Washington State Leadership

P R O G R E S S R E P O R T

B A K E R E V A L U A T I O N R E S E A R C H C O N S U L T I N G D E C E M B E R 2 0 0 8

Washington State Leadership Academy

YEAR 1 PROGRESS REPORT

DUANE B. BAKER, Ed.D. CANDACE A. GRATAMA, Ed.D. MARK FREED, M.A.T.

Duane Baker is the founder and president of Baker Evaluation, Research, and Consulting, Inc (The BERC Group). Dr. Baker has a broad spectrum of public school educational and program experience, including serving as a high school classroom teacher, high school assistant principal, middle school principal, executive director for curriculum and instruction, and assistant superintendent. In addition, he has served as an adjunct instructor in the School of Education at Seattle Pacific University since 1996, where his emphasis has been Educational Measurement and Evaluation and Classroom Assessment.

Dr. Baker also serves as the Director of Research for the Washington School Research Center at Seattle Pacific University. He also serves as an evaluator for several organizations including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Washington Education Foundation, Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, and others.

Members of The BERC Group have K–20, experiences as teachers, counselors, psychologists, building administrators, district administrators, and college professors. The team is currently working on research and evaluation projects at the national, state, regional, district, school, classroom, and student levels in over 700 schools in Washington State and nationally.

COPYRIGHT © 2009 BY THE BERC GROUP INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ADDITIONAL COPIES OF THIS REPORT MAY BE OBTAINED THROUGH THE BERC GROUP (www.bercgroup.com).

THE BERC GROUP

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................... 1

Background of the Washington State Leadership Academy........................................................................1

EVALUATION PLAN FOR YEAR 1........................................................................................... 2

Data Sources............................................................................................................................................3

EVALUATION PLAN FOR YEARS 2 AND 3.............................................................................. 3

Evaluation Questions................................................................................................................................3

Data Sources............................................................................................................................................4

STRATEGIES AND ACTIVITIES FOR YEAR 1 .......................................................................... 5

AWSP and WASA Partnership....................................................................................................................5

Academy Governance ...............................................................................................................................5

Academy Staff..........................................................................................................................................6

Three Teams ............................................................................................................................................6

Business Plan ..........................................................................................................................................7

Academy Instructors and Coaches............................................................................................................7

Selection of the Educational Service Districts............................................................................................7

DESCRIPTION OF WASHINGTON STATE LEADERSHIP ACADEMY......................................... 9

SUMMARY.......................................................................................................................... 12

CONTINUING PRIORITIES .................................................................................................. 12

REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 14

THE BERC GROUP

Executive Summary

In April 2007, the Washington State Legislature passed legislation to create the Washington State Leadership Academy (Section 1 of Second Substitute Senate Bill, SSSB 5955). The intent of the legislation was to put together a public-private relationship. The legislature provided funding for two years, which was contingent upon the Washington Association of School Administrators (WASA) and the Association of Washington School Principals (AWSP) leaders securing additional private funding (Section 1, paragraph 4 of the legislation). In October 2007, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation awarded a three-year grant to fund the Washington State Leadership Academy (WSLA). The purpose of this progress report is to document the processes that have taken place in Year 1 of the development of the Washington State Leadership Academy (WSLA) and to finalize the evaluation plan for Years 2 and 3. The description of the development and intention of the Washington State Leadership Academy is necessary to determine the extent to which WSLA leaders and participating ESDs and districts maintain fidelity to the program. The information for this report was gathered through committee and program process notes, general data collection and analysis, and attendance at program meetings. Academy leaders made clear progress in developing the Washington State Leadership Academy in Year 1; the Research and Design Phase of the project. Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning provided the initial research and literature review for the project and technical assistance. Based on the initial work, AWSP, WASA, and WSLA leaders met the identified goals in their proposal to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for the development of the project. Some of the activities and strategies for Year 1 (Research and Design Phase) include developing a partnership between AWSP and WASA, identifying WSLA governance, hiring academy staff, identifying three teams to develop the academy, creating a business plan, hiring and training academy instructors and coaches, and selecting the Educational Service Districts. In Year 2, the pilot phase, WSLA leaders will implement the research-based program, with four participating Educational Service Districts and 20 School Districts. ESD and district staff members will participate in state and regional training that provides the background for their on-site work. Each district team will work with an on-site external coach for reflection and support. All support is centered around six curriculum strands, which serve as the framework for the academy program. The six curriculum strands include: Why Change, Focus on Learning, Work on Problems of Practice, Lead Coherent System-Wide Support For Learning, Build Clear and Collaborative Relationships, and Enhance Personal Leadership Skills. As academy leaders move into the Year 2 Pilot Phase of the project, it is important that they continue to prioritize some of the areas of focus in the Design Phase. The continuing priorities include communicating a clear vision and process, developing a moral imperative, focusing on teaching and learning, modeling instructional leadership, and building a coaching cadre.

i THE BERC GROUP

THE BERC GROUP ii

Washington State Leadership Academy

YEAR 1 PROGRESS REPORT

INTRODUCTION The purpose of this progress report is to document the processes that have taken place in Year 1 of the development of the Washington State Leadership Academy (WSLA) and to finalize the evaluation plan for Years 2 and 3. This report begins with an introduction to the Washington State Leadership Academy. This section is followed by a description of the methodology, an overview of the Research and Development (Year 1) phase, a description of the Washington State Leadership Academy, and a summary and conclusions.

Background of the Washington State Leadership Academy An extensive body of research demonstrates a relationship between school and district leadership and student achievement. In 2003, Leithwood and Reihl found that principal leadership was the second strongest predictor of student achievement, followed only by quality classroom instruction. District leadership also positively influences student achievement. In their meta-analysis, Waters and Marzano (2006) found a positive correlation (r = .24) between district leadership and student achievement with five district leadership responsibilities associated with student achievement:

Collaborative goal setting Non-negotiable goals for achievement and instruction Board alignment with and support of district goals Monitoring achievement and instruction goals Use of resources to support the goals for instruction and achievement

These seminal findings, among others, prompted leaders from the Washington Association of School Administrators (WASA) and the Association of Washington School Principals (AWSP) to present an idea to the Governor’s office to develop a statewide model that will enhance school leaders’ ability to serve all students. In April 2007, the Washington State Legislature passed legislation to create the Washington State Leadership Academy (Section 1 of Second Substitute Senate Bill, SSSB 5955). The intent of the legislation was to put together a public-private relationship. The legislature provided funding for two years, which was contingent upon WASA and AWSP leaders securing additional private funding (Section 1, paragraph 4 of the legislation). In October 2007, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation awarded a three-year grant to fund the WSLA. With only seven months to retain staff, to organize a statewide planning team, to articulate a vision for the WSLA, to identify a program curriculum, to engage Educational Service Districts and to recruit participating administrators, WASA and AWSP leaders moved quickly to mobilize the

1 T H E B E R C G R O U P

design and planning efforts of Year 1. These efforts are described in more detail in the Strategies and Activities for Year 1 section. During the research and development phase, the WSLA leaders sought to create a statewide approach to school and district leadership that was action-oriented, systemic in supporting the leadership skills of both superintendents and principals as part of a team, and focused on strengthening organizational support for the improvement of teaching and learning for all students. WSLA leaders used anecdotal evidence and research literature to develop the idea that instructional leadership across an entire school district is necessary to transform the effectiveness of each classroom teacher and to support learning progress for each student. According to WSLA leaders, while many states and educational contractors have developed leadership learning curricula for principals and superintendents through readings and seminars, no model currently exists for combining leadership learning with the actual instructional challenges facing each district leadership team. In this conception, participants will develop leadership skills while working on solving a teaching and learning challenge that exists within their district. An experienced coach will work with the leadership team in the district and support their learning at periodic workshop days. WASA and AWSP were interested in developing this unique approach to leadership development and support by employing the talents and knowledge of practitioners and academics within Washington State. They made a conscious choice to avoid contracting with a single contractor to provide this training and instead employed the insights and skills of educators across Washington to develop a specific program for the State using research and best practices from across the country. The sponsors of this effort also had a vision of combining public and private funding and knowledge in order to achieve the best results. Through this partnership, WSLA leaders plan to strengthen the ability of principals and superintendents to improve student learning. A description of the program is detailed in the Description of the Washington State Leadership Academy section of this report.

EVALUATION PLAN FOR YEAR 1 The goal of the evaluation in Year 1 is to document the processes that have taken place in the first year of the grant and to confirm the overall evaluation plan for subsequent years. This information is important to determine the extent to which WSLA leaders and Educational Service District (ESD) and district teams maintain fidelity to the process. Below is a list of data sources collected during Year 1.

T H E B E R C G R O U P 2

Data Sources

Committee and Program Process Notes. We maintained a record of the process used to develop the Washington State Leadership Academy program. This includes meeting minutes and documents generated by WSLA and Design Team members. These documents will be important later in the evaluation process as we check implementation levels against the fidelity of the model developed by the Academy.

General Data Collection and Analysis. We have gathered and analyzed various initiative documents.

Program Meetings. We attended various design team meetings to explain the evaluation plan and to learn more about the plans of the academy.

EVALUATION PLAN FOR YEARS 2 AND 3 In Years 2 and 3, the evaluation will move away from documenting the development of the Washington State Leadership Academy to a more rigorous evaluation focusing on treatment and impact. The evaluation will utilize multiple measures, mixed methodology approach. The collection of both quantitative and qualitative data adds scope and breadth to the study in addition to providing the ability to triangulate findings. The evaluation goal in Year 2 is to provide formative feedback during the pilot phase of the program, and the evaluation goal in Year 3 is to draw a connection between the program (treatment) and impact. We will determine if there is a change in leaders’ attitudes (survey) and practices (interviews) over time and if these conditions have any relationship to student achievement (WASL). We will use both descriptive and inferential statistics in drawing these conclusions. Below is a list of evaluation questions and data sources we propose to collect as part of the evaluation.

Evaluation Questions We propose the following research questions for evaluation activities in Years 2 and 3.

1. To what extent do leaders’ attitudes and practices change over time around the six curricular strands?

2. To what degree can changes in leaders’ attitudes and practices be attributed to professional development provided by the Washington State Leadership Academy?

3. To what extent does teachers’ instructional practice change over time? 4. To what degree can teachers’ instructional practice be attributed to professional

development provided by the Washington State Leadership Academy? 5. To what extent is implementation correlated with teacher and student outcomes

(impact)? 6. To what extent are the changes sustainable?


Data Sources

Document Collection and Analysis. We will continue to gather and analyze various initiative level documents. Specifically, we will gather and analyze documents used to provide professional development in the Academy.

Program Focus Groups and Interviews. We will continue to meet with program staff connected with developing and/or managing the Washington State Leadership Academy. We will track their comments over time for possible future qualitative statistical analyses.

Academy In-Service Feedback. We will code and analyze evaluations collected during professional development training.

District Leaders Focus Groups and/or Interviews. We will meet with district leaders involved in the Washington State Leadership Academy to determine the quality of their experience. During this time, we will record their interviews so that we can track qualitative changes statistically over time (NVivo).

School Leaders Focus Groups and/or Interviews. We will meet with school leaders involved in the Washington State Leadership Academy to determine the quality of their experience. During this time, we will record their interviews so that we can track qualitative changes statistically over time (NVivo).

Teacher Interviews. We will draw upon a teacher sample of convenience to explore whether they have recognized any changes in leadership behavior.

Pre-/Post-Surveys. We will develop administrator (participants and non-participants), teacher, and coach surveys to determine the extent to which attitudes and practices have changed. The surveys will be organized around the six curricular strands.

Attendance at Academy Activities. We will attend Academy training sessions to record the nature of support provided.

Achievement Scores. Because there is an emphasis in Year 3 to measure not just the implementation of the program, but the impact of the Washington State Leadership Academy on student learning, we will gather and organize student achievement data (as a baseline) to be used in future analyses. Because there is a shift taking place across the state in some cases away from the Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) to End of Course (EOC) exams, we will use whichever data are available and appropriate.


STRATEGIES AND ACTIVITIES FOR YEAR 1 Academy leaders made clear progress in developing the Washington State Leadership Academy in Year 1; the Research and Design Phase of the project. Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning (McREL) provided the initial research and literature review for the project and technical assistance. Based on the initial work, AWSP, WASA, and WSLA leaders met the identified goals in the proposal to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for the development of the project. Some of the activities and strategies for Year 1 (Research and Design Phase) include developing a partnership with AWSP and WASA, identifying WSLA governance, hiring academy staff, identifying three teams to develop the academy, creating a business plan, hiring and training academy instructors and coaches, and selecting the Educational Service Districts.

AWSP and WASA Partnership AWSP and WASA are blending efforts to establish the leadership academy. This is unique because historically these organizations have not worked together. One person described, “Philosophically, the two groups are together, but they practice this differently. Although the leaders see things differently, they are committed to making this happen.” Leaders recognize the importance of maintaining transparency and clear communication to ensure trust between the two organizations. One leader stated, “We want to be clear about all the parameters on this project.” Because of this, leaders from both organizations signed a Memorandum of Understanding to formalize the agreement for the leadership, management, and fiscal operation of the Washington State Leadership Academy. Leaders from both organizations share the responsibility for managing the day-to-day operations; carrying out all fiscal, accounting and recordkeeping; employing staff; contracting for services; and fulfilling the mission of the academy. AWSP is the fiscal agent for all funding, and both agencies share the indirect costs.

Academy Governance As stipulated in the original legislation, the partners involved in creating the WSLA were required to form a Board of Directors for academy governance. The partners discussed who should be included on the board, the purpose of the board, and the vision for the academy. The final composition of the Washington State Leadership Academy Board consists of representatives from the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI), the Professional Educator Standards Board, the Office of the Governor, an Educational Service District, AWSP, WASA, Washington Council of Educational Administration Programs, Washington Association of School Business Officials, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. A representative from the Washington State School Directors Association was added to the membership in the spring of 2008. All parties signed a Memorandum of Understanding describing the purpose and membership of the Partners’ Board.


Academy Staff AWSP and WASA leaders hired three WSLA staff members. The three academy staff members include a Director of the Leadership Academy, a Professional Development/Leadership Learning Specialist, and a Communication/Technology Specialist. The Director of the Leadership Academy provides leadership for the academy, participates in the development and design of the program, identifies important research, and maintains communication among all constituents. The Professional Development/Leadership Learning Specialist assists in the development of learning experiences for the coaches and participants at regional and state trainings. The Communication/Technology Specialist documents the progress of the WSLA startup, develops promotional and informational brochures about the academy, designs and launches the WSLA website, and establishes a communications protocol.

Three Teams Three different teams contributed to the development of the WSLA. The three teams include the Planning Team, the Design Team, and the Curriculum Development Team. The roles and responsibilities of these teams are described below. The Planning Team consists of Academy Staff and AWSP and WASA leaders. This team meets monthly, helps to maintain the vision of the WSLA, and provides leadership and support to the other teams. This group develops the guidelines for the Academy and makes final decisions regarding all aspects of the program, budget, and staffing based on proposals and recommendations from the Academy Director. The Design Team consists of members from OSPI, ESDs, higher education, and a McREL representative. Active superintendents and principals from across the state were 12 of the 16 members of this team. The selection of Design Team members was an important piece, and AWSP and WASA leaders wanted representation from the east and west side of the state, large and small districts, a broad range of experience, and different ethnic groups. AWSP and WASA leaders decided the team would consist of 16 members, with four of the members jointly decided upon (OSPI, higher education, and ESD representatives). AWSP and WASA leaders each decided upon six additional members. The Design Team met from January to June 2008 to design the program. The function of the Design Team was to research, plan, and propose a comprehensive professional development system. Team members looked at the initial McREL research and visited other states to inform the work. The givens of the work included: working in teams, job-embedded support for real problem solving, a focus on improving student learning, a coaching component, and a narrow focus with at least 75 participants. Through their work, the Design Team created straw and brick proposals that the Planning Team reviewed. After designing the program, the Design Team continues to play an advisory and input role on the framework and content for the academy. The Curriculum Development Team meets twice a month and is facilitated by the Academy Director, the Leadership/Learning Specialist, and a faculty member from the University of


Washington. The full group also included a faculty member from Washington State University, an experienced leadership coach, a faculty member from Heritage College, and a practicing high school principal. This group put together the content and pedagogy for the WSLA. The team submitted proposals for the content, process, and materials for feedback and input from both the Design Team and the Planning Team. In addition, a technical advisor from McREL reviewed and critiqued the proposals.

Business Plan Part of the funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation required that WSLA staff members develop a business plan to scale-up the program statewide and to sustain the program beyond grant funding. WSLA leaders contracted with Social Market Strategies to develop the business plan. The five-year plan includes an overview of the competition, a revenue and pricing model, and potential risks.

Academy Instructors and Coaches After completing the structure, content, and pedagogy for the Academy, WSLA leaders hired 7 academy instructors and 20 academy coaches. The seven instructors lead the seven days of state and regional workshops, and they meet regularly to coordinate the curriculum materials and lesson plans. All instructors lead the state trainings, and two instructors collaborate to lead each of the regional trainings. The 20 coaches provide on-site coaching for 16-days in each of the districts. The coaches spend an additional seven days with the districts during the state and regional conferences, and they have an additional seven days for training with the academy instructors. Training for the coaches began in summer 2008, and their learning experiences are similar to the ESDs and districts. Describing the training, one person said, “We shape this so everyone has a similar learning experience.” Initially, WSLA leaders received very few applications for the coach position, and they were questioning how to recruit qualified coaches. A similar situation was evident across the state, as OSPI also had a reduction in School and District Improvement Facilitator applicants partly because of changes in the Washington State retirement system. Many of these retirees are no longer working, and PERS 2 plan retirees cannot work and collect benefits. Because of this situation, WSLA leaders did some cross training with OSPI School and District Improvement Facilitators to fill these positions.

Selection of the Educational Service Districts The WSLA Design Team decided to work through ESDs to help build additional capacity. A WSLA leader described, “We are working with ESDs to build capacity, to get district teams, and to work on Problems of Practice.” To participate in the program, ESD superintendents had to submit a letter of interest, which outlined their current and intended support and involvement in leadership development and instructional improvement for districts in their region. The ESDs provide the logistical support, help with the communication among the districts, and acquire commitment from the districts. Five ESDs submitted letters of interest to participate in the pilot of the WSLA. Four


ESDs submitted proposals to work with several small districts, whereas one ESD submitted a proposal to work with one large district. The Planning Team set criteria and developed a rubric to rate the ESD applications. Each member of the Planning Team reviewed the application through this lens. In the end, the Planning Team selected four ESDs, which included the one ESD with the large district. One person described, “We wanted to identify the differences in working with large and small districts.” After selecting the participating ESDs, the Academy Director and members of the Planning Team collaborated with the ESD Superintendents to solicit district interest and to make selections of districts who expressed interest in each ESD. Participating district teams include the superintendent, central office administrators, and principals. Individuals cannot participate in the pilot year. The smaller districts consist of a team of 4 to 7 participants, whereas the larger district has two teams. Each participating district had to commit two years to the program, contribute $5,000, and pay indirect costs, including food and travel expenses to attend trainings. There may be an option for participants to extend participation in Years 3 and 4 as part of a learning group or mentor. The participating ESDs and districts are listed in Table 1. Table 1 Participating Educational Service Districts and School Districts Educational Service Districts School Districts ESD 113 Aberdeen School District Elma School District Napavine School District Toledo School District Lake Quinalt School District White Pass School District ESD 121 Tacoma School District ESD 171 Brewster School District Bridgeport School District Cashmere School District Lake Chelan School District Manson School District Soap Lake School District Warden School District Wilson Creek School District ESD 189 Granite Falls School District Meridian School District Mount Baker School District Lakewood School District Sultan School District


DESCRIPTION OF WASHINGTON STATE LEADERSHIP ACADEMY The mission of the Washington State Leadership academy is to “develop and support school leaders to create educational systems where powerful instruction helps all students succeed.”1 The five primary goals of the program are to:

Identify and implement leadership behaviors and actions that directly improve the quality of instruction in classrooms and programs, resulting in increases in student achievement, especially for students of color and children from low-income families.

Demonstrate that creating effective learning communities for districts and school administrators, supported by on-site coaching and rigorous case study pedagogy along with reading and reflective dialogue, will result in leadership behaviors that improve student learning in schools and districts.

Inform and influence systems that govern and provide for the preparation and continued training and certification for education leaders.

Measure the impact of education leadership on transforming and improving schools and districts.

Attract and sustain a regular cadre of practicing administrators in the Leadership Academy program.

The Washington State Leadership Academy provides a research-based process, in which participating districts engage in state and regional training. Each district team works with an on-site external coach for reflection and support. All support is centered around six curriculum strands, which serve as the framework for the academy program. WSLA participants receive most of the basic training at state and regional conferences. The statewide trainings occur at the beginning and end of the academic year, and regional trainings occur throughout the year at the ESDs. The focus of the conferences is “system improvement.” One WSLA leader described, “Professional development has changed over the last 10 years moving away from individual improvement to system improvement. We are using a team approach.” Another person described, “There needs to be a systemic focus based on individual needs, pushing thinking, asking good questions, and challenging thinking that leads to more self-discovery and self-disclosure.” During these meetings, participants have time to work with their district, and there are opportunities for job-alike training. To assist participants in improving leadership skills, each district has an on-site coach for 16 days. By limiting the on-site time to approximately 2 days per month, WSLA staff members hope to build skills rather than reliance. The coaches maintain the focus, assist with the problem of practice, facilitate communication, facilitate reflective conversations, and observe the work and provide feedback. The coaches need to have a good understanding of quality instruction, and all have a strong educational background. Finally, WSLA leaders recognized that having a good fit and establishing trust between the coaches and districts was essential, and districts had input on their coaches.

1 Quotations from this section are adapted from the Washington State Leadership Academy: Plan for the WSLA Pilot Year. This is a work product of the Washington State Leadership Academy Design Team, June 2008.


Finally, the six curricular strands provide the framework for the leadership academy. While all curricular strands are important, WSLA leaders identified Problem of Practice as the critical strand to help propel districts forward. One leader described,”We are trying to build team leadership around Problems of Practice rather than individual leadership.” The six curricular strands, along with the critical content, are listed in Table 2. Table 2. Curriculum Stands and Critical Content Why Change

Examine international, U.S., Washington State, and local data, disaggregated by key student demographics that present the disparities in student achievement across our nation, state, and local systems.

Examine beliefs and expectations regarding the goal of achieving high levels of learning for all students, with an emphasis on social justice that responds to the call for high achievement for all children.

Understand changes in our world that shape what skills and knowledge students need in order to be successful.

Hear what students currently say about their educational experiences in our Washington State school districts.

Focus on Learning Understand how people learn. Understand high quality teaching and learning, including specific aspects of student

engagement and learning assessment. Understand current instructional frameworks. Understand how to lead the implementation of high quality teaching and learning.

Work on Problems of Practice Frame a system problem around improving teaching and learning. Work from data to understand teaching and learning issues more deeply in the local

context. Develop strategies for how to work on the identified teaching and learning issue, and a

clear rational for why those strategies are likely to work (theory of action). Evaluate progress over time, and refine the work, using evidence. Make the work on problems of practice public.

Lead Coherent System-Wide Support for Learning Develop a systems approach to working on the improvement of teaching and learning. Align curriculum, assessment, professional development, and resources in service of

improvement of teaching and learning. Develop reciprocal accountability between school and district leadership for improving

student learning. Critically examine cases of system-wide instructional improvement efforts. Consider leaders’ roles in improving teaching and learning within and across schools.


Build Clear and Collaborative Relationships

Develop individual team and inter-team collaborative relationships that support leadership for improving teaching and learning.

Develop clear understanding of school and district leaders’ roles and relationships with regard to the work of improving teaching and learning (where we are “tight” vs. “loose”).

Give information, get information, and put it into action, with a focus on learning improvement results.

Understand and practice attributes of highly effective teams. Embed collaboration in routine practices of the schools and districts with a focus on

learning. Time for collaboration is built into the calendar. Focus on key questions. Products of collaboration are made explicit. Team norms guide collaboration. Teams pursue specific and measureable performance goals. Teams have access to relevant information.

Enhance Personal Leadership Skills Periodic reflection on personal leadership attributes that each participant brings to the

work of improving teaching and learning. Listening. Empowering. Coaching. Recognition. Focus on ways to distribute leadership in the service of improving teaching and

learning. Develop and sustain the will to lead the work of improving teaching and learning. Develop awareness of personal leadership strengths and limitations.


SUMMARY Academy leaders made clear progress in developing the Washington State Leadership Academy in Year 1; the Research and Design Phase of the project. Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning provided the initial research and literature review for the project and technical assistance. Based on the initial work, AWSP, WASA, and WSLA leaders met the identified goals in their proposal to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for the development of the project. Some of the activities and strategies for Year 1 (Research and Design Phase) include developing a partnership with AWSP and WASA, identifying WSLA governance, hiring academy staff, identifying three teams to develop the academy, creating a business plan, hiring and training academy instructors and coaches, and selecting the Educational Service Districts. In Year 2, the pilot phase, WSLA leaders will implement the research-based program, with four participating Educational Service Districts and 20 School Districts. ESD and district staff members will participate in state and regional training that provides the background for their on-site work. Each district team will work with an on-site external coach for reflection and support. All support is centered around six curriculum strands, which serve as the framework for the academy program. The six curriculum strands include: Why Change, Focus on Learning, Work on Problems of Practice, Lead Coherent System-Wide Support For Learning, Build Clear and Collaborative Relationships, and Enhance Personal Leadership Skills.

CONTINUING PRIORITIES As academy leaders move into the Year 2 pilot phase of the project, it is important that they continue to prioritize the areas listed below. Communicate a Clear Vision and Process. It is essential that AWSP, WASA, and WSLA leaders continue to meet to create a clear and shared vision, to align goals and resources to the vision, and to communicate the vision to WSLA participants. Just as having a clear and focused vision is important to individual district and school improvement, it is also vitally important in developing this program. The importance of a vision cannot be understated, as it will help all staff members understand the direction of the academy, will help to improve communication, and will help to build trust. Develop a Moral Imperative. The Why Change? curriculum strand is an important area of focus, and WSLA leaders should not make an assumption that participants see a need to change simply because they elected to participate in the program. The moral imperative must be developed using data to bring to the surface, school and district leaders attitudes and beliefs about their students and the goals of schooling. School and district leadership will then need to present a clear case of why change is necessary to teachers and to the public (Problems of Practice). Those school and district leaders who build the moral imperative to change with their staffs will take the first step toward being change agents. School leaders that do not build a sound and convincing rationale that change is necessary will have little long-term success.


Focus on Teaching and Learning. There clearly is a stated focus on teaching and learning in the Washington State Leadership Academy. However, in previous initiatives we have evaluated, this has also been the stated focus, but the majority of the participants focused on structural or first-order change. If improving teaching and learning is part of the Theory of Action, it is necessary to operationally define the type of teaching and learning that is expected and then provide adequate training. Coaches must help maintain this focus at the school site, while providing direction around the Problems of Practice. Model Instructional Leadership. There is also a stated focus on developing leaders that directly improve the quality of instruction in classrooms and programs, resulting in increases in student achievement. However, many leaders have been trained to be managers rather than instructional leaders. To help make this transition, it will be important for WSLA instructors to model instructional leadership and to provide learning experiences that align with powerful teaching and learning. In addition WSLA coaches also need to model instructional leadership, provide opportunities for principals to observe powerful teaching and learning, and to reflect on their own practices.

Build a Coaching Cadre. Changes in Washington State retirement plans have limited the coaching pool for the Washington State Leadership Academy, as it has for OSPI School and District Improvement programs. It will be important for WSLA leaders to develop a plan to build capacity for coaching as they plan to expand support across the state. This may entail using people that have already participated in the program. WSLA leaders may also consider working directly with OSPI to identify means to develop coaches.


REFERENCES Leithwood, K., & Reihl, C. (2003).What we know about successful school leadership. Prepared for the

AERA Division A Task Force on Developing Research in Educational Leadership. Retrieved August 28, 2008 at http://www.cepa.gse.rutgers.edu/what weknow.pdf.

Waters, T., & Marzano, R. (2006). School district leadership that works: The effect of superintendent

leadership on student achievement. A working paper. McREL: Aurora, CO.


http://www.cepa.gse.rutgers.edu/what%20weknow.pdf


The BERC Group, Inc. 22232 - 17th Ave. SE Suite 303 Bothell, WA 98021 Phone: 425.486.3100 Web: www.bercgroup.com

http://www.bercgroup.com/

Washington State Leadership

Documents

Transcript of Washington State Leadership