A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

Section III
Planning Schoolwide Program Change

Step 5:
Writing the Schoolwide Plan

In Steps 1 through 4, a schoolwide planning team will have completed the most significant tasks in preparing a schoolwide plan. The needs assessment collected a comprehensive base of information about the school from the school's primary stakeholders. Team members analyzed the results of their data gathering, sorted out priority needs, researched strategies for addressing the problems, and set program goals. Now it's time to pull all the parts together in a coherent program statement. A good plan elicits everyone's comments. Since the plan will guide the schoolwide program until the next time ESEA is reauthorized, this is not a time to take short cuts. It may be useful for the core members of the planning team to retreat to an isolated location for several days to concentrate on drafting a plan that the team can distribute broadly for review. Although a small subgroup may create the first draft, it is important to have open dialogue about proposed changes. Experienced planners suggest making all drafts available for widespread comment before the plan is finalized.

Tool #8: Step-by-Step Framework for Developing a Schoolwide Program Plan can guide this final step. Tool #9: Finalize Your Schoolwide Plan: An Evaluation Rubric, developed by consultants in the Iowa Department of Education, is a framework a school can use to reflect on the quality of its plan. Iowa's "three-star" system for evaluating schoolwide plans suggests qualities that distinguish exceptional schoolwide plans.

Because the plan describes a schoolwide program, it should subsume all other plans that address individual programs within the school. In many cases, these other plans will contribute vitally to the schoolwide program, but this particular plan should bring focus and coherence to all previously separate aspects of the school.

States and districts vary widely in their requirements for schoolwide program applications. The plan outlined in this Idea Book is adapted from guidelines the Oregon Department of Education developed in collaboration with RMC Research Corporation (Portland, Oregon, office). The key components we address are: (1) the combination of ESEA program funds; (2) ensuring a solid research basis for solutions; (3) data-based evaluation, accountability, and continuous improvement; and (4) ongoing program development and coordination. Don't forget to check these elements against your state and local requirements to see if additions or adjustments are needed.

Combining Program Funds

As described in Section II, one of the significant advantages IASA created for schools that adopt schoolwide programs is the flexibility to combine federal, state, and local funding sources into a single budget that supports programs and activities. Funds from all parts of ESEA may be combined with other federal education programs, including the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act, School-to-Work Opportunities Act, McKinney Homeless Assistance Act, IDEA, and other programs.

This flexibility creates broad opportunities for schoolwides to integrate many dimensions of their education programs. Federal education funds can be combined with state and local funds as long as the resulting programs meet the "intent and purposes" of each of the individual funding streams.

Because this funding flexibility is new, schools, districts, and states are gradually exploring the best ways to maximize the opportunity while also meeting state and local auditing requirements. Many knowledgeable program specialists may be just learning about how budget flexibility and combining funds can benefit a schoolwide program. Tool #10: Title I, Part A of Improving America's Schools Act compares the schoolwide program options with the more traditional "targeted assistance" Title I option. For additional information, contact state and federal education officials.

Planning Changes on a Solid Foundation of Research

The new instructional program contained in a schoolwide plan should be based on the best available information about teaching and learning for students who have not yet achieved high standards. Planning teams can learn about education models, programs, and strategies from several sources. Comprehensive Centers and Regional Educational Laboratories are available to serve schools and districts in every region of the country.⁽¹¹⁾ They are especially well-equipped to guide schools through the change process.

Technical assistance providers at each federally-supported Comprehensive Center have developed a wealth of information that takes schools through every aspect of schoolwide planning. For example, the Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory (NWREL), with assistance from the Education Commission of the States, has developed a Catalog of School Reform Models that supports schools, districts, states, and others as they implement research-based comprehensive reform and demonstration programs. This catalogue can be obtained directly from NWREL (Web site:  www.nwrel.org/scpd/natspec/catalog).

Among the specialized resources available from WestED, the Region XI Comprehensive Center (Web site: www.wested.org), are the following:

• Focus on School Improvement—a guide for educators, parents, and policy makers to use in planning. Incorporating the research literature on effective planning process, this resource offers a brief but coherent seven-step improvement framework.

• Schoolwide Reform: A New Outlook—a two-volume set to assist in planning schoolwide reforms. Developed specifically for schools planning or implementing the schoolwide option under Title I, these materials also offer an in-depth resource for any school engaged in reform efforts. The guide includes a videotape, information on planning strategies (especially the needs assessment process), examples of innovative schoolwide approaches, and transparencies and activities to direct planning.

• Educating Limited English Proficient Students: A Review of the Research on School Programs and Classroom Practices—a paper that summarizes a substantial body of research on effectively educating English-language learners.

• Rebuilding Schools as Safe Havens: A Topology for Selecting and Integrating Violence Prevention Strategies—a guide that covers the steps necessary to safeguard schools and to select, integrate, and streamline violence prevention policies and practices.

Regional Educational Laboratories such as RMC Research Corporation and WestED, and others, also develop planning resources for schools to show how ESEA programs can be coordinated with other funded programs using research-based strategies. In Linking ESEA and Service-Learning: A Planning, Implementation, and Evaluation Guide (RMC Research, 1997), RMC summarizes the major ESEA programs and presents strategies for combining and coordinating schoolwide program components. The guide also introduces school planners to the basics of both ESEA and service learning and explains how service-learning approaches can be used in schoolwide programs to increase academic learning and program innovation.

School-based study groups, led by teachers and including parents, can review articles and books, visit schools, and contact presenters from past conferences or staff development programs. The World Wide Web is an invaluable resource, as are many districts' professional libraries. Data on the success of established programs and models are often only a telephone call away. Among the sources to consult are the following:

• District and state education agency offices

• Regional Educational Laboratories, Comprehensive Centers, universities and colleges, national research networks

• Books, articles, and professional journals

• The school's staff and its community

• The Internet

• Other schools or communities with evidence of success

At the conclusion of this volume is a comprehensive list of contacts in each of these categories that can assist planning teams. In addition, the schools profiled in Volume II of this Idea Book welcome the opportunity to share what they have learned about good practices and strategies; contact information for them is also at the end of both volumes.

Data-Based Evaluation, Accountability, and Continuous Improvement

Two evaluation activities—monitoring students' progress toward challenging state and local academic standards and tracking a school's progress in implementing its goals—provide the information schoolwide programs need to show results to their stakeholders and to continuously improve their efforts. Because evaluation is so critical to the ongoing success of a schoolwide, it is an important element to build into a schoolwide plan. In fact, planning, implementing, and monitoring are stages in a continuous process of using data on student and school performance to improve practices and programs. This section addresses the aspects of continuous improvement that help determine the contents of a schoolwide program plan. For a more in-depth discussion of accountability and continuous improvement, please see Section V.

Schools have many resources for evaluating students and education programs. Challenging education standards for all students, accurate ways to measure achievement, and a commitment to accountability are the basis for continuous improvement in schoolwide programs. Useful measurements of student academic progress can include scores on standardized and teacher-developed tests, portfolios of student work, class grades, and attendance data. Schoolwide plans that call for several types of assessments will generate a variety of information that can improve weak components of a school or classroom and keep strong components healthy.

What are the assessment requirements for schoolwide programs, especially for students with special needs? The same standards, assessments, and school improvement requirements that apply to Title I, Part A programs also apply to schoolwide programs. The same assessment procedures are to be used for all students to determine a school's progress toward helping students meet the state's challenging academic standards. Of course, individualized assessments are entirely appropriate as part of the school's instructional plans for students.

As of July 1, 1998, IDEA requires that all state or districtwide assessments of student achievement encompass all students, including those with disabilities, unless the student's individualized education program (IEP)—an educational plan for the student prepared by a team knowledgeable of the student's educational abilities and needs—provides that the student should be exempted from such assessments [Section 612(a)(17), 111 Stat. 67]. IDEA requires that IEPs include a statement specifying the necessary modifications in the administration of state or districtwide assessments that would allow the child to participate in assessments. If the IEP team determines that a student with disabilities will not participate in a particular state or districtwide assessment (or part of such assessment), the IEP must include a statement of why that assessment is not appropriate for the child, and describe the alternative method by which the child will be assessed [Section 614(d)(1)(A)(v); 111 Stat. 84].

A small number of students have IEPs specifying that they should be excluded from regular assessments. IDEA requires the state or local agency first to develop guidelines for the participation in alternate assessments for those children whose disabilities keep them from participating in state and district assessment programs; and second, beginning not later than July 1, 2000, to develop and conduct those alternate assessments [Section 612(a)(17)(A); 111 Stat. 67].

The IDEA requires that students with disabilities be provided with appropriate test accommodations, where necessary, in state and district assessment programs. The individualized determinations of whether a student will participate in a particular assessment, and what accommodations, if any, are appropriate should be addressed through the IEP process and included in the student's IEP. For students with disabilities not covered by the IDEA, but having an educational plan under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the determination of whether to participate in a particular assessment, and what accommodations, if any, are appropriate, should be made in accordance with that plan.

Students with limited English proficiency (LEP) should ordinarily be included in state or district assessments of student achievement. When LEP students are included in assessment programs, they must be included in ways that are valid and reliable, and they must be afforded appropriate accommodations. Although Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not require the inclusion of every LEP student, a strong educational or psychometric justification would be needed to exclude these children. For example, if a reading test is designed to measure proficiency in reading English, a professional judgment might be made that this test will not render valid results for students who have not had sufficient instruction in English.

Educationally appropriate accommodations must be provided to LEP students. Depending upon the nature and purpose of the test and the particular needs of an LEP student, appropriate accommodations may include extended time, providing a valid and reliable version of the test in the student's native language, and bilingual dictionaries.

Tool #11: Ensuring the Quality of Student Assessments: Validity, Reliability and Fairness gives background information about the technical standards that assessments should meet. This tool also suggests strategies for assessing early learning and for making appropriate testing accommodations.

Accommodations for students with disabilities and LEP students can be divided into four general types: (1) changes in the way a test is presented or administered; (2) changes in how a student answers the questions (e.g., orally, in braille, or on large braille answer sheets); (3) changes in the timing or scheduling of the test; and (4) changes in the setting in which the assessment is administered.

In most cases, the same accommodations that teachers make during instruction are also effective during the assessment process. If students receive extra time to finish assignments, use special visual equipment, or work alone to complete assignments requiring great concentration, these accommodations are logical ones to make during assessment. However, it may not be appropriate to explain directions, read text, or give feedback on the correctness of a response, unless this is specified in a student's IEP or Section 504 plan.

Accommodations should be determined case-by-case, based on the student's needs and characteristics rather than on the type of disability or the degree of limited English proficiency.

The chart on the next page indicates ways to accommodate children's assessment needs. These examples do not represent the full range of accommodations that are available. For more information, contact your local SEA. The U.S. Department of Education's Office of Special Education Programs has a cooperative agreement with the National Center on Educational Outcomes at the University of Minnesota to study and provide information regarding the inclusion of students with disabilities in statewide and other assessments. The center can be reached at: NCO, University of Minnesota, 350 Elliott Hall, 75 East River Road, Minneapolis, MN 55455; or, call (612) 626-1530 or visit Web site: www.coled.umn.edu/NCEO.

What accountability measures are needed in a schoolwide plan? Under ESEA, a schoolwide plan should specify the procedures the school will use in monitoring its progress, including procedures that meet any state requirements. In particular, schoolwide plans must specify:

• Procedures for measuring and reporting student progress on an annual basis
• Strategies for including teachers in decisions to use assessments that supplement the state assessment system
• Plans for reporting the results of assessments to parents and the community

How can data be used to analyze and monitor progress? Assessment data can be particularly useful when separated into information for particular populations—for example, by gender, major ethnic or racial category, level of English proficiency, migrant student status, disability, or economic status—which can be compared over time and across groups. This level of analysis is not currently required of schoolwide programs in all states; but if it is possible to include this step in your plan, teachers will gain a tool for understanding which groups are benefiting most from instruction and which students need extra attention. For more information on disaggregating and analyzing data, see Section V.

Ongoing Program Development and Coordination

Schoolwide programs are supposed to be comprehensive approaches to serving students in high-poverty communities. Coordination between programs and services is therefore an important emphasis within ESEA. A schoolwide plan should explain how the program will coordinate education activities with other programs and agencies. Possible types of coordination include:

• Helping young children make the transition from early childhood programs (such as Head Start, Even Start, or Title I prekindergarten programs) to elementary school

• In secondary schools, where appropriate, coordinating the schoolwide program plan with programs under the School-to-Work Opportunities Act, the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act, and the National and Community Service Act of 1990

• Coordinating and integrating parent involvement activities among programs

think about this. . .

Disaggregating Data to Determine Improvement Goals

A school's overall strength comes from the success of many different components working together—grade-level and subject-matter teams, separate programs, administration and teachers, the community and parents, and support staff. A school's performance may be strong in one component but weak in another. Or, perhaps two components are strong individually but do not work well together.

To untangle these nuances, disaggregate your data. Break the information available from different measurements into individual components. How do various areas of the school work when examined individually? Try to identify patterns in the way programs are conducted and in the quality and results of key components by comparing performance across grades or student groups. For example, achievement often drops at transition points between the early years and the elementary, middle, and high school grades. Or perhaps there are groups of students whose achievement is persistently weak.
Consider other dimensions of the school that contribute to children's academic performance. Drug use is a threat to many schools, especially as students reach the middle school years. Do your data collection methods obtain information on parent or community perceptions about the potential for drug use in your community? If so, how does the school plan to increase children's safety and ensure a drug-free environment? Should prevention and intervention services be a priority for the school?

Similarly, parent involvement in schools typically drops significantly in middle schools and in high schools, just when students need adult support. Do your surveys assess various parent and community roles in the school? If your analysis reveals a sharp drop in parent involvement between two grades, perhaps your schoolwide program should include a school-family-community partnership that will stimulate parent involvement.

As the planning team examines data, consider identifying benchmarks—target goals—the school can aim for at periodic intervals, quarterly or semi-annually. A school can set benchmarks against its own projected achievement targets or use district, state, or national goals, when they are available. Benchmarking is useful because it makes clear the incremental progress school planners should look for as they move toward long-term goals.

Keep in mind that no school is perfect and change takes time. The most important first steps are to examine data thoroughly and candidly and to commit to making reasonable changes that can be accomplished within set timelines.

¹¹ The addresses, phone numbers and Web sites for Regional Educational Laboratories and Comprehensive Centers that serve very state and district are listed in Resource IV at the conclusion of this Idea Book volume.

-###-

[Step 4 - Setting Schoolwide Program Goals]

[Step 6 - Finalizing the Schoolwide Plan]