Twelve studies find that overall gains in charter schools are larger than other public schools; four find charter schools’ gains higher in certain significant categories of schools; six find comparable gains; and, four find that charter schools’ overall gains lagged behind traditional schools.
Source: Charter School Achievement: What We Know, July 2005 Update
|
|
 |
|
|
http://www.uscharterschools.org/cs/r/view/uscs_rs/1722
This on-line series has examined what it takes to start and run a charter school from "scratch." In this final installment, we look back at LHS over the past year and a half, and reflect on the major lessons learned from this school's experience.
This on-line series has examined what it takes to start and run a charter school from "scratch." In this final installment, we look back at LHS over the past year and a half, and reflect on the major lessons learned from this school's experience. With more than 60 percent of the charter schools in the country being newly created, we would like to point out some of the key strategies used by LHS to meet the unique day-to-day challenges of building a school culture and organization from the ground up.
: Lesson 1. Maintain continual "buy-in" to the school's philosophy and instructional approach
: Lesson 2: Invest in leadership
: Lesson 3: Manage expectations of students and staff
: Lesson 4: Develop capacity for strategic planning
: Summary
Lesson 1. Maintain continual "buy-in" to the school's philosophy and instructional approach.
Consistent with other research on schoolwide reform and charter schools, the need for school participants to buy-in to the school's philosophy and approach is neither new nor surprising. Clear and specific school missions can help shape instructional programs that in turn, may improve teaching and learning in schools (Berman and Gjelten, et al., 1984; Conley, 1993; Izu and Aronson, 1995). Similarly, in the charter schools they studied, Wohlstetter and Griffin (1997) found that vague or unfocused school missions made it more difficult for many of these schools to develop coherent instructional programs.
What is different in many charter schools, especially start-up charter schools, is the magnitude of the task, where the need to develop buy-in among new students and staff remains constant over time. Many start-up charter schools begin small with plans to steadily grow over several years. For example, LHS has kept to their plan of adding a new grade level and a hundred students a year with the expectation of serving about 300-400 students in grades 9-12 over a four-year period. Consequently, in the last year, LHS doubled the number of students and more than tripled the number of staff. As a result, ensuring that participants share a common view of the school's direction and major approaches to teaching and learning is an ongoing task.
A key strategy LHS has used to develop buy-in among staff is to select teachers who are eager to be a part of, or have input into, a new or alternative school, and who are willing to take on the additional responsibilities that come with working in a small school setting. In addition to a week-long orientation and all-school retreat prior to the opening of school, LHS has also emphasized choosing teachers with prior experience - that is, experienced, credentialled teachers with public school experience. Wohlstetter and Griffin's (1997) research shows that prior instructional and managerial experience can make the transition from mission to practice easier for charter schools.
Among the challenges LHS has faced, however, is operationalizing a charter and mission drafted primarily by a group of people other than the current staff and student body. While broad-based input is a key strategy and strength of the three years Kushner spent planning, designing and negotiating a charter, the staff and students who joined LHS in its first year had limited input into the process of defining or revising the school mission and approach.
In addition, like other start-up charter schools (Wohlstetter and Griffin, 1997), LHS' short time frame for getting an instructional program operational exacerbates the problem. With the press to find a facility, recruit students, raise funds and form a non-profit corporation and board, the majority of the teachers for the first year (1997/8) were hired just a few weeks months before school opened.
With the addition of new staff in the second year, some tension and conflict has been apparent as staff and students work to build a common vision for the school. Debate among staff has focused primarily on issues such as whom the school should serve (all or high-risk students) and the meaning of 'leadership' within the school (e.g. how does it fit into the curriculum, and who should have input into school decision-making). While such tensions are a normal part of any fast growing organization, charter school operators and developers should recognize the critical importance of developing staff buy-in as the school expands. Once the school opens and large numbers of students need to be served, debate or unsettled questions about a school's mission can be a major hindrance in effectively meeting the demands of day-to-day school operations.
Similarly, as other research has found (Izu, Carlos, and Yamashiro, et al, 1998), time for professional development is difficult to come by, especially in small, start-up charters where staff are expected to perform additional duties beyond teaching. Consequently, time spent to master the skills related to a particular curriculum and instructional approach end up doubling as time used for the training, dialogue and planning that is needed to build school culture and shared vision. At LHS, there are weekly staff meetings, and once a month the meeting is devoted specifically to professional development issues. Even so, Kushner feels time for systematic ongoing professional development is limited.
When these challenges are combined with the turnover that is expected and typical of new organizations, ways to build new staff and student buy-in to the school's philosophy and instructional approach is key. In other charter schools WestEd has studied (Izu, Carlos, & Yamashiro, 1998), some charter schools have built in a process for ongoing schoolwide reflection and review of the charter on a periodic basis (e.g. annually or bi-annually). This allows new staff and parents to have input as well as to develop an understanding of what the school is trying to accomplish with students. Creative use of parent or other volunteers and schedules has also helped some schools free-up more staff time for professional development activities.
Lesson 2: Invest in leadership.
What LHS' experience and other charter school research suggests is that charter schools, and start-up charters in particular, have diverse leadership needs. These leadership needs span not only curricular and instructional areas, but a broad range of small business activities such as finance, marketing, procurement, and legal and political issues. (Wohlstetter and Griffin, 1997; Loveless and Jasin, 1998).
A key strategy that LHS has used, especially with respect to small business and management activities, is to broaden its base for leadership beyond a single individual. Consistent with other charter school research on ways to overcome this problem (see for example, Manno, Finn, Bierlein, and Vanourek, 1998), LHS' founder, Mark Kushner, created a LHS board comprising diverse individuals with a range of legal, fiscal, fundraising, educational and other expertise. In addition, Kushner himself came with a strong legal and business background and a keen ability to deal with the political challenges that faced LHS in its early days.
However, this strategy of broadening the leadership base has not yet been fully extended to the curricular and instructional domains of the school. Consequently, LHS has not developed formal structures for instructional leadership and decision-making among staff, such as a curriculum committee which is invested with specific powers and which meets on a regular basis. The lack of these structures is of course due in part to the small size of the school and the short amount of time it has been operating.
But recent charter school research suggests that this type of issue is part of a much larger challenge on the part of school operators. Loveless and Jasin (1998) point out that starting a charter school requires founders to master two primary challenges: first, essential resources must be found (facilities, start up funds, staff, etc.); and second, governance and administrative structures must be established. In particular, these administrative structures need to be established in a way that allows the school to evolve into a 'formal' organization. In other words, one of the challenges for the school is to move from a small, informal organization based largely on the entrepreneurial skills of one to two original founders to a larger, more complex school which operates by formal or established policies and which involves a broad representation of the organization's members.
For LHS, one of the clearest expressions of this move toward 'formal' organizational structures has been the function of the LHS board within the overall governance of the school (see installment #3). Not only has the board brought small business and management experience to the school, but it has also acted as the ultimate decision-making authority in establishing overall school policy and direction. This authority as a 'formal' decision-making body originates in the school's articles of incorporation and bylaws. As the staff continues to grow, the issue of finding the correct balance between the board's role in setting policy and the staff's role in actually implementing that policy is likely to grow in importance at LHS. As the principal explains, one of the future challenges the school will face will be developing appropriate mechanisms for staff to give input on policy to the board.
Lesson 3: Manage expectations of students and staff.
According to Kushner, one clear lesson he learned over the past year was to ensure that students (and parents) come with realistic expectations for the school. When LHS opened, expectations for LHS were high among everyone - administrators, staff and students. But as a new school in the process of developing all aspects of its instructional program as well as extra-curricular activities, not all of the activities and services were expected by some were available during the first year. The lack of certain anticipated services led to disappointment for some staff and parents. In addition, insufficient staffing for ambitious programs and behavior guidance, especially in a university setting, resulted in some discipline problems beginning to arise by mid-year during the first year of operation.
LHS has successfully dealt with these challenges. First, in order to deal with the student behavior issues, school staff set aside time during the early hectic months of the first school year to hammer out a student a discipline policy that was agreeable to everyone. They also hired a dean of students to support teachers in establishing classroom management. From that point forward, conduct for student behavior was made clear to students and parents - from the outset.
To address the larger issue of high or unrealistic expectations for the number of services that the school could accomplish in its first year, the school developed more realistic marketing and recruitment strategies. In the Spring, when the principal and director of enrollment spoke to prospective students, families or staff members, they more clearly differentiated between the services the school was currently offering and the types of services the school hoped to be able to offer in the future. They also more clearly laid out school expectations for students around such issues as school uniforms, academic focus, and the school's theme of leadership.
Similarly, because staff have been drawn to the school for a variety of reasons, they have had to adjust their own expectations once they started working. For example, LHS, as a start-up charter school, does not have the administrative support or established infrastructure of a traditional public school. Consequently, in return for having a larger voice in the direction of the school, staff have also had to share in some of the administrative duties. And while many teachers were attracted to the school by the opportunity to participate in the governance of the school, they also had additional goals to have more of an impact on students and to experiment with new instructional approaches, both of which required additional time and resources. Such demands can greatly impact a given teacher's abilty to take on new challenges, even if the teacher or staff member has the best of intentions.
Lesson 4: Develop capacity for strategic planning.
A major strength of LHS generally, and Kushner specifically, is the emphasis on strategic planning that has been present since the outset. Building on a comprehensive, research-based planning process in the early phases of the school's development, Kushner has continued to think about the big picture - considering not just present, but future school needs when making decisions. As a start-up charter school, this component is critical to the long-term development - and survival - of the school.
According to Kushner, the formation of a board with a broad range of expertise, including experience and skills working with small, non-profit organizations has been tremendously helpful in developing the school's capacity for strategic planning. For example, Kushner and the board developed long-range financial plans for LHS that were critical in helping to raise outside funds that in turn helped the school hire additional staff and finance a new, permanent building. Similarly, in talking with other board members about the board's role, the focus on setting long-term policy and expanding the board to meet future needs are examples of a similar focus on strategic planning. More recently, LHS has engaged the services of Harvard University Business School alumni group called Community Partners to do an in-depth business plan for the school, focusing on finance and management issues and the long term stability of the school.
In order to maintain this valuable asset for the school, LHS has placed an emphasis on continuing to train new board members in learning to look at the big picture and consider school issues within the context of the future of the school, and not just its present challenges. One of the strategies LHS has used to develop this capacity, particularly staff and student members, is to maintain a relatively large number of different on-going board committees. In addition to serving on the overall board, board members are required to participate on one of the six standing committees which have particular oversight responsibilities assigned to them, such as public relations, fundraising, finance educational goals, and trustee nominations. This type of on-going participation by all members helps to expand and extend strategic thinking and planning skills to newer board members and institutionalize a particular working culture within the board that extends beyond the leadership skills of just one or two important members.
Summary
In conclusion, these are not the only lessons one can learn from LHS's first year and a half. The principal was asked to draw up his own list of lessons and came up with the following:
- Focus on Mission
- Emphasize Leadership & Professional Development
- Manage Expectations
- Plan for Adequate Staffing
- Emphasize Strategic Planning
- Hire Experienced Staff in the Beginning
But the lessons featured in this case study capture some of the major challenges and strategies the school has used to build a high school from the ground up. Some of the lessons LHS learned during this time are unique to their context and the goals they were trying to achieve in opening a 'break-the mold' secondary school. However, some of these lessons, particularly around maintaining continual staff buy-in and in setting realistic expectations for students and parents, are applicable other charter schools, especially charter schools starting from scratch or engaging in challenging schoolwide reform efforts.
Bibliography
- Paul Berman and Tom Gjelten, et al. Improving School Improvement: Findings. Volume 2, R-103/2. Berkeley, CA: Berman, Weiler Associates, 1984.
- David T. Conley. Roadmap to Restructuring: Policies, Practices, and the Emerging Visions of Schooling. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon, 1993.
- Jo Ann Izu and Julie Aronson, et al. Voice, Collaboration and School Culture: Creating a Community for School Improvement. San Francisco, CA: Far West Laboratory, 1995.
- Tom Loveless and Claudia Jasin. Starting from Scratch; Political and Organizational Challenges Facing Charter Schools, Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 34, Number 1, Feb 1998, pages 9-30.
- Bruno V. Manno, Chester E. Finn Jr, Louann A. Bierlein, and Gregg Vanourek. Charter Schools: Accomplishments and Dilemmas, Teachers College Record, Volume 99, Number 3, Spring 1988., ppg 537-558.
- Priscilla Wohlstetter and Noelle C. Griffin. First Lessons: Charter Schools as Learning Communities. CPRE Policy Briefs, RB-22-September 1997.
- Jo Ann Izu, Lisa Carlos, and Kyo Yamashiro, et al. The findings and Implications of Increased Flexibility and Accountability: An Evaluation of Charter Schools in Los Angeles Unified School District, Cross-site Report. San Francisco, CA: WestEd, August 1998.
Source: www.USCharterSchools.org
|
