs,
instruction, assessment, professional development and an increase in student
achievement.
Local Community Stakeholders and School Board Members
1. In order for a superintendent’s reforms to have a chance to succeed, he or
she must be in office for a reasonable period of time. It is not possible to
see the results of many reforms implemented during the average tenure of a
superintendent. Much care should be taken when considering the
termination of a superintendent’s contract.
2. Running a school district and developing policy is incredibly complex.
Training for board members in all aspects of education, from legislation to
budget to data-analysis to pedagogy to communication and team-building
is crucial.
3. Much of the work and the success of a superintendent hinges on his or her
relationship and communication with the members of the board of
education. Frequent changes in elected or appointed school board
membership can be detrimental to maintaining a clear focus on the needs of
students and staff, and may derail progress.
Policy Makers and Superintendent Preparation Programs
1. Building relationships with and communicating well with the board of
education is a critical element of the success of a superintendent. In order
to implement reform strategies and to bring cohesion to the district, the
3/31/2009 161
superintendent must be able to bring cohesion to the board and gain their
support. Time should be spent in preparation programs and mentors should
be assigned to new superintendents to assist them in navigating these
relationships.
2. It is important to develop a strategic plan to guide the actions, resource
allocation, policies, and initiatives of the district and the board. Time
should be spent in preparation programs around the development of
strategic plans that directly respond to the strengths and challenges of the
district.
3. The prior experience of a superintendent can greatly contribute to the
success of his or her administration. Preparation programs should include
an internship component to provide participants with opportunities to
observe and actively engage in as many aspects of the job as possible prior
to accepting a superintendent position.

Recommendations for Future Research
Throughout the data collection and analysis processes, indications for future
research emerged in the following areas:
1. A key element of the ASPIRE program being implemented in the Southwest
Public School District is recognizing excellence. A component of recognizing
excellence is a pay-for-performance incentive that is awarded to staff for
outstanding growth in the achievement of their students. At the time of this
study, the incentive program had been in effect for only one year. Follow-up
3/31/2009 162
study should be undertaken to determine the impact of the program on teacher
practice and student achievement and it’s cost-effectiveness in attracting and
retaining highly qualified staff.
2. As part of their efforts to develop human capital, SPSD is offering incentives
of sign-on bonuses of up to $6000 to teachers in hard to staff subjects. Follow-
up study should be conducted to determine the impact of this incentive and its
cost effectiveness in attracting and retaining highly qualified teachers in hard
to staff subject areas.
3. At the time of this study, Dr. Mendez had been the superintendent for four
years, and some impact on student achievement could be seen. Many of his
specific reforms, however, such as the Curriculum Based Exams, were not at
full implementation. Follow-up study should be conducted to assess the
impact of these reforms on student academic achievement.
4. This was a case study of the ways one superintendent was implementing
reform in one urban district. Nine similar studies were conducted by other
members of the research team. Results of these studies should be aggregated
and data triangulated to look for similarities and differences in the strengths
and challenges of the districts, the backgrounds and experiences of the
superintendents, and the reform strategies implemented. This would allow the
conclusions drawn to be more reliably generalized. In addition, follow-up
study should be conducted in all districts to determine the impact of the reform
strategies implemented.
3/31/2009 163
References
Ainsworth, L. (2007). Common formative assessments: The centerpiece of an
integrated standards-based assessment system. In D. Reeves (Ed.), Ahead of
the curve: The power of assessment to transform teaching and learning (pp.79-
101). Bloomington, ID: Solution Tree.

Alexander, K. L., & Entwisle, D. R. (2001). The dropout process in life course
perspective: Early risk factors at home and school. Teachers College Record,
103, (5), 760-822.

Anderson, S., (2003 August). The school district role in educational change: A review
of the literature [Electronic Version]. International Center for Educational
Change Working paper #2. http://fcis.oise.utoronto.ca/~icec/workpaper2.pdf

Applebaum S.H., Molson, J., & Valero, M. (2007). The crucial first three months: An
analysis of leadership transition traps and successes. The Journal of American
Academy of Business, 11(1), 1-8.

Bauch, P., & Goldring, E. (1995). Parent involvement and school responsiveness:
Facilitating the home-school connection in schools of choice. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 17 (1), 1-21.

Belfield, C.R. & Levin, H. M. (2007). The economic losses from high school dropouts
in California: California dropout research report #1. Retrieved September 24,
2007 from http://www.lmri.ucsb.edu/dropouts/researchreport1.pdf

Bjork, L. G., Kowalski, T. J., & Browne-Ferrigno, T. (2005). Learning theory and
research: A framework for changing superintendent preparation and
development. In L. Bjork & T. Kowalski (Eds.), The contemporary
superintendent: Preparation, practice and development (pp. 71-106). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Blossfeld, H. & Shavit, Y. (1993). Persisting barriers. In Y. Shavit & H. Blossfeld
(eds.), Persistent Inequality. Boulder, CO: Westview Press

Byrd, J., Drews, C., & Johnson, J. (2006). Factors impacting superintendent turnover:
Lessons from the field. NCPEA Education Leadership Review, vol 7 (2).
Retrieved on January 3, 2008 from http://cnx.org/content/m14507/latest/

California Department of Education. (2007). Overview of California’s 2006-07
Accountability Progress Reporting System. Retrieved December 19, 2007,
from http://www.cde.ca.gov

3/31/2009 164
California Department of Education. (2007b). School Accountability Report Card:
Data Element Definitions and Sources 2006-07. Retrieved December 19, 2007,
from http://www.cde.ca.gov

California School Boards Association (2007). School Board Leadership-The Role and
Function of California’s School Boards. West Sacramento CA: California
School Boards Association.

Carlsmith, L., & Railsback, J. (2001). The power of public relations in schools. By
request. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.

Carr, J. F. & Harris, D. E. (2001) Succeeding with standards: Linking curriculum,
assessment, and action planning. ASCD

Childress, S., Elmore, R. F., & Grossman, A. (2006). How to manage urban school
districts. Harvard Business Review. November, 2006, 1-14.

Childress, S., Elmore, R. F., Grossman, A., & King, C. (2007). Note on the PELP
coherence framework. Public Education Leadership Project, January 2007, 1-
14.

Chrispeels, J., Gonzales, M., & Edge, K. (2006). Uniting in reform: The power and
importance of bringing all stakeholders to the table. Paper persented at the
American Educational Research Association (AERA) Annual Meeting in San
Francisco, CA.

Council of the Great City Schools (2006). Review of human resource operations in the
Charlotte-Mecklenburg schools. Washington, DC: Council of the Great City
Schools.

Darling-Hammond, L., (1999, December). Teacher quality and student achievement:
A review of state policy evidence. Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy
R-99-1. http://depts.washington.edu/ctpmail/PDFs/LDH_1999.pdf

Dembo, M. H. & Marsh, D. D. (2007). Developing a new Ed.D. program in the
Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern California.

Eaker, R., Dufour, R., & Burnetter, R. (2002). Getting started: Reculturing schools to
become professional learning communities. Bloomington, ID: National
Education Service.

Earl, L., & Torrance, N. (2000). Embedding accountability and improvement into
large-scale assessment: What difference does it make? Peabody Journal of
Education, 75(4), 114–141.

3/31/2009 165
Eiter, M. (2002). Best practices in leadership development: Lessons from the best
business schools and corporate universities. In M. Tucker & J. Codding (Eds.),
The principal challenge: Leading and managing schools in an era of
accountability (pp. 99-122). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Elmore, R. F. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. Washington,
DC: Albert Shanker Institute.

Elmore, R. (2003). A plea for strong practice. Educational Leadership, 62(3), 6-10.
Retrieved February 8, 2008 from http://www.oaesa.org/k-
8/Library/APLEAFORSTRONGPRACTICE.doc

Elmore, R. (2003b). Knowing the right thing to do: School improvement and
performance-based accountability. Center for Best Practices. Retrieved on
February 25, 2008 from www.nga.org/cda/files/0803KNOWING.PDF.

Elmore, R. F., & Fuhrman, S. (2001). Holding schools accountable: Is it working?. Phi
Delta Kappan. 83(1), 67-72.

Fullan, M., (2000). The return of large scale reform. Journal of Educational Change,
vol. 1, pp. 1-23.

Fullan, M., Bertani, A., & Quinn, J. (2004). New lessons for districtwide reform:
Effective leadership for change at the district level has 10 components.
Educational Leadership. 61(7), 42-46.

Fuller, H., Campbell, C., Celio, M. B., Harvey J., Immerwahr J., & Winder, A. (2003).
An impossible job? The view from the urban superintendent’s chair. Seattle,
WA: Center on Reinventing Public Education.

Guskey, T. (1995) Results-oriented professional development: In search of an optimal
mix of effective practices Electronic Version]
http://wwwncrel.orgsdrs/areas/rpl_esys/pdlitrev.htm#his

Hamilton, L. (2003). Assessment as a policy tool. Review of Research in Education,
27. pp. 25- 68.

Hannaway, J. & Rotherham, A. J. (2006). Collective bargaining in education:
negotiating change in today’s schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education
Press.

Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., & Rivkin, S. G. (2004). Why public schools lose
teachers. The Journal of Human Resources, 3(92), 326-354.

Harvey, J. (2003). The urban superintendent: Creating great schools while surviving
on the job. Orlando, FL: Council of the Great City Schools.
3/31/2009 166
Hatch, T. (2001). Incoherence in the system: Three perspectives on the
implementation of multiple initiatives in one district. American Journal of
Education. 109(4), 407-437.

Hess, F.M. & West, M.R., (2006). A better bargain: overhauling teacher collective
bargaining for the 21
st
century. American Enterprise Institute and The
Brookings Institution.
Howlett, P. (1993, May). The politics of school leaders, past and future. The
Education Digest, 58(9), 18-21. Retrieved May 1, 2008, from Research Library
Core database. (Document ID: 5139451).

Hughes, R. C., & Haney, R. (2002). Professional military education: A serious
enterprise for leaders. In M. Tucker & J. Codding (Eds.), The principal
challenge: Leading and managing schools in an era of accountability (pp. 123-
142). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Hunter, R. C. & Bartee, R. (2003). The achievement gap: Issues of competition, class,
and race. Education and Urban Society. 35(2), 151-16

Ingram, R.L. (2008). My solutions for public education in California. School
Employers Association of California (SEAC).

Ingram, R.L. & Snider, B. (2008). An educator’s guide to contract negotiations.
Leadership, 30-34.

Institute for Educational Leadership. (2003). Preparing school principals: A national
perspective on policy and program innovation. Washington, DC: Hale &
Moorman.

Jacob, B. A. (2007). The challenges of staffing urban schools with effective teachers.
The Future of Children, 17(1), 129-153. Retrieved January 24, 2009 from:
http://www.futureofchildren.org/usr_doc/7_07.pdf

Jentz, B., & Murphy, J. T. (2005). Starting confused: How leaders start when they
don't know where to start. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(10), 736-744.

KewalRamani, A., Gilbertson, L., Fox, M., and Provasnik, S. (2007). Status and
Trends in the Education of Racial and Ethnic Minorities (NCES 2007-039).
National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S.
Department of Education. Washington, DC.

MacIver, M. & Farley, E. (2003). Bringing the district back in: The role of the central
office in improving instruction and student achievement. (Report No. 65).
Baltimore, MD: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed At
Risk, Johns Hopkins University. Retrieved February 8, 2008 from
http://www.csos.jhu.edu/crespar/techReports/Report65.pdf
3/31/2009 167
Marshall, K., (1999). A meta-analysis of research on coaching models, guidelines for
the development of a coaches’ cadre. Action Learning Systems.

Marzano, R., Pickering, D., & Pollock, J., (2001). Classroom instruction that works:
resrarch-based strategies for increasing student achievement Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.Alexandria:Virginia.

Marzano, R. J. (2007). Designing a comprehensive approach to classroom assessment.
In D. Reeves (Ed.), Ahead of the curve: The power of assessment to transform
teaching and learning (pp.103-123). Bloomington, ID: Solution Tree.

McGhee, J. J., & Griffith, L. K. (2001). Large-Scale Assessments Combined with
Curriculum Alignment: Agents of Change. Theory into Practice, 40(2), 137-
144.

McLaughlin, M. W., Gilbert, S., Hightower, A. M., Husbands, J. L., Marsh, J. A.,
Young, V. M., & Talbert, J. E., (2002). Districts as change agents: Levers for
system-wide instructional improvement. Presentation at the annual meeting of
the American Educational Research Association (pp. 1-9). New Orleans:
Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy.

Miller, D.C., Sen, A., and Malley, L.B. (2007). Comparative Indicators of Education
in the United States and Other G-8 Countries: 2006 (NCES 2007-006).
National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S.
Department of Education. Washington, DC.

Murnane, R. J., & Steele, J. L. (2007). What is the problem? The challenge of
providing effective teachers for all children. Excellence in the Classroom, 17:1.
Retreived January 24, 2009 from:
http://www.futureofchildren.org/usr_doc/7_02.pdf

Murphy, J., & Datnow, A. (2003). Leadership lessons from comprehensive school
reform designs. In J. Murphy & A. Datnow (Eds.), Leadership for school
reform: Lessons from comprehensive school reform designs. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Corwin Press.

Murphy, J. & Vriesenga, M. (2006). Research on school leadership preparation in the
United States: an analysis. School Leadership & Management, 26:2, 183 - 195

National Center for Education Statistics (2005). Projections of education statistics to
2014. Retrieved November 14, 2006 from
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/projections/sec_3a.asp

National Center for Education Statistics (2006). Dropout rates in the United States:
2002 and 2003. Retrieved September 20, 2007 from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2006/2006062.pdf
3/31/2009 168
National Center for Research on Teacher Learning (NCRTL). Critical Issue:
Evaluating professional growth and development. Retrieved on Mach 24, 2008
from http://www.ncrtl.msu.edu/

National School Boards Foundation (2001). Improving School Board Decision-
Making: The Data Connection. Alexandria VA: National School Boards
Foundation.

National School Public Relations Association (2002). Raising the bar for school PR:
New standards for the school public relations profession. Rockville, MD:
Author. Retrieved from: http://www.nspra.org/files/docs/StandardsBooklet.pdf

Neely, R.O., Berube, W. & Wilson, J. (2002). The entry plan. School Administrator,
59 (9), 28-30.

Neff, T. J., & Citrin, J. M. (2005). You’re in charge—now what?: The 8 point plan.
New
York, NY: Crown Publishing Company.

Newmann, F. M., Smith, B., Allensworth, E., & Bryk, A. S. (2001). Instructional
program coherence: What is it and why it should guide school improvement
policy. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(4), 297-321.

O’Day, J., Bitter, C., Kirst, M., Camoy, M., Woody, E., Buttles, M., Fuller, B., &
Ruenzel, D. (2004). Assessing California’s Accountability System: Successes,
Challenges, and Opportunities for Improvement. PACE Policy Brief, 4(2).
Retrieved August 21, 2006 from http://www-
gse.berkeley.edu/research/PACE/policy_brief.04-2.pdf

Odden, A., (1998). Creating school finance policies that facilitate new goals. CPRE
Policy briefs (RB-26-September). Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy
Research in Education. (CPRE), Graduate School of Education, University of
Pennsylvania.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Perie, M., Moran, R., and Lutkus, A.D. (2005). NAEP 2004 Trends in Academic
Progress: Three Decades of Student Performance in Reading and Mathematics
(NCES 2005–464). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education
Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC:
Government Printing Office.

Peterson, K. (2002). The professional development of principals: Innovations and
opportunities. Educational Administration Quarterly. 38(2), 213-232.

3/31/2009 169
Reed, D. (2003). The growing importance of education in California. San Francisco,
CA: Public Policy Institute of California. Retrieved September 12, 2007 from
https://blackboard.usc.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab=courses&url=/bin/
common/course.pl?course_id=_12614_1

Rueda, R. (2005). Student learning and assessment: Setting an agenda. In P. Pedraza
& M. Rivera (Eds.), Latino education: Setting an agenda (pp. 185-204).

School Works (2007). Overview of the SchoolWorks quality criteria 3
rd
edition
developed for the Broad Prize for Urban Education.

Shannon, G. S., & Bylsma, P. (2004). Characteristics of Improved School Districts:
Themes from Research. Olympia, WA: Office of Superintendent of Public
Instruction.

Shatkin, G., & Gershberg, A. (2007). Empowering parents and building communities:
The role of school-based councils in educational governance and
accountability. Urban Education, 42(6) 582-615.

Snipes, J., Doolittle, F., & Herlihy, C. (2002). Foundations for success: Case studies of
how urban school systems improve achievement. Washington. DC: Manpower
Demonstration Research Corporation.

Stecher, B., Hamilton, L., & Gonzalez, G. (2003). Working smarter to leave no child
behind: Practical insights for school leaders. Santa Monica, CA: Rand
Corporation.

Stiggins, R. (2004, September). New Assessment Beliefs for a New School Mission.
Phi Delta Kappan, 86(1), 22-27.The Broad Foundation & The Thomas B.
Fordham Institute. (2003). Better leaders for America's schools: A manifesto.
Los Angeles

Thomas, D. A. and King, C. in Childress, S. (2007). Reinventing human resources at
the school district of Philadelphia in Elmore, R.F., Grossman, A. S., &
Johnson, S. M. (Eds.). Managing School Districts for High Performance.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

Togneri, W., & Anderson, S. E. (2003). Beyond islands of excellence: What districts
can do to improve instruction and achievement in all schools. Washington, DC:
The Learning First Alliance and the Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development. Pp.10-22, 31-45, 47-56.

Walker, G. E., Golde, C. M., Jones, L., Bueschel, A. C., & Hutchings, P. The
formation of scholars: Rethinking doctoral education for the twenty-first
century

3/31/2009 170
Waters, J. T., & Marzano, R. J. (2006). School District Leadership that Works: The
Effect of Superintendent Leadership on Student Achievement. Aurora, CO:
Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning.

Waters, J. T., Marzano, R.J., & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30
years of research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement.
Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning.

Watkins, M. (2004). The first 90 days: critical success strategies for new leaders at all
levels. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Wong, H. K. (2004). Induction programs that keep new teachers teaching and
improving. NASSP Bulletin, 88(638), 41-58.

Worthen, B. R., & Sanders, J. R., (1989). Educational evaluation. New York:
Longman.

Zavadsky, H & Dolejs, A. (2006). Data: Not just another four letter word. Principal
Leadership (Middle School Ed.) 7(2), 32-36.
3/31/2009 171
APPENDIX A

Please log: Name, data/time of interview, contact information, documents to be
obtained after the interview, part of the interview guide that were not fully covered,
digital tape location.

Superintendent Interview Guide – DAY 1

Q# Question RQ:

1

Describe the overall status of the district when you assumed your
position as Superintendent?

What were the major strengths of the district? (ask for 3 most
salient)

What were the major challenges facing the district? (ask for 3
most salient)

What was the overall academic profile of the district?

1a

1a

1a

1a

2

Considering the context of the district when you arrived, what strategies
did you use to improve the overall condition of the district?

What specific strategies did you employ to improve student
achievement within your district?

Which participants were significantly involved in these
strategies?

How would you describe the level of implementation you have
achieved for each strategy used?

1a/b

1a/b

1a/b

1a/b

3/31/2009 172
APPENDIX A, Continued

Superintendent Interview Guide – DAY 2

Q# Question RQ:

3

Please describe key aspects of your previous background/experience
(Probe: Rate top 3 experiences in terms of importance)

How did your preparation and experience help you to select and
implement appropriate reform strategies designed to improve student
achievement?
(Probe: USLI experience, non-USLI experience, K-12 background,
degree programs, work experience, etc.)

1c

1a/b/
c

4

Please rate your previous professional experience with the following
reform strategies [On a scale from 1 = limited to 3 = extensive].
(Reform Strategies: Strategic Plan, Assessment, Curriculum,
Professional Development, HR System and Human Capital
Management, Finance and Budget, Communications, Governance and
Board Relations, Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations, and
Family and Community Engagement)

(Probe: Identify her/his rationale for each rating)

1c

3/31/2009 173
APPENDIX B

Please log: Name, title, data/time of interview, contact information, documents to be
obtained after the interview, part of the interview guide that were not fully covered,
digital tape location.

Key Player Interview Guide

Q# Question RQ:

1

Describe the overall status of the district when the Superintendent
arrived (or when the key player arrived if after the Superintendent)?

What were the major strengths of the district? (ask for 3 most
salient)

What were the major challenges facing the district? (ask for 3
most salient)

What was the overall academic profile of the district?

1a

1a

1a

1a

2

Considering the context of the district, what strategies did the
Superintendent use to improve the overall condition of the district?

What specific strategies did the Superintendent employ to
improve student achievement within the district?

What was your involvement in these strategies?

How would you describe the level of implementation achieved
for each of the reform strategies used?

(Note: Request documents mentioned).

1b

1b

1b

1b

3/31/2009 174
APPENDIX C
Please log: Names, titles, data/time of interview, contact information, documents to
be obtained after the interview, parts of the interview guide that were not fully
covered, and digital tape location.

Specific Dimensions of Reform Interview Guide

Q# Question

1

In this whole discussion, we want to focus directly on (the specific dimension)

What is your district currently doing with regard (name the dimension)?
What has been the superintendent’s specific strategies regarding this
dimension?

Is your current strategy at all linked to improving student
achievement—please explain?

What has been your success in getting your current reform in this
dimension actually implemented and what challenges do you now face
in this regard?

How does your current effort for this dimension differ from what you
were doing prior to when the current superintendent came to this
district?

For your prior approach, to what extent was that approach fully
implemented?

3/31/2009 175
APPENDIX C, Continued

Specific Dimensions of Reform Interview Guide (Probes)

Questions
Strategic Plan:

What is your district currently doing with regard to (name the dimension)? What
has been the superintendent’s specific strategies regarding this dimension?

Is your current strategy at all linked to improving student achievement—please
explain?

What has been your success in getting your current reform in this dimension
actually implemented and what challenges do you now face in this regard?
Assessment:

What strategies or does your district have in place in regards to summative and
formative assessment to improve student performance?

What assessment practices are carried out both at the district-level and school-
site level to improve student achievement?

How does your district ensure that assessment policies and practices are carried
out throughout the district?

3/31/2009 176
APPENDIX C, Continued

Specific Dimensions of Reform Interview Guide (Probes), Continued

Questions
Curriculum:

What steps does the district take to ensure that the curriculum provides all
students with opportunities to access content and learning standards, (e.g., under-
performing students, students with disabilities, and English Language Learners)?

What steps does the district take to ensure fidelity of implementation of the
curriculum across all schools and classrooms?

What steps does the district take to review and update the curriculum and
adopted materials for alignment to learning standards and student learning
needs?
Professional Development:

Describe how the district’s professional development plan includes emphasis on
improving student achievement, building teacher effectiveness, maintaining high
standards, and promoting continuous learning to enhance intellectual and
leadership capacity?

How are resources specifically designated and available to support the district's
professional development plan?

To what extent does the district's organizational structure and policies ensure the
implementation, evaluation, and monitoring of the professional development
plan?

3/31/2009 177
APPENDIX C, Continued

Specific Dimensions of Reform Interview Guide (Probes), Continued

Questions
HR System and Human Capital Management:

What structures are in place to support the recruitment, selection, and placement
of new teachers and administrators?

What district policies and practices are in place to ensure teachers and
administrators build collective capacity to understand and respond to student
achievement data?

How are incentives used to attract and retain highly qualified teachers and strong
administrators for hard to staff schools?
Finance and Budget:

Prior to the superintendent’s tenure, did the districts mission, vision, and value
statements align resources to the districts instructional goals and priorities?

Describe the process used to create an organizational culture which includes all
stakeholders in the development of district-wide budget and spending priorities?

What effective controls are in place to ensure the district’s resources are
managed properly, including financial reports for fiscal management and
decision-making?

3/31/2009 178
APPENDIX C, Continued

Specific Dimensions of Reform Interview Guide (Probes), Continued

Questions
Communications:

What structures are in place to support communication of the district's vision to
the key stakeholder groups: (e.g., students, staff, and community members)?

What district policies and practices are in place to ensure district personnel build
collective capacity to "tell the story" concerning policies, activities, and events
employed to improve student achievement?

How is the communication plan used to inform the community of district
interests and activities?
Governance and Board Relations:

Describe how the districts’ vision, mission, value, and priorities are focused on
the achievement and needs of all students providing a coherent "road map" to
success?

What procedures are in place and guide how the governance team
(superintendent/board members) works together to establish systems and
processes to monitor student achievement while communicating the information
to the larger community?

What district-wide policies, culture and practices are currently utilized which
reflect a commitment to implementing systemic reform, innovative leadership,
and high expectations to improve student learning and achievement?

3/31/2009 179
APPENDIX C, Continued

Specific Dimensions of Reform Interview Guide (Probes), Continued

Questions
Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations:

What processes are in place to build trust, foster relationships and ensure open
communication between the District and labor union negotiating teams?

What are the procedures for establishing principles and objectives for the
negotiating process?

What strategies are employed by the negotiating teams to ensure accountability
and fair and equitable outcomes for the District’s employees?
Family and Community Engagement:

How does the district support capacity building and encourage parents and
community members to participate in governance and advisory roles?

Please describe the district’s process for gathering information about
parent/community needs related to supporting their children’s education and how
the district responds to this information?

What kind of training or support is provided to administrators, teachers, and
other school staff in working with parents as equal partners in student academic
achievement?
180
APPENDIX D
Quality Rubric - Strategic Plan

Definition: The strategic plan defines the district’s vision, mission, and goals. It also assigns the performance indicators and work
plans to each of the districts goals and serves as the guiding document for the district decisions and priorities.

Components High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Vision

□
□ □
The district’s vision is well articulated in
the strategic plan. It expresses the ethical
code, overriding convictions, and the moral
convictions of the district
□
□ □
The vision represents the personal values
of those vested in the organization and is
easily understood
□
□ □
The district’s vision is somewhat
articulated in the strategic plan. To some
extent it expresses the ethical code,
overriding convictions, and the moral
convictions of the district
□
□ □
Vision somewhat represents the personal
values of those vested in the organization
and is moderately understood
□
□ □
The district’s vision is not articulated in
the strategic plan. It does not express the
ethical code, overriding convictions, and
moral convictions of the district
□
□ □
Vision does not represent the personal
values of those vested in the organization and
is not easily understood
Mission

□
□ □
The mission statement is a clear and
concise expression of the district’s identity,
purpose, and means
□
□ □
The mission statement is a bold
declaration of what the district will be and is
known and understood by most in the district
□
□ □
The mission statement is somewhat an
expression of the district’s identity, purpose
and means
□
□ □
The mission statement somewhat states
what the organization will be and is known
and understood by some in the organization
□
□ □
The mission statement is a not clear and
lacks concise expression of the district’s
identity, purpose and means
□
□ □
The mission statement, to a limited extent,
is declaration of what the organization will
be. It understood by few people in the
organization
Objectives (Goals)

□
□ □
Objectives clearly commit to achieve
specific, measurable results
□
□ □
Objectives are very closely aligned with
the mission statement and they are district
objectives that are measurable and observable
□
□ □
Objectives moderately commit to achieve
specific, measurable results
□
□ □
Some objectives are aligned with the
mission statement; they are district
objectives moderately measurable and
observable
□
□ □
Limited commitment to achieve specific,
measurable results
□
□ □
Few objectives are aligned with the
mission statement and few are district
objectives that are measurable, demonstrated,
and observable
Strategies

□
□ □
Full commitment to deploy any and all of
the districts resources-people, facilities,
equipment and funding- to execute the
strategies to meet objectives is clearly
articulated
□
□ □
The strategies strongly indicate the
districts priorities and standards
□
□ □
Some commitment to deploy districts
resources-people, facilities, equipment and
funding- to execute the strategies to meet
objectives
□
□ □
The strategies indicate moderate
commitment to the districts priorities and
standards
□
□ □
Limited commitment to deploy districts
resources-people, facilities, equipment and
funding- to execute the strategies to meet
objectives
□
□ □
Few strategies indicates the districts
priorities and standards

3/31/2009 181
APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric - Strategic Plan (continued)

Components High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Action Plan □
□ □
Specific reference to the strategy it
supports
□
□ □
States the objective of the action plan itself
□
□ □
Has a detailed description of each step
required to complete the plan.
□
□ □
Indicates assignments and responsibilities
□
□ □
Includes a timeline for plan
□
□ □
Some reference to the strategy it supports
□
□ □
States some of the objectives of the action
plan
□
□ □
Has some description of steps required to
complete the plan.
□
□ □
Indicates some assignments and
responsibilities
□
□ □
Includes some timeline for plan
□
□ □
Limited reference to the strategy it
supports
□
□ □
Objective of the action plan not clearly
stated
□
□ □
Has a little description steps required to
complete the plan
□
□ □
Indicates few assignments and
responsibilities
□
□ □
Timeline for plan very limited
Theory of Action □ Superintendent has a written “theory of
action” that clearly articulates structure;
specifies what is tightly managed and what
decisions should be left to school leaders
□ It is aligned with district context, capacity, &
system leader’s beliefs
□ Superintendent has a “theory of action” that
loosely articulates what is managed by
district and what decisions should be left to
school leaders
□ It is loosely aligned with district context,
capacity, & system’s beliefs
□ Superintendent does not have a “theory of
action.” What is managed by district and
decisions school leaders
□ It is aligned with district context, capacity, &
sups. belief system
Data Dashboard □ District has clearly identified several key
indicators that give district’s pulse
□ Indicators are aligned with district’s strategic
plan; accountability plan assigns
responsibility for achieving district goals to
specific people/depts.
□ District has some indicators that give
district’s pulse
□ Indicators somewhat aligned with strategic
plan; accountability plan assigns some
responsibility for district goals to specific
people/depts.
□ District has few indicators that give district’s
pulse
□ Indicators not aligned with district’s strategic
plan; accountability and responsibility for
achieving district goals not clearly defined

3/31/2009 182
APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric – Assessment

Definition: Assessment activities enable districts to know whether students are learning what they are supposed to learn (i.e., the
standards). Common, regularly-scheduled district-wide assessments should connect directly with standards, curriculum, pacing
guides, and professional development.

Components High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Summative
Assessments

Full district-wide implementation of state
standardized assessments.
Full compliance to state and federal (NCLB)
requirements.
Moderate implementation of state
standardized assessments.
Compliance to state and federal (NCLB)
requirements.
Low district-wide implementation of state
standardized assessments
Low or no compliance to state and federal
(NCLB) requirements.
Formative
Assessments

District-wide use of standards-based
common benchmark and curriculum-
embedded assessments.
Common rubrics to review student work.
Assessment schedule and pacing guides
developed and utilized.
Moderate district-wide use of common
benchmark assessments.
Some common rubrics to review student
work.
Assessment schedule and pacing guides
developed.
Low or no district-wide use of formative
assessments.
Low or no use of common rubrics to review
student work.
No or unclear assessment schedule and/or
pacing guides.
Data Management,
Information, and
Reporting
System/Technology
District-wide (Internet-based) infrastructure
system for assessment data collection,
management, and reporting.
Data collection every 6-8 weeks.
Easy system for entry/retrieval of assessment
data and results/reports.
User friendly data reports.
District/school staff technology trained,
supported and proficient.
Moderate infrastructure for assessment data
collection, management, and/or reporting.
Periodic data collection.
System for entry/retrieval of assessment data
and reports.
District/school staff technology trained.
Low or no infrastructure for assessment data
collection, management, or reporting.
Low or no periodic data collection.
Limited or no district/school staff technology
trained, supported or proficient.

3/31/2009 183
APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric – Assessment (continued)

Component High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Analysis,
Interpretation, and
Utilization of
Assessment Data

District-wide analysis, interpretation, and
utilization of assessment data to improve
instructional practices, decision-making, and
support for learning.
Meaningful feedback to identify areas of
focus and needs for student mastery of
standards.
District-wide schedule for data analysis to
plan and improve curriculum, instruction,
and student achievement.
Moderate district-wide analysis,
interpretation and/or utilization of
assessment data.
Moderate feedback to identify areas of focus
and student needs.
Intermittent schedule for data analysis.
Low or no district-wide analysis,
interpretation or utilization of assessment
data.
Limited or no schedule for data analysis.
Professional
Development (PD)

District-wide plan to ensure all district/school
staff have knowledge and receive support in:
District-wide assessments (summative and
formative)
Effective utilization of data
management/reporting system
Analysis/interpretation of assessment data,
student achievement and meeting of
standards
Collaborative data teams to analyze/interpret
data and design next steps improve
instruction and student performance aligned
to proficiency of standards.
Moderate district-wide plan for
district/school staff to receive training and
support in:
District-wide assessments
Utilization of data management/ reporting
system
Analysis/interpretation of student assessment
data and student achievement
Limited or no district-wide plan for
district/school staffs to receive PD and
support on district-wide assessments.
Limited or no PD for the utilization of data
management/reporting system.
Limited or no PD for the
analysis/interpretation of student assessment
data.
Fiscal Support and
Resources

District-wide fiscal policies and resources
support systematic assessment plan and
implementation aligned to state and federal
accountability measures for student
performance.
Fiscal resource allocation and policies
support district-wide assessment plan.

Limited or no district-wide fiscal policies
and resources in support of systematic
assessment plan and/or implementation.

3/31/2009 184
APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric – Curriculum

Definition: Curriculum refers to the materials used to teach. Classroom materials (e.g., textbooks, worksheets, pacing guides, etc.)
should address the scope and sequence of the district’s learning standards.

Components High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Alignment to
Learning
Standards &
Assessments

□ The district has adopted and implemented a
curriculum that is based upon content
standards and frameworks, and is aligned to
required assessments of student learning
□ The district curriculum contains all of the
essential knowledge and skills students need
master the state and district learning standards
□ The district provides pacing plans in all
content areas that assist teachers in delivering
the required content during the academic year,
aligned to periodic assessments of student
learning
□ The district has an adopted curriculum that is
based upon content standards and
frameworks, and is partially aligned to
required assessments of student learning
□ The district curriculum contains some of the
essential knowledge and skills students need
master state and district learning standards
□ The district provides pacing plans in some
content areas that assist teachers in delivering
the required content during the academic year
□ The district does not have has an adopted
curriculum that is based upon content
standards and frameworks, or aligned to
required assessments of student learning
□ The district curriculum contains little of the
essential knowledge and skills students need
master state and district learning standards
□ The district does not provide pacing plans that
assist teachers in delivering the required
content during the academic year

Equal Access to
Learning
Standards
□ The district curriculum optimizes all students’
opportunities to access content and learning
standards, including under-performing
students, students with disabilities, and ELs
□ The district curriculum provides many
students with opportunities to access content
and learning standards
□ The district curriculum provides few students
with opportunities to access content and
learning standards
Fidelity in
Implementation
□ The district communicates the required
curriculum clearly and systematically with all
stakeholders, especially site administrators,
teachers, students, and parents
□ The district provides adequate funding for
schools to support professional development
and full implementation of the curriculum
□ The district demonstrates a systemic
commitment to long-term implementation of
the curriculum
□ The district communicates the required
curriculum with site administrators, and
teachers
□ The district provides some funding for
schools to support professional development
and implementation of the curriculum
□ The district demonstrates some commitment
to long-term implementation of the
curriculum
□ The district does not fully communicate the
required curriculum to site administrators,
teachers, or other stakeholders
□ The district provides little or inadequate
funding for schools to support professional
development and implementation of the
curriculum
□ The district demonstrates little or no
commitment to long-term implementation of
the curriculum
3/31/2009 185
APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric – Curriculum (continued)

Components High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Sufficiency of and
Appropriateness of
Materials
□ The district provides sufficient instructional
textbooks and curricular materials (including
intervention materials) for all students.
□ The district provides all schools with
abundant supplemental materials to support
and enhance implementation of the
curriculum in all subject areas.
□ The district provides curricular materials are
appropriate for and culturally relevant to all
students
□ The district provides instructional textbooks
and curricular materials for all students.
□ The district provides schools with some
supplemental materials to support
implementation of the curriculum in some
subject areas.
□ The district provides curricular materials are
appropriate for and culturally relevant to
many students
□ The district does not provide sufficient
instructional textbooks and curricular
materials for all students.
□ The district provides schools with few or no
supplemental materials to support
implementation of the curriculum.
□ The district provides curricular materials are
appropriate for and culturally relevant to some
students
Clear and regular
procedures to
review and update
the curriculum
□ There is a system in place that provides for
regular review of the adopted materials for
core subjects by district and site
administrators and teachers to verify
alignment and universal access
□ There is a system in place that provides for
district and site administrators and teachers to
adapt materials to ensure alignment and
access
□ There is a system in place that provides for
District and site administrators and teachers to
use assessment results to determine what
materials are needed to supplement the
adopted curriculum to ensure that all key
standards are mastered.
□ Key staff members periodically review the
adopted materials for core subjects to verify
alignment
□ Key staff members periodically adapt
materials to ensure alignment and access
□ Key staff members periodically use
assessment results to determine what
materials are needed to ensure that all key
standards are mastered.
□ Some district staff members may occasionally
review the adopted materials for core subjects
to verify alignment
□ Some district staff members may occasionally
adapt materials to ensure alignment and
access
□ Some district staff members may occasionally
use assessment results to determine what
materials are needed to ensure that key
standards are mastered.

3/31/2009 186
APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric – Professional Development

Definition: Professional development is any program or course intended to improve teachers’ or principals’ effectiveness. It may center on
content (e.g., teaching about force in physics instructional techniques (e.g., Cornell note-taking), leadership (e.g., workshop for principals and
assist principals), or habits (e.g., collaboration among teachers in the same grade-level/subject matter). In many districts, professional development
topics are arbitrarily chosen. Successful districts have an integrated professional development strategy that centers on enabling teachers to detect
when students aren’t meeting a certain standards and to adjust their instruction accordingly, or enables principals and teachers to improve their
knowledge and skills in areas of district focus.

Component High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Designing
Professional
Development

LEA includes budgeted, coherent PD
activities that reflect the best available
research-based strategies for improved
student achievement and focus on standards-
based content knowledge.
PD supports the district’s long-term plan and
identified goals.
Plan includes needs assessment process and
goals of PD include the following: improving
all students’ learning, improving teacher
effectiveness, setting high standards for
teachers, promoting continuous staff
learning, and enhancing staff intellectual and
leadership capacity.
Resources are designated and available to
support PD plan and specific personnel stay
abreast of and incorporate best practices into
teaching, learning, and leadership.
LEA includes PD activities but they do not
reflect the best available research-based
strategies and may focus on standards-based
content knowledge.
PD minimally supports the district’s long-
term plan.
Plan may include a needs assessment process
may include two or less of the following:
improving all students’ learning, improving
teacher effectiveness, setting high standards
for teachers, promoting continuous staff
learning, and enhancing staff intellectual and
leadership capacity.
Resources are available to support PD plan
and few personnel stay abreast of best
practices.
The LEA has little or no connection to PD
activities which do not necessarily focus on
standards-based content knowledge.
PD plan is not in alignment with district’s
long-term plan.
The plan does not include a needs assessment
process and goals of PD include one or none
of the following: improving all students’
learning, improving teacher effectiveness,
setting high standards for teachers,
promoting continuous staff learning, and
enhancing staff intellectual and leadership
capacity.
Minimal resources are available to support
PD plan and little or not effort has been
made to identify personnel stay abreast of
best practices in teaching, learning, and
leadership.
Implementing
Professional
Development

LEA’s organizational structures and policies
support the implementation of PD activities
on the individual, collegial, and
organizational levels.
PD is integral to the district culture and
promotes inquiry.
PD plan includes “coaching model” and all
staff receives coaching support.
LEA ensures that resources remain available
Most LEA’s organizational structures and
policies support the implementation of PD.
PD is inconsistent across the district and may
promote inquiry and improvement.
Plan includes the “coaching model” and
participation is sporadic.
Some resources are available to support PD.
□ Minimal number of the organizational
structures and policies support the
implementation of PD.
□ PD is disconnected to classroom practices
and does not support and promote teacher
effectiveness in the classroom.
□ Plan does not include “coaching model.”
□ Minimal resources are available to support
PD.
3/31/2009 187
to organize and implement PD.
APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric – Professional Development (continued)

Component High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Evaluating and
Improving
Professional
Development

LEA uses PD design goals to determine
evaluation measures and standards for
success. Personnel for collecting, analyzing,
and reporting data and for facilitating the
“PD next steps” decisions are clarified.
Evaluation findings are used to make
improvements in PD plan and criteria
include: 1) improved teaching, improved
student learning, 3) narrowing of student
achievement gaps.
LEA has a process for monitoring and
documenting the alignment of the school
improvement plan(s), professional
development activities, and teacher and
student outcomes.
LEA has a plan to determine PD evaluation
measures but lacks clarity and specifics as to
what measures will be used as standards for
success. Minimal personnel are selected for
collecting, analyzing, and reporting data and
developing next steps (lacks depth).
Evaluation findings exist but are not used to
make improvements in PD plan.
Lack of alignment in the school improvement
plan(s), PD activities, and teacher and student
outcomes.

□ Little or no connection between PD design
goals and evaluation process. Personnel have
not been identified to collect and analyze data.
□ Little or no connection between evaluation
findings of make improvements in PD plan.
□ The process for monitoring and
documentation of the school improvement
plan(s) exists but lacks alignment between PD
activities, and teacher and student outcomes.
Sharing
Professional
Development
Learning

LEA has a plan to document professional
development learning (challenges and
successes) changes in order to sustain
excellence when major changes in personnel
occur.
Records are kept to guide future PD
decisions.
Implementation materials are organized and
available to serve as models of effective
practice. This strategy is essential for
keeping staff, administrators, parents,
students, and community moving in the same
direction.
□ LEA has moderate documentation of PD
learning (challenges and successes).
□ Records are kept.
□ Some implementation materials are
organized and available to others to serve as
models of effective practices. Therefore,
most of the staff, administrators, parents,
students, and community all moving in the
same direction.
□ LEA lacks documentation of PD challenges
and successes.
Few or no records are kept to guide future PD
decisions.
Little or lack of evidence to support that
implementation materials are organized and
available to others to serve as models of
effective practices.

3/31/2009 188
APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric – HR System and Human Capital Management

Definition: Research indicates that teacher quality is perhaps the primary influence on student achievement, yet many districts do a
poor job of attracting, selecting, and managing talent, whether at the teacher, principal, or central office level. Improving the recruiting
and hiring processes for teachers and principals, developing attractive compensation packages, and processing applications and
payments quickly—which a good HR system should be able to do—can greatly improve the quality of instruction in schools and
classrooms across the district. Districts then need to develop clever support and retention strategies to keep talent in the district. Most
importantly, districts can proactively improve their capacity for providing a quality education by examining and refining their
selection process.

Component High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Recruitment,
selection and
placement of new
administrators
□ Achievement data, demographics, staffing,
and culture of the district are used to define
qualities of new administrators
□ District program in place to recruit
outstanding teachers as administrators
□ Achievement data, demographics, staffing,
and culture of each school are used to develop
a customized set of required principal skills at
all sites
□ Strongest principal leaders are placed at the
most underperforming schools
□ Some criteria are used when identifying
potential school leaders during the
administrator hiring process
□ Informal referral process is in place to
encourage in-house recruitment
□ Placement of principals is determined by
district personnel
□ Strong principals are encouraged to take on
underperforming schools
□ Hiring decisions have little to no connection
to student achievement
□ In-house recruitment program is nonexistent
or inconsequential
□ Placement is driven by availability or other
criteria
□ Performance of school is not considered in
placement
Recruitment of
highly qualified
teachers
□ Quarterly report to community regarding the
percentage of classes with HQTs
□ Compensation incentives are used to recruit
HQTs
□ District and employee organizations work
collaboratively to recruit HQTs from high-
performing schools to teach in
underperforming schools within the district
□ Annual HQT reporting is completed as
required by law
□ Incentives limited to few curricular areas or
special circumstances
□ Strong effort made by district, without union
support, to encourage HQTs from high-
performing schools to teach in
underperforming schools
□ No reporting policy in place or inconsistent
reporting to community
□ No incentive policy in place to support
recruitment of HQTs
□ No or inconsistent efforts to recruit HQTs
from high performing schools to teach in
underperforming schools in the district

3/31/2009 189
APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric – HR System and Human Capital Management (continued)

Component High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Teacher support
and development
□ All teachers have access to ongoing PD that is
targeted at district achievement goals and
delivery of standards-aligned curriculum,
instruction, and assessment
□ District has established a new teacher support
system the promotes high-quality support and
resources
□ PD activities are strongly tied to board-
adopted district goals and objectives
□ District collects data to measure the
effectiveness of PD as it related to improved
student achievement
□ Some teachers have access to ongoing PD that
is targeted at district goals and delivery of a
standards-aligned curriculum and instruction
program
□ District provides some site-level support for
new teachers through formal and informal
processes
□ PD activities are generally supportive of
district goals and objectives
□ Teachers are encouraged to measure the
effectiveness of PD as related to student
achievement
□ There exists little evidence that PD activities
are tied to district achievement goals or
specific curriculum objectives
□ New teachers receive the majority of support
through university teacher preparation
programs
□ No evidence of ties between PD and district
goals and objectives
□ No effort is made by the district to measure
the effectiveness of PD or impact on student
achievement
Salaries, wages,
and benefits
□ District and employee organizations work
collaboratively to ensure salaries, wages, and
benefits are sufficiently competitive to attract
and retain HQTs with an emphasis on math,
language arts, reading, and teaching ELs
□ District conducts quarterly analyses of
recruitment and retention data
□ The district has negotiated competitive
salaries, wages, and benefits as compared to
surrounding school districts
□ District conducts annual analyses of
recruitment and retention data
□ No evidence suggests a collaborative effort on
the part of the district and employee
organizations to attract and retain HQTs in
math, language arts, reading, and teaching
ELs
□ No evidence suggests analysis plans exist in
the district
Use of incentives □ Compensation incentives are used to recruit
HQTs and administrators to work in hard-to-
staff schools
□ Incentives include: extra compensation,
opportunities for collaboration, reduced class
size, and recognition programs
□ Compensation incentives are used to recruit
HQTs in certain content areas at hard to staff
and/or underperforming schools
□ Limited monetary and non-monetary
incentives in use by the district to attract and
retain HQTs and strong administrators
□ Compensation incentives are not used to
attract HQTs / administrators to hard to staff
and/or underperforming schools
□ Incentives are not in place or in use to attract
and retain HQTs and/or strong administrators

3/31/2009 190
APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric - Finance & Budget Rubric

Definition: While student achievement is the ultimate bottom line, more superintendents are fired for poor financial management
than for poor student achievement results. In addition to ensuring that their budget is balanced and sustainable, superintendents should
closely align their budget with instructional priorities. Some districts have adopted innovative budgeting approaches such as “zero-
based budgeting” and weighted student funding to bring their budgets into closer alignment with their priorities.

Component High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Strategic Budget
Planning
□
□ □
Strategic plan is linked to the
superintendent’s goals and priorities,
incorporates measurable objectives and
outcomes, and is used as the basis of budget
planning.
□
□ □
The budget is closely aligned to the
district’s mission, goals, and operational
activities and identifies who is accountable
organizationally for specified outcomes.
□
□ □
School budget is explicitly tied to the
district’s instructional goals and priorities.
□
□ □
Changes in district priorities are reflected
in the budget in a timely fashion.
□
□ □
Fiscal team understands the district’s past
fiscal issues, problems, challenges, and
accomplishments in order to gain perspective
on how to guide the district in the future.
□
□ □
District goals and priorities, outlined in the
strategic plan, are found in budget priorities,
but the links between the strategic plan and
the budget process are not evident.
□
□ □
There is some evidence of the district’s
instructional goals and priorities in the
budget.
□
□ □
Changes in district priorities are reflected
in the budget, but not in time to make
meaningful decisions.
□
□ □
The budget is somewhat aligned to the
district’s mission, goals, and operational
activities but organizational accountability is
not clear.
□
□ □
The district’s past fiscal issues, problems,
challenges, and accomplishments are not
considered in planning process.
□
□ □
Strategic plan is not referenced in budget
planning.
□
□ □
Changes in district priorities are not
reflected in the budget.
□
□ □
The budget is not understood by
stakeholders.
□
□ □
Fiscal team has no historical perspective of
past fiscal issues.

3/31/2009 191
APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric - Finance & Budget Rubric (continued)

Components
High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Organizational
Culture
□
□ □
Expands participation in budget process to
include stakeholders and secure buy-in by
constituencies.
□
□ □
Presents audit findings & corrective action
plans to Board.
□
□ □
Establish a clear process to solicit input
from Local District personnel, principals, and
others on the annual budget process and to
pilot-test ideas before they are rolled out to
the field.
□
□ □
Participation in budget process limited to
upper and middle management.
□
□ □
Board is made aware of audit findings.
□
□ □
Processes for input from Local District
personnel, such as principals, is not clearly
established.
□
□ □
Little participation in budget process
outside of fiscal.
□
□ □
Audit findings are not sun-shined.
□
□ □
Input from Local District personnel,
principals, and others on the annual budget
process is not solicited.
Operational
Procedures
□
□ □
Establishes effective controls to ensure
that the district’s resources are managed
properly, including monthly financial reports
for fiscal management & decision-making.
□
□ □
Uses the district’s annual external audit to
improve district operations, including— the
timely review and follow-up of findings,
development of corrective action plans, and
implementation of corrective actions.
□
□ □
Establish uniform comprehensive financial
procedural manuals for school sites, Local
Districts, and central offices and conduct
appropriate training for users.
□
□ □
Controls to ensure that the district’s
resources are managed properly, including
periodic financial reports for fiscal
management & decision-making, are
restricted to few district personnel.
□
□ □
District’s annual external audit is
discussed only when produced and not
revisited in planning process.
□
□ □
Financial policies are not readily available
to school sites, Local Districts, and central
offices.
□
□ □
Financial reports for fiscal management &
decision-making are only produced, or made
available to decision-makers, in times of
crisis.
□
□ □
District’s annual external audit is not used
to inform decisions or future policy.
□
□ □
No formal financial procedural manuals
are available.

3/31/2009 192
APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric – Communications

Definition: Effective school districts need to showcase the great stories in their district and to counteract misinformation or negative
news. Developing a public relations or communications office staffed with experts on dealing with the media can enable the district to
communicate its vision to the public or proactively build support for an important initiative.

Component High (3)

Medium (2)

Low (1)

Communications Plan □ Communications plan is aligned with
district’s strategic plan
□ Communications plan actively supports
district mission and vision
□ Communications plan tailored to reflect
diversity of district schools
□ Communications plan designed to seek
community input
□ Communications plan is up to date
□ Communications plan is understood by
district office and school staff
□ Communications plan addresses needs of all
stakeholders
□ Communications plan is out of date or
missing
□ Schools are unaware of district
communications plan
□ Schools contact district office when
communications issues arise
Communications
Office
□ Communications office is integral part of
district decision making
□ Communications office maintains close
liaison with community
□ Communications office routinely consults
with district schools to ensure reporting of
“great stories”
□ Communications office is adequately staffed
□ Communications office consulted for input
in decision making
□ Communications office contacts schools and
community stakeholders with news of events
and decisions
□ Communications office is not functioning
□ Communications office is inadequately
staffed
□ Communications office not routinely
informed of decisions affecting community
stakeholders
Communication of
district vision to the
community
□ District meets with community leaders to
discuss district vision
□ Multiple interactive means are used to
disseminate district vision
□ District employees take a proactive approach
to telling honest district message

□ District communicates vision via periodic
releases in local newspapers
□ District notifies community organizations of
district vision
□ School leaders are required to maintain
coherence of district vision with school goals
□ District vision is not communicated to the
community
□ Mission and vision are displayed on district
home page
□ School bulletins and newsletters relay district
vision to homes

3/31/2009 193
APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric – Communications (continued)

Component High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Build support for
district initiatives
□ Family and community members are
engaged as decision makers in
communicating district initiatives
□ District initiatives are communicated and
understood by community
□ District notifies community organizations of
initiatives
□ Key community leaders are informed of
district initiatives
□ School leaders are encouraged to
communicate information regarding district
initiatives with key personnel
□ Community is unaware of district initiatives
□ Schools are given information concerning
district initiatives to send home in
newsletters
Two way
communications with
community
□ District and community feel involved and
engaged in their public schools
□ Focus groups and town hall meetings inform
community of district interests and activities
□ Staff members are involved in community
groups and organizations
□ Information concerning proposed legislation
that affects schools and communities are
tracked and disseminated by district
□ District publishes calendar and transportation
schedules in local newspapers
□ Community organizations are routinely
notified of district events
□ Key community leaders are routinely
notified of district events
□ School leaders are encouraged to
communicate school activities via
newsletters and letters home
□ Community events and activities are
disseminated through schools
□ Community is unaware of district events
□ District communicates to community
primarily through schools
□ Community does not communicate activities
with district
□ Parents receive letters and newsletters from
their school announcing special district
events

3/31/2009 194
APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric – Governance/Board Relations

Definition: Most districts are governed by boards elected from the local population; others answer to appointed boards. In either
case, school boards are responsible for setting the policy direction for the district; superintendents can take a supporting role in
developing policy but are mainly charged with executing it. Winning the support of board members, especially elected ones, is a time-
consuming but critical task for most superintendents.

Component High (3)

Medium (2)

Low (1)

Setting the
Direction for the
Community’s
Schools
□ The District’s vision, mission, value, and
priorities are focused on achievement and the
needs of all students are clearly known in the
school community.
□ The vision, mission, values, and priorities are
described in the LEA plan and visible at all
district sites and described as measurable
goals.
□ The District’s goals are measurable and
achievable being evaluated annually to
improve instruction and close the gap
between high and low achieving students.
□ The District’s vision, mission, value and
priorities may lack clear focus and not
necessarily focused on student achievement
and the needs of all students are not well
known at all district sites.
□ The District’s goals are measurable and
possibly achievable but not evaluated
annually nor may be part of the LEA plan.
□ The instruction is not necessarily closing the
gap between high and low achieving
students.
□ The District’s vision, mission, value, and
priorities lack focus or are non-existent.
□ There is very little to no information available
at any district site or in the LEA plan.
□ The goals are not measurable or non-existent
and are not reviewed.
Establishing an
Effective and
Efficient Structure
for the District
□ The Board has established an organizational
structure that fully supports the district’s
vision while empowering the superintendent
and staff.
□ The Board approves policies and sets the
direction for adopting the curriculum.
□ The Board establishes budgeting priorities
on-time and consistent with the vision and
goals.
□ The Board has established an organizational
structure that partially supports the District’s
vision and may not fully empower the
superintendent.
□ Board policies are not adopted or approved in
a timely manner and there is little input in the
curriculum adoption.
□ The budget may not fully reflect the priorities
and is not consistent with the vision and
goals.
□ The board has established an organizational
structure that may not support the district
vision and may not empower the
superintendent and staff.
□ Board policies are not adopted or approved
and there is little to no input in the curriculum
adoption.
□ The budget does not reflect the priorities and
is not consistent with the vision and goals.

3/31/2009 195
APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric – Governance/Board Relations (continued)

Components High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Providing Support
and Resources
□ The Board supports the superintendent and
staff and acts in a professional demeanor
modeling the District’s belief and vision.
□ The budget allocation aligns resources based
on instructional priorities and student needs
and there is concentrated evidence of
providing additional support to reform efforts
that directly impact student achievement.
□ The Board may support the superintendent
and staff and sometimes acts with
professional demeanor modeling the
District’s beliefs and vision.
□ The budget partially aligns resources to
instructional priorities and student needs and
there is some evidence of additional support
to reform efforts that directly impact student
achievement.
□ The Board rarely supports the superintendent
and staff and seldom models the District’s
belief and vision.
□ The budget allocation does not align
resources based on instructional priorities or
student need and there is no evidence of
providing additional support to reform efforts
that directly impact student achievement.

Ensuring
Accountability to
the Public
□ The Board establishes systems and processes
to monitor student achievement and
communicates the information to the school
community.
□ The Board evaluates the superintendent and
sets the policy for the evaluation of all
personnel.
□ The Board monitors program effectiveness
through assessments and requires changes to
protect scarce resources and monitors
effectiveness through self-evaluation.
□ The Board may have established systems to
monitor student achievement while
communication lacks consistency to the
community.
□ The Board evaluates the superintendent but
may not set policy for the evaluation of all
personnel.
□ The Board may monitor program
effectiveness through assessments and
seldom requires changes to protect resources
and there may be evidence of monitoring
through self-assessment.
□ The Board has not established systems to
monitor student achievement and rarely
communicates any information to the
community.
□ The Board marginally evaluates the
superintendent and does not set policy for
personnel evaluations.
□ The Board rarely monitors program
effectiveness to protect resources and there is
no evidence of its’ effectiveness through self-
evaluation.
Actions as
Community
Leaders
□ The Board has involved the community in
appropriate, meaningful ways to allow for
feedback from stakeholders.
□ There is clear communication to community
members regarding district policies, district
educational programs, and the financial
condition of the district and progress of local
goals or bond information.
□ The Board allows the superintendent to share,
as appropriate, information with local
constituency groups.
□ The Board infrequently involves the
community in meaningful ways allowing for
feedback from stakeholders.
□ There may be clear communication to the
community regarding policies, programs and
the financial condition of the district but it is
not consistent.
□ The Board sometimes allows the
superintendent to share, as appropriate,
information with local constituency groups.
□ The Board has generally not involved the
community in any meaningful way and does
not readily accept feedback from the
community.
□ There is no clear communication to the
community and generally, district information
can be obtained only at district sites.
□ There is generally no sharing of information
with local constituency groups.
3/31/2009 196
APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric – Labor Relations/Negotiations

Definition: In addition to teachers unions, superintendents often need to build relationships and negotiate with several other unions to
which various district staff belong. Success in working with unions requires an upfront investment in building relationships and
understanding the priorities of union leaders. The content of contracts also requires close attention. Contract language can restrict or
expand the superintendent’s options for replacing and reassigning staff. This is particularly crucial with teacher contracts, as teacher
quality is one of the most significant influences on student achievement.

Component High (3)

Medium (2)

Low (1)

Relationships,
Communications
and Trust
□ Both teams have solid trusting relationships,
credibility, political savvy, and model ethical
behavior by establishing core values
□ All bargaining members are provided with a
continuous meaningful training on traditional,
interest-based and core values bargaining
□ All key stakeholders informed of planning,
updates, modifications to proposals and
strategies, and tentative and final agreements
□ Both teams have moderate relationships,
credibility, political savvy, and model ethical
behavior by establishing core values
□ All bargaining members are provided with
some training on interest-based and
traditional bargaining
□ Some information is disseminated regarding
planning, updates, modifications to proposals
and strategies, and tentative and final
agreements to some stakeholders
□ Teams have limited skeptical relationships,
lacking credibility, political savvy, and
ethical behavior need for core values
□ There is a need for meaningful training on
traditional, interest-based and core values
bargaining
□ Only a few stakeholders are informed of
negotiation process and limited information is
distributed about tentative and final
agreements
Negotiation
Principles
and Objectives
□ Both teams have secure, established roles and
responsibilities
□ All teams use strategic plans, mission
statements, major goals and core values to
develop objectives
□ Teams work together collaboratively to
review existing contract language, to identify
problem areas, articulate community
concerns, and discuss the impact of current
language on student achievement and district
operations
□ Only one team has secure, established roles
and responsibilities
□ The district and other teams have limited
access to strategic plans, mission statements,
major goals and core values to develop
objectives
□ Each team works in isolation to review
existing contract language, and identify
problem areas, that impact of current
language on student achievement and district
operations
□ Both teams have secure, established roles and
responsibilities
□ All teams use strategic plans, mission
statements, major goals and core values to
develop objectives
□ Existing contract language is not considered
or discussed in reference to the impact of
current language on student achievement and
district operations

3/31/2009 197

APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric – Labor Relations/Negotiations (continued)

Components High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Strategies for
Negotiations

□ Bargaining goals and objectives are
developed in relation to the importance of the
district mission and bargaining success,
district verifies the proposal against district
philosophy, core values, financial resources,
community support and impact of student
achievement
□ District and union work together to determine
an overarching approach to negotiations with
considerations for distributive or integrative
bargaining or a combination of the two
□ There is a solid plan for impasse: meditation,
fact finding and post fact finding negotiations
□ Bargaining goals and objectives are
somewhat developed in relation to the
importance of the district mission and
possible bargaining success
□ District determines an overarching approach
to negotiations with considerations for
distributive or integrative bargaining or a
combination of the two
□ Impasse results in breakdown in
communication, the district does not have a
plan for this process
□ Bargaining goals and objectives are
developed in relation to the importance of
each parties individual interest; the district
philosophy, core values, financial resources,
community support and impact of student
achievement are not the main consideration
□ Each group determines an overarching
approach that benefits self-interest in
negotiations
□ There is a solid plan for impasse: meditation,
fact finding and post fact finding negotiations
Fair and Equitable
Outcomes
□ Equitable distribution of rights in evaluations,
assignments, health plan, calendars, staff
development, schedules, retirement etc.
□ A high value placed on all employees and
fully recognizes their impact on the successes
of district students
□ Within the context of core values and fiscal
ability, settlement provides a fair and
equitable compensation package

□ In many cases, management rights override
the distribution of rights in evaluations,
assignments, health plan, calendars, staff
development, schedules, retirement etc.
□ Some value placed on employees and there
are small attempts to recognize their impact
on the success of district
□ At times, different groups consider core
values and fiscal impacts when negotiating
settlements and compensation packages
□ Power struggles exist when deciding the
rights in evaluations, assignments, health
plan, calendars, staff development, schedules,
retirement etc.
□ Employees perceive that they are not
recognized for their impact on the successes
of district
□ Regardless of core values and fiscal impact,
groups demand unreasonable, unaffordable
compensation packages

3/31/2009 198
APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric – Family and Community Engagement

Definition: All residents of a school district’s jurisdiction can be considered its stakeholders, so ensuring everyone’s satisfaction can
be difficult. Districts should offer several ways for the community and families to interact with the district, from coordinating
volunteer opportunities for parents to partnering with local organizations in support of student success. It is also important to gather
feedback from the public on the district’s performance. Several districts take surveys of parents of children and of the community in
general to determine how they view the district and what their priorities for improvement are. These surveys should be closely linked
to the district’s performance management system and data dashboard. Increasing stakeholder satisfaction can lead to greater support
for bond measures for the district, significantly increasing its financial resources.

Component High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Parenting □ The district provides coordinated trainings, at
all levels, based on parent needs and local
context.
□ The district has a system or process in place
for appropriate and quality referrals.
□ The district ensures and supports schools in
educating all staff in working with parents as
equal partners, coordinates parent programs,
and builds ties between parents/ community
and the schools.
□ Schools organize trainings for parents on a
scheduled basis.
□ Schools provide appropriate referrals.
□ The district or school offers staff trainings in
how to work with the parents/community.
□ Schools plan trainings upon request by
parents.
□ Schools provide referrals.
□ Schools receive little support from the district
in planning trainings for staff with a focus on
working with parents/community.
Communication □ Information is provided in a language and
format that ensures participation for those
parents who lack literacy skills or whose
native language is not English.
□ A district-wide expectation of consistent and
effective two-way communication between
the home and school exists.
□ Schools provide key information concerning
the school program and its activities, as
feasible, in a language that ensures
participation for those parents whose native
language is not English.
□ Schools encourage consistent and effective
two-way communication between the home
and school.
□ Schools are inconsistent in providing
translated notifications. Few resources or
options are available for schools that need
translation assistance.
□ Schools do not regularly emphasize the
importance of communication between the
home and school.

3/31/2009 199

APPENDIX D, Continued
Quality Rubric – Family and Community Engagement (continued)

Component High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Volunteerism □ The district and school parent involvement
policy informs parents about opportunities for
volunteers and the rights for parents to be
involved in school and classroom
activities/events.
□ The district delineates specific measures that
are taken to increase parental involvement
and addresses various barriers.
□ The district and school parent involvement
policy informs parents about opportunities for
volunteers and the rights for parents to be
involved in school and classroom
activities/events.
□ The district and schools address major
barriers, such as language, transportation, and
need for childcare.
□ The district and school parent involvement
policy informs parents about opportunities for
volunteers and the rights for parents to be
involved in school and classroom
activities/events.
□ The district and schools do little to address
barriers to parent/community participation.

Learning at Home □ The district supports schools in providing
techniques and strategies that parents may use
to improve their children’s academic success
and help their children in learning at home.
□ Schools provide techniques and strategies that
parents may use to improve their children’s
academic success and help their children in
learning at home.
□ Schools rely on teachers to work with
individual families on a as needed basis.
Decision Making □ Parents are encouraged and actively recruited
to participate in undertaking governance and
advisory roles..
□ The district organizes opportunities for
parents/ community to be involved in the
joint development of the LEA plan, parent
involvement policies, parent needs
assessments, and school-parent compacts.
□ Parents are encouraged to participate in
governance and advisory roles.
□ Parents/community are involved in some
components of the development of LEA plan,
parent involvement policies, parent needs
assessments, and school-parent compacts.
□ Schools do not have active parent
committees, and are provided little support
for taking corrective measures.
□ Parents/community are not consulted in the
development of the LEA plan, parent
involvement policies, parent needs
assessments, or school-parent compacts.
Collaboration with
the Community
□ Community organizations and/or institutions
are highly involved in district and/or school
activities, working in collaboration with the
district.
□ Community organizations and/or institutions
are minimally involved in district and/or
school activities.
□ Community organizations and/or institutions
are not involved in district and/or school
activities.

200
APPENDIX E:
Implementation Rubric (All Levers)

Dimension High
3
Medium
2
Low
1
Challenges &
Concerns
The external challenges
to full implementation
and the concerns/
thoughts of key players
□ No serious obstacle or
challenge.
□ Staff focused on
improving full use of
lever and its impact on
student performance
□ Common commitment to
approach
□ Some obstacles and/or
challenges to
implementation.
□ Staff focused on thought
and actions needed to
improving lever
□ Majority of staff
showing commitment to
approach
□ Serious external
obstacles to
implementation
□ Staff focused on whether
approach to lever is best
design or is feasible
□ Possible strong
disagreement about best
direction
Fully Implemented
in Practice
The extent that each
component of the
change lever is fully
implemented in
practice.
□ Full implementation of
all components of the
lever across the district
□ Best practices have been
established and are
communicated in
coordinated manner
□ Practice is reflected in
policy and procedures
□ Uneven and/or
inconsistent
implementation of the
lever across the district
□ Best practices are being
collected-with plans for
communicating these
across the district
□ Possibly some good
ideas about
implementation of the
change lever
□ Little actual
implementation of the
lever beyond minimal
bureaucratic
requirements
Common Culture:
Data, Reflection, &
Continuous
Improvement
Shared understanding,
values, and desired
expectations, including
active use of data,
reflection and
continuous
improvement of the
change lever itself.
□ Extensive use of data
and reflection about the
change lever—its design,
implementation and
effectiveness in
supporting student
achievement.
□ Common and clear
expectations across
district
□ Extensive work on
continuous improvement
□ Use of data and
reflection guides
decisions about the
change lever
□ Expectations
communicated across the
district
□ Moderately effective
continuous improvement
efforts
□ Little common
understanding of the
change lever
□ No/little data collection
regarding lever
□ No/little reflection about
how to improve
implementation of
change lever
Sustainable Use:
Resources, Staff,
Regularization
Ad hoc vs. stability of
staff and fiscal
resources and a fit with
the ongoing
organization.

□ Strong possibility of
sustainability
□ Strong and ongoing staff
and fiscal resource
commitment
□ Shared expertise and
capacity building
□ Inclusion in regular way
the district operates
□ Moderate possibility of
sustainability
□ Moderate staff and fiscal
resource commitment
□ District support and
expertise

□ Very tenuous approach
to implementation of
change lever
□ Little chance of
sustainability in terms of
staffing, resources, or
regularized patterns

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this study is to discover what actions superintendents are taking to improve student achievement, and specifically to understand the impact of ten identified reform strategies on academic achievement and outcomes for students. This study examines the reform strategies used by an urban superintendent who is a graduate of The Urban School Leadership Institute (USLI) superintendent preparation program. It presents findings regarding the superintendent’s responses to the strengths and weaknesses in his district, the reform strategies implemented by the superintendent in order to improve student achievement, and the relationship of the reform strategies used to the background and experience of the superintendent.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Promoting student achievement: a case study of change actions employed by an urban school superintendent

PDF

Superintendent's leverage: a case study of strategies utilized by an urban school district superintendent to improve student achievement

PDF

An urban superintendent's strategies for systemic reform: a case study

PDF

The superintendent and reform: a case study of action by the system leader to improve student achievement in a large urban school district

PDF

A case study in reform: implementation strategies of one urban superintendent

PDF

The role of the superintendent in raising student achievement: a superintendent effecting change through the implementation of selected strategies

PDF

Systemic change and the system leader: a case study of superintendent action to improve student achievement in a large urban school district

PDF

Reform strategies used by system leaders in education to impact student achievement: a case study

PDF

How successful urban superintendents in California improve student achievement

PDF

An examination of traditional versus non-traditional superintendents and the strategies they employ to improve student achievement

PDF

Effective strategies superintendents utilize in building political coalitions to increase student achievement

PDF

Sustaining student achievement: Six Sigma strategies and successful urban school district superintendents

PDF

Sustainable reform: a follow-up case study on one urban superintendent’s efforts to improve student achievement

PDF

Superintendents and Latino student achievement: promising practices that superintendents use to influence the instruction and increase the achievement of Latino students in urban school districts

PDF

Effective practices employed by superintendents' leadership teams that impact student achievement

PDF

Leading the way: the effective implementation of reform strategies and best practices to improve student achievement in math

PDF

What strategies do urban superintendents utilize to address global challenges in the implementation of 21st century skills

PDF

Strategies employed by successful urban superintendents responding to demands for student achievement reform

PDF

The effective implementation of reform strategies, instructional conditions, and best practices to improve student achievement in math: a case study of practices at Land High School

PDF

CAHSEE intervention strategies implemented by successful urban California superintendents

Asset Metadata

Creator Murphy, Kristen K. (author)

Core Title Reform strategies implemented to increase student achievement: a case study of superintendent actions

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 05/10/2009

Defense Date 03/04/2009

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,reform strategies,superintendent

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Castruita, Rudy M. (committee chair), Marsh, David D. (committee chair), Robles, Darline P. (committee member)

Creator Email krisk@usc.edu,kristenmurphy@luckymail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m2227

Unique identifier UC1190983

Identifier etd-Murphy-2783 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-245073 (legacy record id),usctheses-m2227 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Murphy-2783.pdf

Dmrecord 245073

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Murphy, Kristen K.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Repository Name Libraries, University of Southern California

Repository Location Los Angeles, California

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu