Most state education agencies and local school districts are counting on academic coaches and teams of experienced educators to turn around underperforming schools.
But while those approaches have been used to meet the requirements of high-stakes state accountability programs, scaling up the practices to help hundreds of schools identified as not making adequate progress under the federal No Child Left Behind Act is proving too costly and unwieldy for some.
See the related story,
Under the federal law, Title I schools that fall short of their states鈥� goals for adequate yearly progress for two consecutive years are identified as needing improvement. Those schools are required to receive technical assistance and must each draw up a two-year improvement plan using practices grounded in scientifically based research.
States must set aside 4 percent of their Title 1 allocations for school improvement efforts, directing no less than 95 percent of that money directly to districts identified as having low-performing schools.
But state departments of education and local districts often face similar obstacles in following the federal law: They don鈥檛 have enough people to provide hands-on intervention in their struggling schools. They lack the expertise on their staffs to tackle the schools鈥� myriad challenges. They don鈥檛 have the money to expand school improvement efforts they鈥檙e already pursuing.
So states and districts are looking at large-scale strategies to help underperforming schools, with most focusing on districtwide reform efforts rather than parachuting into every school. There鈥檚 a greater emphasis on seeking partnerships with private and nonprofit organizations to bring in the expertise and resources to boost test scores more quickly.
Rethinking Roles
During a conference here in Baltimore last week, state and local education officials examined efforts under way to devise systems of support for low-performing schools and districts.
Joseph F. Johnson Jr., a special assistant to Ohio鈥檚 state superintendent, said state education agencies facing limits on their capacity must rethink every job vacancy and contract out work to those who show the expertise to improve schools.
鈥淲hat is clear,鈥� he told the gathering, 鈥渋s so much that has been done in the past in states hasn鈥檛 worked.鈥�
Mr. Johnson, who leads Ohio鈥檚 efforts to close the achievement gaps between students of dif ferent racial and ethnic backgrounds, also said state education agencies have lacked the necessary 鈥渃ommitment, dedication, and passion鈥� in their attempts to turn around troubled schools.
鈥淚f we can鈥檛 model [that commitment and passion] as a state, we can鈥檛 expect it within the schools and school districts with which we work,鈥� he added.
The Washington-based Council of Chief State School Officers and the newly established Center for Data-Driven Reform in Education organized the Oct. 3-5 conference, which attracted about 170 state and local education officials. The center, which is based at Johns Hopkins University here, received a five-year, $10 million federal grant to give states and districts guidance in identifying programs that are effective in raising achievement in low-performing schools.
Robert E. Slavin, the director of the center and a co-director of the Success for All Foundation, said school improvement policies must be crafted on a wide scale: 鈥淚t鈥檚 not going to happen one kid at a time or one school at a time.鈥�
Some contend that the complex work of improving academically lagging schools has been overshadowed by the federal law鈥檚 provisions for free tutoring and school transfers.
School improvement efforts may not be as 鈥渟exy or new鈥� as supplemental education services or transfers, but they are what will bolster achievement, Jeff Simering, the legislative director for the Council of the Great City Schools in Washington, said during an interview earlier this month.
The U.S. Department of Education also has underemphasized school improvement interventions, Mr. Simering said.
鈥淲hen push comes to shove, putting a kid on a bus or sending a kid to private tutor aren鈥檛 going to have as much impact as the curriculum decisions and service-delivery options that schools implement under their school reform plans,鈥� he said.
But Fran Walter, who leads the instructional-change group for the Education Department鈥檚 office of student achievement and school accountability, said the department monitors all aspects of the law 鈥渆qually and seriously.鈥�
Both school districts and state education departments are responsible, under the law, for helping struggling schools meet their achievement goals. State education agencies must establish a 鈥渟tatewide system of intensive and sustained support and improvement鈥� by using teams of experienced educators and other partners to help struggling schools, the law鈥檚 guidelines say.
Districts are charged with analyzing the schools鈥� data and budgets, along with identifying 鈥渟cientifically based鈥� strategies to improve instructional problems.
Ms. Walter is heading a three-year effort to monitor states鈥� implementation of the No Child Left Behind law, a revision of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act that President Bush signed in January 2002. The 14 reviews completed so far, she said at the conference, show that some state education agencies with school improvement experience are trying to figure out how to expand their capacity to serve more schools.
Other states are still trying to adapt their programs to take the law鈥檚 more prescriptive approach to lifting up struggling schools.
Building Capacity
Educators shared their strategies at the conference. In the Philadelphia public schools, for example, 鈥渜uality-review teams鈥� are dispatched to examine key aspects of low-achieving schools, ranging from their instructional programs to their overall climates.
Paul G. Vallas, the chief executive officer of the 190,000-student district, stressed that districts must consider 鈥渄iversified management models.鈥� Private companies or universities run dozens of schools in Philadelphia, an arrangement imposed by state lawmakers.
Contracting with high-quality private and nonprofit providers allows school systems to fill in the gaps and better meet schools鈥� needs, Mr. Vallas said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 shown us that you don鈥檛 have to do everything in-house,鈥� he said. 鈥淟et鈥檚 use the market to get the most cost-effective benefit.鈥�
Representatives of North Carolina鈥檚 education department boasted about their hands-on, team-based intervention for schools identified as low-performing under the state鈥檚 accountability system. But the state targeted at most 16 schools in one year. The state can鈥檛 afford to duplicate those efforts, which cost up to $7 million, in all of the 138 schools missing the mark under the federal law. North Carolina will instead translate that work to help its 43 school districts needing improvement.
鈥淲hat worries me with district assistance is, how many students will be sacrificed while the district builds capacity?鈥� said Jackie Colbert, the assistant director of the school improvement division at the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction.
