The Olmsted Falls Continuous Improvement Process

1. The Olmsted Falls Continuous Improvement Process From District Leadership to Building Leadership

2. Objectives of Discussion • Answer these questions: • How does this fit in with the other stuff? • What is SPDG? • What is the function of a District Leadership Team? • What is the function of a Building Leadership Team? • What are we trying to accomplish?

3. Student Learning Assessment Instruction Academic Content Standards/Learning Targets Professional Learning Community

4. Mission Shared Vision Shared Values Goals Communication Clarity Assessment Systematic Interventions Collaborative Teams Focus Results Conflict Professional Learning Community

5. Ohio Leadership Advisory Council Beliefs/Assumptions • The purpose of leadership is the improvement of instructional practice and student performance, regardless of role; • Ohio’s leadership system must be anchored in teaching and learning, focused on building community, and directed to ensuring the success of all children; and • A common and collective understanding of essential practices or behaviors is needed to create a coherent leadership development system.

6. SPDG District Requirements • Establish DLT/BLT • Examine leadership team structures/practices in accordance with OLAC • Use the Ohio Improvement Process and Data Framework to identify areas of greatest need and probable causes contributing to needs • Develop a focused plan with a limited number of goals and strategies • Submit plan for external review and make modifications based on feedback received • Implement the plan • Monitor the plan for implementation fidelity and impact

7. Why Leadership Team Structures? • Shift focus from a single individual to a team that can function as a purposeful community • Distribute key leadership functions • Align and focus work across the system using few district goals • Ensure effective leadership is exercised at all levels of the system

8. Leadership Defined Ohio Leadership Advisory Council’s Framework

9. Cause & Effect Analysis • What results do we currently get (Effect)? • What are the antecedents (Cause)?

10. Leadership Team – Primary Functions DLT • Set performance targets aligned with district goals, and monitoring performance against the targets • Build a foundation for data-driven decision making on a system-wide basis • Design system planning and focused improvement strategies/structures/ processes • Facilitate the development/use of collaborative structures • Allocate system resources toward instructional improvement

11. Leadership Team – Primary Functions BLT • Build a school culture that supports effective data-driven decision making • Establish priorities for instruction/achievement aligned with district goals • Establish priorities for instruction/achievement aligned with district goals • Provide opportunities for teachers to learn from each other; greater opportunity for teacher leadership • Monitor/provide effective feedback on student progress • Support the development, implementation, and monitoring of focused SIP

12. Why use this framework? • Findings from a sample of effective and not so effective districts

13. Evidence of Effective Practices 1.5 Data Driven Decisions 1.4 Professional Development 1.3 Leadership Critical Area Environment/ Climate 1.8 Instructional Practices 1.3 Alignment with Standards 1.4 0 1 2 3 None Limited Adequate Strong Summary Profile Results forSix Pilot Districts

14. Reference to the Six Critical Areas The SID instrument identifies the SYSTEMATIC practices and policies in these areas. • Alignment with State Standards • Instructional Practices • Environment/Climate • Leadership • Professional Development • Data-Driven Decisions

15. Findings: Common Weaknesses Instructional Practices • Limited higher order thinking skills • Lessons geared toward tests – not engaging to students • Limited inclusion of SWD/gifted programming • Limited differentiation of instruction • Inconsistent implementation/non-sustained

16. Findings: Common Weaknesses Environment and Climate • Highest scoring across all districts • Need to emphasize high expectations for students and staff • Parent involvement needed at all levels • School • District • Home

17. Findings: Common Weaknesses Leadership • Communication is key • two-way • transparent • Ineffectual building/district leadership teams (if they exist) • Top-down management of district • Limited balanced leadership • Board and union leadership not aligned

18. Findings: Common Weaknesses Professional Development • Limited alignment with building/district needs • Not job-embedded • Limited time for collaboration within or across grades • Coaching not used effectively

19. Findings: Common Weaknesses Data-driven Decisions • Beginning to analyze data – very student based • Limited use of data to drive instruction and intervention • Resource allocation not reviewed regularly • Limited building level input in budgeting

20. Next steps… • Diffuse the OFCS’ district plan • Create a BLT structure • Conduct a Cause/Effect analysis at the building level to look for evidence regarding why we get the results that we do (both achievement and growth) • Set a very limited number of building goals that are in alignment with District CIP and building vision and mission