at brown university - annenberg institute for school...

Non Profit Org.

US Postage

PAID

Providence, RI

Permit #202

Annenberg Institute for School ReformBrown University Box 1985Providence, Rhode Island 02912

at brown university

Winter 2009

Getting Smarter: A Framework for DistrictsEllen Foley and David Sigler

Urban School District Central Offices and the Implementation of New Small Autonomous Schools InitiativesMeredith I. Honig

Redesigning the Central Office to Deliver Better ValueAndrew Moffit

Toward a “Relationship-Based Industry”: Connecting Central Offices and CommunitiesMary Sylvia Harrison

Redesigning the “Central Office”

Annenberg Institute for School Reform | Voices in Urban Education

Voices in U

rban Education Redesigning the “Central O

ffice”W

inter 2009

this book is printed on environment® Paper. this 100 percent recycled paper reduces solid waste disposal and lessens landfill dependency. by utilizing this paper,• 15.85 trees were preserved for the future.• 11,226,800 BTUs of energy were conserved.• 45.77 pounds of waterborne waste were not created.• 745 pounds of solid waste were not generated.• 6,733 gallons of wastewater flow were saved.• 1,467 pounds of greenhouse gases were prevented from forming.

Redesigning the “Central Office”Number 22, Winter 2009

PublisherAnnenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown UniversityWarren Simmons, Executive Director

EditorRobert Rothman

Managing EditorSusan Fisher

Copy EditorMargaret Balch-Gonzalez

Production & DistributionMary Arkins Decasse

DesignGilbert Design Associates, Inc.

IllustrationCarolina Arentsen

Voices in Urban Education (issn 1553-541x) is pub-lished quarterly at Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island. Articles may be reproduced with appro pri ate credit to the Annenberg Institute. Single copies are $10 each, including postage and handling. A discount is available on bulk orders. Call 401 863-2018 for further information.

The Annenberg Institute for School Reform was established in 1993 at Brown University. Its mis-sion is to develop, share, and act on knowledge that improves the conditions and outcomes of school-ing in America, especially in urban communities and in schools serving disadvantaged children. For program information, contact:

Annenberg Institute for School ReformBrown University, Box 1985Providence, Rhode Island 02912Tel: 401 863-7990Fax: 401 863-1290Web: www.annenberginstitute.org

© 2009 Annenberg Institute for School Reform

2 The New “Central Office”Robert Rothman

5 Getting Smarter: A Framework for DistrictsEllen Foley and David Sigler

A“smartdistrict”focusesonsixkeyfunctionsinordertoproduceresultsandequityforallstudents.

13 Urban School District Central Offices and the Implementation of New Small Autonomous Schools InitiativesMeredith I. Honig

CentralofficestaffinChicagoandOaklandplayedkeyrolesinimplementingmajorreforminitiatives.

24 Redesigning the Central Office to Deliver Better ValueAndrew Moffit

Thecorporatesectorofferslessonsinhowdistrictcentralofficesmightberedesignedtoserveschoolsmoreeffectively.

33 Toward a “Relationship-Based Industry”: Connecting Central Offices and CommunitiesMary Sylvia Harrison

Engagingparentsandthecommunityeffectivelyrequiresmoreproactiveeffortsbydistrictcentralofficeleaders.

VUE’sWebsiteat<www.annenberginstitute.org/VUE>offersmoreinformationaboutVUE,includingexcerptsfrompreviousissues,audioandvideoclips,andorderinginformation.

AnnenbergInstituteforSchoolReform | Voices in Urban Education


2 Annenberg Institute for School Reform

Overthepastfewyears,educatorsandpolicy-

makershavepaidincreasingattentiontoschool

districts.TheAnnenbergInstituteforSchoolReform’s

TaskForceontheFutureofUrbanDistricts,School

CommunitiesthatWork,helpedleadthiseffortby

suggestinghowdistrictscouldberedesignedto

supportschoolsinwaysthatpromoteresultsand

equity.Otherresearchhasshownthecriticalrolethat

districtsplayinschoolimprovement.

Thisnewattentionisawelcomesign.Fordecades,

schooldistrictshavebeenvilifiedasimpediments

toreform.Thisviewwasperhapsbestexemplified

byDavidRogers’s1968book100 Livingston Street,

whichturnedtheheadquartersoftheNewYorkCity

schoolsystemintoasymbolofwhathecalleda“sick

bureaucracy.”Reformersinthe1980sand1990s

soughttobypassdistricts;standards-basedreform

wasoriginallydesignedasasysteminwhichschools

wouldbeaccountabletostates,andcharterschools

werecreatedasawayforschoolstobefreefrom

districtrulesaltogether.

Yet,whileresearchersdemonstratedthesupport

thatdistrictscan–andneedto–provide,theirwork

raisedthequestionofhowdistrictscanfunctioneffec-

tively.Whatshoulda“smartdistrict”looklike?What

wouldamodern-day110LivingstonStreetdo?

ThisissueofVoices in Urban Educationattempts

toprovidesomeanswerstothesequestions.Usinga

varietyoflensesandperspectives–thoseofresearch-

ers,consultants,reform-supportorganizations,and

communityleaders–theauthorssuggestwhatan

The New “Central Office”

Robert Rothman is senior editor at the Annenberg Institute for School Reform and editor of VoicesinUrbanEducation.

RobertRothman

V.U.E. Winter 2009 3

effective“centraloffice”woulddoandhowthese

practicesdifferfromthosedistrictcentralofficeshave

typicallyperformed.

•EllenFoleyandDavidSiglerlayoutaframework

forasmartdistrictthatfocusesonsixessential

functions.

•MeredithHonigshowshowcentralofficestaff

inChicagoandOaklandworkedtosupportan

initiativetocreatesmallschoolsinthosecities.

•AndrewMoffitdrawslessonsfromthecorporate

sectortodescribethethreekeyareasacentral

officeneedstoaddress.

•MarySylviaHarrisondiscusseshowacentral

officecanandshouldengageparentsand

membersofthecommunity.

Theseauthorsmakeclearthattheroleofthe

centralofficeoughttobefarfromthatofthestereo-

typicalbureaucraticagency.Effectivecentraloffices

donotsimplymonitorwhetherschoolscomplywith

anendlesssetofrules;instead,theyworkwithschools

toprovideneededresourcesandsupportandreach

outtocommunitymembersandorganizationsto

findadditionalsourcesofsupport.Theyarenimble

andflexible,ratherthanhidebound.Andtheymake

decisionsbyusingdataandresearch.

Thesearticlesalsomakeclearthatthereare

somethingsdistrictsshouldstopdoing.Ofcourse,

somefunctions,liketransportationandlegalservices,

willnotgoaway.Buttheauthorssuggestthatthose


administrativefunctionsneedtobeconductedin

servicetothedistrict’smission,whichistoensurea

high-qualityeducationforeverystudent.Thatsuggests

thatredesigningcentralofficesinvolvesculturalchange

atleastasmuchasitrequirestechnicalmodifications

tostructuresandrolesandresponsibilities.

Redesigningdistrictcentralofficessothatthey

functionmoreeffectivelywillnotbeaneasytask.

Changeofthatmagnituderarelyis.Peopledonotlike

theideathatthewaytheyhaveworkedfordecades

mighthavetochange.Butastheseauthorsshow,

aredesigneddistrictcentralofficecanbefarmore

effectiveforchildrenandfamilies.Perhapswiththe

newattentionontheirrole,centralofficescanhavea

chancetofulfilltheirpotential.


In2002,SchoolCommunitiesthat

Work,theAnnenbergInstitute’sTask

ForceontheFutureofUrbanDistricts,

developedasetofideastocreate

“smartdistricts”(AnnenbergInstitute

2002).Sincethen,amajorpartofthe

AnnenbergInstitute’sagendahasbeen

toworkwithexistingdistrictstoimple-

menttheseideas.Whilenodistrict,on

itsown,canprovidethecomprehensive

webofopportunitiesandsupports

thatchildrenandtheirfamiliesneed,1

thereareanumberofwaysmostdistricts

canbemuchsmarterthantheyhave

beenhistorically.

Schooldistricts,whichemergedin

theearlytwentiethcentury,grewout

ofthesocialandorganizationalideas

thattookholdduringtheIndustrial

Revolution.“AdministrativeProgres-

sives,”asthisearlybandofreformers

hasbecomeknown,soughtthe“one

bestsystem”(Tyack1974)thatwould

separateschoolingfrompoliticsand

Ellen Foley is associate director of district redesign and leadership at the Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University and assistant clinical professor in the Master’s in Urban Education Policy Program at Brown University. David Sigler is a principal associate at the Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University.

Getting Smarter: A Framework for Districts

EllenFoleyandDavidSigler

A “smart district” focuses on six key functions in order to produce results and equity

for all students.

produceassimilated,productiveciti-

zensasefficientlyasFord’sfactories

producedcars.Alongsidethefocuson

“scientificmanagement”wasastrong

beliefthatintelligencewasinnate

andthatraceandethnicityplayeda

powerfulroleindeterminingan

individual’spotential.Theideathat

onlyasmallproportionofchildren

weremeanttosucceedacademically

wasbuiltintoschoolsystems.

Astheseideasplayedoutoverthe

lastcentury,schooldistrictsbecame

highlybureaucraticorganizationsthat

bufferedschoolsfromoutsideinterven-

tion(Elmore2000).Schooldistricts

attemptedtostandardizeinputs–treat-

ingallschools,students,andeducators

asthesame–whiletoleratingwide-

rangingoutcomesforstudents.Bythe

latetwentiethcentury,thereputation

ofschooldistrictswasasanobstacleto,

notacatalystfor,reform.

Butcreatingwholesystemsof

successfulschoolsrequiresschool

districtstobeakeyplayerinreform.

Asschooldistrictsevolvefromtheir

bureaucraticroots,theyarestruggling

withanumberofcriticalquestions:

Whataretherolesthatweshouldkeep

1 TheoverarchinggoaloftheAnnenbergInstituteforSchoolReformistohelpschooldistrictsandtheircommunitiescreate“smarteducationsys-tems.”Thesesystemsaimtoachievethisexcellenceandequityatscalebycombiningeffectiveschooldistrictswithacomprehensivewebofopportunitiesandsupportsforchildrenandfamilies,providedinpartnershipwiththecommunity.


Inthisarticleweprovideanover-

viewofthesekeyfunctionsandtheir

attendantpractices.Wealsodiscuss

whatdistinguishesthisframeworkfrom

otherlikeeffortsanddiscusstheframe-

work’simplicationsforschooldistricts.

The Smart District FrameworkOurframeworkincludesthefollowing

keyfunctions:

•LeadforResultsandEquity

•FocusonInstruction

•ManageHumanCapital

•UseDataforAccountability

andContinuousImprovement

•BuildPartnershipsand

CommunityInvestment

•AlignInfrastructurewith

StrategicVision

Lead for Results and Equity

Smartdistrictsdevelopandprovide

leadershipnecessaryforthedistrictand

itsschoolstoaccomplishthegoalof

providingallstudentswithanexcel-

lenteducation.Inourformulation,

responsibilityandauthorityarefirmly

lodgedwiththesuperintendent,buthe

orsheunderstandstheneedforand

thepowerofinclusive,distributedlead-

ership.Plansandpoliciesaredrafted

byteamswithexpertiseinthearea

ofinterest,buttheyarereviewedand

revisedthroughinputfromstaffatall

levelsofthedistrictandfromparents

andotherinterestedcitizens.Leader-

shipsetsthetonefortheorganization

bymodelingprofessionalbehavior,

includingclearcommunicationand

effectivecollaboration.Toleadfor

resultsandequity,districtleaders:

•collaboratewithallstakeholders

todevelopavisionforthedistrict

andimplementastrategicplanfor

realizingit;

•buildownershipandsustainprog-

resstowardthevisionthrough

effectiveinternalcommunication;

andwhatrolesshouldweeliminateor

transfertoothers?Whatnewfunctions

shouldwetakeon?Whatcapacitymust

wehavein-houseandwhatcapacities

canwefindinpartnerorganizations,in

theschoolsthemselves,atcityhall,and

atthestatedepartment?Whichdeci-

sionsshouldbecentralizedandwhich

shouldbemadeattheschoollevelor

inotherentities?

AstheAnnenbergInstituteworks

withschooldistrictsandcommunities

alloverthecountry,itiscleartousthat

theessentialrolesofschooldistrict

centralofficeshavenotbeenadequately

articulated.Tofillthisvoid,theInstitute

hasdevelopedaframework,basedon

theaccumulatedknowledgeabout

effectivecentralofficepracticesgleaned

fromourworkandfromourownand

others’research.

Ellen Foley and David Sigler | V.U.E. Winter 2009 7

•establishacollaborativeorgani-

zationalculturethatbalancesthe

prescriptionandguidancefrom

centralofficewithflexibilityand

autonomyforschools;

•developsubstantiveleadershipat

alllevelsoftheorganization;

•encourageandevaluatenewideas,

methods,andpartnerstoensure

theavailabilityofthemosteffective

supportsandservicesforschools;

•ensureaserviceorientationtoward

schoolsandthecommunity.

Focus on Instruction

Havinganinstructionalfocusdoes

notmeancreatingalockstep,teacher-

proofcurriculum.Rather,itmeans

thatthecentralofficeensuresthata

district’stime,attention,andresources

arefocusedprimarilyonschoolsand

studentlearning.Achievingthisfocus

reliesoninputfromschool-based

stafftoagreeonasetofcommon

materialsandapproaches,sothatthe

higheststandardsforinstructionand

learningarebuiltintothesystem.

Thesematerialsandapproachesare

supplementedwithsupportsandtimely

interventionsforstudentswhoarenot

reachingthestandards,professional

developmentopportunitiesforteachers,

andextendedlearningopportunities

forall.Inasmartdistrict,thecentral

officeensuresthatthesesupports

andinterventionsareavailable;they

mighteitherprovidethemorsimply

coordinatetheirprovision.Tofocuson

instruction,districtleaders:

•establishacommoncurricular

frameworkalignedwithhighaca-

demicstandardsandassessments;

•developandimplementvalid

andusefulsystemsofformative

andsummativeassessment;

Havinganinstructionalfocusdoes

notmeancreatingalockstep,teacher-

proofcurriculum.Rather,itmeans

thatthecentralofficeensuresthata

district’stime,attention,andresources

arefocusedprimarilyonschoolsand

studentlearning.

•ensureappropriatesupportsand

interventionsforallstudentswhile

maintaininghighexpectations;

•ensureextendedlearningopportu-

nitiesandsupportsthatfacilitate

learningbeyondtheclassroom;

•developanddistributeteaching

andlearningtoolsandresources

effectively.

Manage Human Capital

Inpubliceducation,humancapital

referstotheknowledgeandskillsetsof

oureducatorsthatdirectlyresultin

increasedlevelsoflearningforstudents.

Inshort,wearetalkingaboutwhatthey

knowandareabletodo–theirtalent

level.Giventhisdefinition,managing

humancapitalreferstohowanorgani-

zationtriestoacquire,increase,and

sustainthattalentlevelovertime.More

specifically,itreferstotheentirecon-

tinuumofactivitiesandpoliciesthat

affecteducatorsovertheirworklifeata

particularschooldistrict.Giventhat


teachers,principals,andthosethat

supportthemarethebiggestfactors

impactingstudentachievementin

schools,effectivelymanaginghuman

capitalisarguablyasmartdistrict’s

mostimportantjob.Tomanagehuman

capital,districtleaders:

•attracttalentfromavarietyof

sources,createadiversepipelineof

qualityapplicants,andstreamline

entryintothesystem;

•provideongoingmentoringand

supportinvaryinglevelsandform;

•deployhumancapitaltomeet

thevaryingneedsofschoolsand

students;

•evaluatetheeffectivenessof

personnelandprovideappropriate

recognitionandaccountability;

•ensurethatallstaffparticipate

inhigh-qualityprofessional

developmentthatistiedtoevalu-

ationand,wheneverappropriate,

supportsinstruction;

•providecompetitivecompensa-

tionandavarietyofincentives

forachievingexcellenceandmeet-

inggoals;

•establishacareertrackforteachers

thatprovidesvariedchallengesand

advancementopportunitiesforthe

mosteffectiveindividuals.

Use Data for Accountability and

Continuous Improvement

Toachieveresults,smartdistrictsneed

toknowcurrentandpastresultsand

whattheyhavetodotoimprovethose

results.Districtsandtheirpartners

needtodevelopsophisticatedanduser-

friendlydatacollectionandanalysis

systemsthatenablethemtomonitorthe

performanceofyoungpeople,schools,

programs,personnel,andthepartners

themselvesagainsttheresultsthey

expect.Smartdistrictsintegratenot

onlythecollectionofdata,butalsothe

seriousandregularexaminationofdata

intothenormaloperatingprocedures

ofschoolsanddistricts.Tousedatafor

accountability,districtleaders:

•collect,organize,analyze,and

actondataandhelpothers

throughoutthesystemtodoso;

•monitoroutcomesofstudents,

schools,anddistrictpersonnel,

aswellasindicatorsthatimpact

thoseoutcomes;

•evaluatetheeffectivenessofimple-

mentedprograms;

Inmostcommunities,theschooldistrictistheorganization

withthegreatestnumberofresourcesatitsdisposal,bothfiscal

andhuman,forservingchildren.Butsmartdistrictsalsorecognize

thatchildrenneedmorethanwhatisavailableinschooltobe

successfullearners.


•evaluatetheeffectivenessof

personnel;

•ensuretechnologyandsupport

necessaryfortimelyandeffective

useofdata.

Build Partnerships and

Community Investment

Inmostcommunities,theschool

districtistheorganizationwiththe

greatestnumberofresourcesatits

disposal,bothfiscalandhuman,for

servingchildren.Inaddition,itisthe

entitychargedwithensuringthe

academicsuccessofthosechildren.

Butsmartdistrictsalsorecognize

thatchildrenneedmorethanwhat

isavailableinschooltobesuccessful

learners.Therefore,smartdistricts

embracetheresponsibilitytoadvocate

stronglyforsupportsthataddress

theneedsofthestudentstheyserve

bothinand outsideofschool.Smart

districtspartnerwithandinvolve

awidespectrumofcommunity

members,organizations,andagencies

tosetandachievetheoverarching

goalsofthedistrict.Thesepartners

shareinformationwidelyandhave

regular,respectfulconversations

amongthemselvestohelpensure

distributedleadership,responsibility,

andaccountabilityforresults.To

buildpartnershipsandcommunity

investment,districtleaders:

•brokerpartnershipstoincrease

resourcesforschoolsandstudents;

•collaboratewithmultiplesectors

ofthecommunitytosetdistrict

prioritiesandidentifystrategiesfor

realizingthem;

•advocateforawebofcommunity

supportsandcoordinatepartner-

shipstoprovidethem;

•communicateeffectivelyexternally;

•regularlyseekcommunityinput

andfeedback.

Align Infrastructure with

Strategic Vision

Schooldistrictsarecomplexorganiza-

tionsinvolvednotonlyineducating

youngpeoplebutalsointransporting

them,feedingthem,payingtheir

teachers,andcomplyingwithstate

andfederalmandates.Smartdistricts

managetheiroperationsandresources

toensureanappropriatelearning

environmentandsupportsystemsfor

allschoolsandstudents.Smartdistricts

employsoundmanagementpractices,

ensuringthatthebusesrunontime,

legalobligationsaremet,paychecks

goout,andfacilitiesareconduciveto

learning.Finally,theymakeclearthe

differencebetweenboardandcentral

officerolesandresponsibilities.Toalign

theinfrastructurewiththestrategic

vision,districtleaders:

•ensuretheequitable,efficient,and

transparentdistributionofpublic

andprivateresources;

•ensureclean,safe,andwell-

maintainedfacilitiesthatallowfor

productivelearningenvironments;


•implementpoliciesthatsupport

thedistrict’sfocusoninstruction

anditsaccountabilityforresults

andequityinalignmentwithlegal

requirements;

•developatechnologyinfrastruc-

turethatenablescentralofficeand

school-basedstafftodotheirjobs

efficiently;

•attendtothelogisticalneeds

ofstudentssothattheyarrive

ontimeandarereadytolearn

throughouttheday.

What’s Different about This Framework?TheAnnenbergInstituteiscertainly

notaloneinitseffortstocatalogand

describewhateffectiveschooldistricts

andcentralofficesdo.Thisframework

isdifferentbecauseitfocusesonboth

whatschooldistrictsshoulddoand

howtheydoit.Thelastdecadeorso

ofresearchonschooldistrictshas

touchedonseveralofthesefunctions.

Focusingoninstructionandusing

data,forexample,aretwoareasthat

havebeenclearlyestablishedinthe

literatureaskeyrolesforschooldistricts

(see,forexample,Cawelti&Protheroe

2003;Corbett&Wilson1991;Mas-

sell&Goertz1999;Murphy&Hal-

linger1988;Shannon&Bylsma2004;

Snipes,Doolittle&Herlihy2002;

SpringboardSchools2006;Togneri

&Anderson2003).

Buttherehasbeenlittleinfor-

mationprovidedabouthowdistricts

developthesefunctions.Ourframe-

workincludesnotonlythefunctions

andpracticesthatschooldistricts

shouldfocuson,butalsoontheways

theyshouldapproachtheirwork.Below

wedescribethekeyvaluesthatare

infusedthroughoutourframework.

Smart Districts and Their Central

Offices Collaborate and Partner

in Critical Ways

Smartdistrictsacknowledgethat

ensuringanexcellenteducationfor

allstudentsisnotsomethingtheycan

achievealone.Theyfostersubstantive

collaborationwithinthemselvesas

wellaswithimportantcommunity

stakeholders.Whetherundera

traditionalgovernancestructureor

newmodelslikemayoralcontrol,

smartdistrictsactivelylooktocreate

importantpartnershipsthatarecritical

totheirsuccess–partnershipswith

entitieslikeeducationmanagement

organizationsthatrunportfolios

ofpublicschools,childandfamily

serviceorganizationsthattendtothe

healthandwelfareofstudentsand

theirfamilies,andservice-provider

organizationsthathaveexpertise

inthingslikequalityafter-school

programsortargetedrecruitmentthat

thedistrictmaylack.Thissentiment

comesthroughinvirtuallyevery

functionintheframework.

Whetherunderatraditionalgovernance

structureornewmodelslikemayoral

control,smartdistrictsactivelylookto

createimportantpartnershipsthatare

criticaltotheirsuccess.


Smart Districts Are Communicative

and Transparent

Smartdistrictsconsistentlystrivefor

ahighleveloftransparency.They

ensureopportunitiesforcommunity

participationingoalsettingand

governance;provideclearandconsistent

explanationsfordistrictdecisionsto

districtstaffandexternalparties;and

worktobuildinvestmentintheirvision

andplansthroughongoingdialogue

withallstakeholdersinvariousforums.

Smart Districts Are Committed

to Equity

Smartdistrictschampionthecauseof

equitythroughoutthedistrictthrough

communicationwiththecommunity,

strategicallocationofresources,and

nurturingofhighexpectations.They

recognizethatcreatingequityforstu-

dentsdoesnotsimplymeandividing

resourcesequally,butratherthatit

meansprovidingtoeachstudentwhat

heorsheneedstobesuccessful.

Smart Districts Are Service Oriented

Smartdistrictsrecognizestudents,

families,thecommunity,schools,

andeducatorsastheirpartnersand

worktoserveandsupportthem

toensurechildrenhavewhattheyneed

tobesuccessful.

Smart Districts Are Coherent

Smartdistrictsplaythekeyroleof

aligningresources,internalandexternal

capacity,policy,andstrategicplanning

toensurethatstudentshaveeverything

theyneedtobesuccessfulandto

receiveahigh-qualityeducation.

Implications for School DistrictsTheimplicationsfordistrictsare

straightforward,butnotnecessarily

easytoimplement.Districtleaders,

atthebehestofboardsorintheface

ofcommunitypressure,mustfocus


onpracticalquestionsnecessaryfor

day-to-dayoperations(e.g.,Should

schoolsupervisionbeorganizedby

gradelevelorK–12feederpatterns?

Whatcurriculumsupportmaterials

shouldwepurchase?).Butthey

mustalsomaketimeforevenmore

importantquestionsandreflectionon

whethertheyarefulfillingthemost

importantrolesthatdistrictsmustplay

ifallstudentsaretobeguaranteedthe

opportunityforanexcellenteducation.

Moreover,theymustlookcarefullyat

howtheyplaytheserolesandthe

valuestheyfosterintheirapproachto

thework.Thisframeworkattempts

toimparttheimportanceofdeveloping

thecapacitytoworkintheseessential

areasandintheseessentialways.

Wehavealreadyusedthisframe-

worktohelpdistrictscataloguethe

challengestheyface,tounderstand

thecapacitythatexistsamongschool

districtemployees,toorganizepotential

supportsfromoutsidethedistrict,

andtoreflectonwheretheyneed

toimprove.Whilemanylargeurban

schooldistrictsaremakingprogress

ineducatingallstudentsandreduc-

ingachievementgaps,noneofthe

examplesofdistrictturnaroundhave

achievedthegoalofallstudentsreach-

ingproficiency.

Thisframeworkis,ofnecessity,a

workinprogress–likethedevelop-

mentofsmartdistricts.Inthefuturewe

hopetobuildspecifictoolsfordistricts,

basedontheframework,thatwillhelp

themandtheircommunitiesidentify,

notjustwhattheyshouldbedoing

andhowtheyshouldbedoingit,but

alsohowtogetfromwheretheyareto

wheretheyneedtobe.

References

AnnenbergInstituteforSchoolReform.2002.School Communities that Work for Results and Equity.Providence,RI:BrownUniversity,Annen-bergInstituteforSchoolReform.

Cawelti,G.,andN.Protheroe.2003.High Student Achievement: How Six School Districts Changed into High Performance Systems.Arlington,VA:EducationalResearchServices.

Corbett,H.D.,andL.B.Wilson.1991.“TheCentralOfficeRoleinInstructionalImprovement,”School Effectiveness and School Improvement3,no.1:45–68.

Elmore,R.F.2000.Building a New Structure for School Leadership.Washington,DC:AlbertShankerInstitute.

Massell,D.,andM.Goertz.1999.District Strategies for Building Capacity and the Influence of State Policy on Local Initiatives.Philadelphia:ConsortiumforPolicyResearchinEducation.

Murphy,J.,andP.Hallinger.1988.“CharacteristicsofInstructionallyEffectiveDistricts,”Journal of Educational Research81,no.3:175–81.

Shannon,G.S.,andP.Bylsma.2004.Characteristics of Improved School Districts: Themes from Research.Olympia,WA:OfficeoftheSuperintendentofPublicInstruction.

Snipes,J.,F.Doolittle,andC.Herlihy.2002.Foundations for Success: Case Studies of How Urban School Systems Improve Student Achievement.Washington,DC:ManpowerDemonstrationResearchCorporationandCounciloftheGreatCitySchools.

SpringboardSchools.2006.Minding the Gap: New Roles for School Districts in the Age of Accountability.SanFrancisco,CA:SpringboardSchools.

Togneri,W.,andS.Anderson.2003.Beyond Islands of Excellence: What Districts Can Do to Improve Instruction and Achievement in All Schools.Washington,DC:LearningFirstAlliance.

Tyack,D.1974.The One Best System: A History of American Urban Education.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.


Meredith I. Honig is an assistant professor of educational leadership and policy studies at the University of Washington in Seattle.

Urban School District Central Offices and the Implementation of New Small Autonomous Schools Initiatives

MeredithI.Honig

Central office staff in Chicago and Oakland played key roles in implementing major

reform initiatives.

Educationalresearchhasshedlittle

lightonthisquestion.Forexample,

manystudiesofnewsmallautonomous

schoolsinitiativesfocusonschool-level

outcomesandimplementationprocesses

(e.g.,AmericanInstitutesforResearch

&SRIInternational2003,2004;

Sporte,Correa,Kahne&Easton2003;

Darling-Hammond,Ancess&Ort

2002;Raywid2002;Raywid,Schmerler,

Phillips&Smith2003;Wallach&

Gallucci2004;Wallach&Lear2003).

Suchstudiestypicallyarguethatcentral

offices–andusuallyformalcentraloffice

policiessuchasmandatedcurriculum–

curbimplementation.However,such

studiesgenerallydonotrevealhowcen-

tralofficesmightenableimplementation.

Thesestudiesarealsolimited

becausetheytendtodrawtheircon-

clusionsaboutcentralofficesfroma

handfulofone-timeinterviewswith

centralofficeadministratorsorsurveys

ofschoolprincipalsregardingwhat

andhowwelltheircentralofficesare

doing.Singleself-reportsandprincipals’

reportsprovideimportantperspectives

oncentralofficeparticipation.But,

especiallysincemostcentralofficework

unfoldsovertimeandbeyondtheview

ofschoolprincipals,suchdatasources

aresignificantlyincompleteinwhat

theyteachabouthowcentraloffices

Newsmallautonomousschools

initiativeshavespreadtourbandistricts

nationwide.Whiletheirdesignsvary,

theseinitiativesgenerallyaimtoconvert

largepublichighschoolsintomultiple,

smaller,moreautonomousschools

andtocreatenewsmallautonomous

publicschoolsofvarioustypes.Initiative

advocatesargue,inpart,thatthesheer

diversityofstudentsinurbandistricts

–and,arguably,othermid-sizedto

largedistricts–increasestheurgency

toreinventschoolsintonewer,smaller,

moreautonomousunitsthataremore

rigorous,caring,andresponsiveto

individualstudents.

Inturn,districtcentraloffices

wouldexpandstudentlearningdistrict-

wideiftheyhelpedschoolsbuildtheir

capacityformakingkeydecisionsabout

howtosupporttheirstudents,rather

thanmainlydirectedschools’decisions.

Suchformsofdistrictcentraloffice

supportdepartstarklyfromtraditional

centralofficerolesasregulatorsof

ornon-participantsinreformefforts.

What,morespecifically,dourban

schooldistrictcentralofficesdowhen

theyenabletheimplementationofnew

smallautonomousschoolsinitiatives?

This article has been adapted by the author from her forthcoming article “No Small Thing: School District Central Office Bureaucracies and the Implementation of New Small Auto nomous Schools Initiatives,” in AmericanEducationalResearchJournal.


mightparticipatemoreproductively

inimplementation.Otherresearchon

districtssuggeststhatindividualcentral

officeadministrators’relationshipswith

schoolsmaybemoreconsequentialto

implementationofambitiouschangeini-

tiativesthanformalpolicychanges(e.g.,

Burch&Spillane2004;Honig2006).

Giventheseconsiderations,I

concludedthatanextgenerationof

researchonnewsmallautonomous

schoolsinitiativesshouldfocuson

centralofficeadministratorswhoaim

toenableimplementationandaimto

revealwhattheydoandhowtheydoit.

Suchadministratorswerelikelytofind

fewroadmapsfortheirworkanddis-

coverthattheymustinventtheirwork

onthejob.Accordingly,researchshould

focusattentionondistrictswherecen-

tralofficeadministratorsstoodagood

chanceofhavingtheresources,political

support,andfreedomtoinventtheir

workinwaysthatpromisedtoenable

implementation.

TwosuchdistrictswereOakland

UnifiedSchoolDistrict(OUSD)in

CaliforniaandChicagoPublicSchools

(CPS).Duringmyperiodofstudy

(2001–2003inOUSDand2003–2006

inCPS),centralofficeadministrators

inbothdistrictsactivelyengaged

indevelopingnew,nontraditional

implementationsupportrelationships

withschoolsandwithothercentral

officeadministrators.Variousresources

(e.g.,majorgrantsfromtheBill&

MelindaGatesFoundation,supportive

executive-leveldistrictleadership,

andvariousexternalpartners)were

availabletobolstertheirefforts.Inthis

article,Isummarizekeylessonsfrom

myin-depthexaminationofcentral

officeadministrators’participationin

implementationinthosetwodistricts.1

Theselessonsrevealhowcertaincentral

officeadministratorscanworkbetween

thecentralofficeandparticipating

schoolstoenableimplementation.

1 MystudiesinOUSDandCPSinvolvedatotalof138interviewswith89respondents;meetingobservations;andextensivedocumentreviews.Icollectedthesedataoverthreeacademicyearsineachdistrict.Forafulldiscussionofstudymethods,seetheoriginalsourcematerialinHonig(inpress).Thefindingsreportedhererelatespecificallytohowcentralofficeadministratorsparticipatedintheongoingimplementationofnewsmallautonomousschoolsinitiatives.Thesefindingsdonotincludecentralofficeadministra-tors’workduringadistinctstart-upperiod–theperiodimmediatelyfollowingthepassageoftheenablingschoolboardpoliciesinbothdistricts,duringwhichcentralofficeadministratorsmainlyfocusedoninitialschoolselectionandhelpingthosefirstschoolsopentheirdoors.Ireportoncentralofficeparticipationinthisdistinctstart-upphaseinaseparatepapercurrentlyinprogress.

Meredith I. Honig | V.U.E. Winter 2009 15

andprivateandpublicinterestlaw

firmsandreportedlyhadlimited

investmentsincentralofficecareers.

Giventheirnewworkcontexts,back-

grounds,andcareertrajectories,SSO

administratorsseemedtooperate

relativelyunfetteredbytraditional

top-downcentralofficerolesand

routinesthatcanimpedeimplementa-

tionofsomechangeinitiatives.These

SSOadministratorsworkedovertime

tocraftnewsupportrelationships

betweencentralofficesandschools

thatenabledimplementation.

Bridging and Buffering

In the new, dynamic support relation

ships, SSO administrators both bridged

schools to and buffered schools from

the rest of the central office.

SSOadministratorsenabledimplemen-

tationbyvariablyengagingintwobroad

typesofworkpractices,dependingon

How School District Central Offices Enabled ImplementationInbothdistricts,certaincentraloffice

administrators–thoseinofficesdedicatedtotheimplementationof

thenewsmallautonomousschools

initiatives–enabledimplementation

throughtwomainstrategies.Aselabo-

ratedinthisarticle,thesestrategies,in

broadterms,involvedbridgingschools

tobutalsobufferingschoolsfrom

therestofthecentraloffice.2These

findings,overall,underscoretheimpor-

tanceofunderstandingdistrictcentral

officeparticipationinimplementation,

notmainlyasatechnicalproblemof

developingbetterformalpolicy,butas

ahumanchallengeofhelpingcentral

officeadministratorsworkwithschools

andothercentralofficeadministrators

innew,dynamicways.

New Support Relationships

Dedicated, nontraditional central

office administrators worked between

the central office and schools to

negotiate new support relationships

between the two.

Leadersinbothdistrictscreated

officesspecificallydedicatedtothe

implementationoftheirnewsmall

autonomousschoolsinitiatives.Both

officeslaunchedwithonecentraloffice

administratorandonesupportstaff

personandgrewoverthethreeyears

ofmystudytoincludebetweensixand

tencentralofficeadministrators.Most

oftheadministratorsinthesesmall

schoolsoffices(SSOs)werenewto

centralofficeworkandcamefrom

careersinprivatebusiness,publicpolicy,

Inbothdistricts,certaincentraloffice

administratorsenabledimplementation

throughtwomainstrategies.These

strategiesinvolvedbridgingschools

tobutalsobufferingschoolsfromthe

restofthecentraloffice.

2 Forafulleraccountoftheoutcomesassociatedwiththeseactivities,pleaseseetheoriginalsourcematerialcitedinHonig(inpress).


schools’capacityandotherconditions:

bridgingandbufferingbetweenschools

andtheircentraloffice.Bothproved

consequentialtoimplementation.

bridging

Bridgingincludedactivitiesthat

increasedcentralofficeadministrators’

andschoolleaders’engagement

withtheother.Theirspecificbridging

activitiesfocusedonthreeareas:

1.Policy/practice development: linking

other central office administrators

with evidence from schools’ plans and

experiences to advocate for immediate

district policy and practice changes.

Suchongoingpolicyandpractice

developmentactivitiesseemedpartic-

ularlyimportanttoimplementation,

giventheautonomyprovisionsofthe

initiative.Thoseprovisionsinvited

arangeofschoolinnovationsthat

policy-makerscouldnotanticipate

atthepointofpolicydesignandthat

occasionallyconflictedwithcentral

officepoliciesandpractices.

Likewise,theschoolboard

policiesthatauthorizedthenewsmall

autonomousschoolsinitiativestended

tocallforschoolautonomyin

generalbutnottoelaboratehowthe

centralofficemightactuallyenable

schoolstohaveautonomy,espe-

ciallywhenthepromisedautonomy

conflictedwithotherschooldistrict

policies.Avoidingsuchpotentially

controversialdecisionsatthepointof

policydesignmayhaveenabledpas-

sageoftheoriginalpolicy,butitleftin

placevariouspoliciesandpracticesthat

potentiallyimpededimplementation.

SSOadministratorsinboth

districtsbolsteredimplementation

byadvocatingforcentralofficepolicy

andpracticechangesthatpromised

tosupportimplementationofindi-

vidualschoolplans.Forexample,

participatingschoolsinCPS,likeall

otherCPSschools,reportedtoanArea

InstructionalOfficer(AIO)–acentral

officeadministratorassignedtoevalu-

ateandsupportschoolsinaparticular

geographicregion.SSOadministrators,

inpartnershipwithothers,pressed

forandeventuallysecuredanAIO

specificallyforthenewsmallautono-

mousschools.Oneofthemexplained

inaninterviewthattheAIOswerea

mainconduitthroughwhichvarious

resourcesandlegitimacyflowed;as

newsmallautonomousschoolscame

onlineandspreadacrossmultiple

AIOs,SSOadministratorsfoundthat

theAIOsdidnotalwaysworkwiththe

schoolsinwaysthataimedtosupport

theirindividualschoolplans.

Examplesofpolicyandprac-

ticedevelopmentinOUSDtypically

involvedeffortstoinfluenceambi-

tiousreformsofentirecentraloffice

unitsinsupportofnewsmallautono-

SSOadministratorsinbothdistricts

bolsteredimplementationby

advocatingforcentralofficepolicy

andpracticechangesthatpromised

tosupportimplementationof

individualschoolplans.


mousschools’implementationand

overallcentralofficeimprovement.

Forinstance,oneSSOadministrator

workedwithfinanceandbudgetoffice

staffpeopletocreateanewbudgeting

systemforthedistricttofacilitatethe

autonomiespromisedtotheparticipat-

ingschoolsand,eventually,toextend

thosefreedomstoalldistrictpublic

schools.AnotherSSOadministrator

engagedstaffinthehumanresources

departmentinreinventinghowthey

workedwithschoolstoimprovetheir

responsivenesstoschools’particular

humanresourceneeds,especiallywhen

itcametohelpingtheparticipating

schoolshireteachersandstaffwhosup-

portedtheirspecificnewsmallautono-

mousschoolsimprovementplans.

2.Capacity building: linking themselves

with other central office administrators

to build their relationships with and

knowledge of participating schools for

future central office policy and practice

changes.

Suchactivitiesseemedessentialto

enablingimplementation,sinceSSO

administratorsgenerallydidnothave

formalauthorityoverothercentral

officeunitswhosepoliciesandpractices

affectedsmallschoolsimplementation.

Throughvariousknowledgeandrela-

tionshipstrategies,SSOadministrators

increasedothercentralofficeadmin-

istrators’investmentsinandabilityto

respondtotheparticipatingschoolsin

waysthatresultedinorpromisedto

seedfuturepolicyandpracticechanges

supportiveofimplementation.

Inbothdistricts,SSOadministra-

tors’mainstrategiesforcentraloffice

knowledgeandrelationshipbuilding

involvedtheirattendingothercentral

officeunits’meetings,joiningtheir

workgroups,orsupportingthework

ofthoseotherunitsinotherways.For

instance,oneCPSSSOadministrator

recountedattendingstaffmeetingsof

thecentralofficeaccountabilityunit

sothatwhentheybeganrevisingtheir

implementationstrategyforNoChild

LeftBehind,theadministratorwould

be“atthetable”toshapehowthat

strategyunfoldedinserviceofthe

participatingschools.Othersdescribed

helpingothercentralofficeadministra-


3.Communicating external require

ments: linking schools to central office

and other external demands to bring

schools’ policies and practices in line

with them in the short term while they

worked to change central office policies

and practice to support schools’ plans

over the long term.

AsoneCPSSSOadministrator

explained,thepromiseofgenerally

underspecifiedautonomiesinthe

schoolboardpoliciesmeant“[schools]

thinktheyhaveautonomies,andin

actualitythereisnothingwritten.. . .

Theautonomieshavenotbeenspelled

out.Thereisapolicy,butithasnot

beensignedasacontract.”Theadmin-

istratorwentontoexplainthat,absent

clearagreementsaboutwhatthepolicy

authorizedschoolstodo,schoolsoper-

atedinaprecariouslegalposition;and

itbecamethejoboftheadministrator

toprotectschoolsbyensuringthey

workedwithinthelawastheadmin-

istratorunderstoodit.Forexample,

oneschool’sapproachtoteachingand

learningspecificallycalledforevaluating

studentworkbymeansotherthancon-

ventionallettergrades–anapproach

thatdirectlyconflictedwithdistrictand

statepoliciesrelatedtograding.SSO

administratorsworkedwiththatschool

inthelongtermtotranslatetheirstu-

dentevaluationsintolettergradeswhile

workingtosecuresupportiveformal

policychanges.

Likewise,aspartoftheirprofes-

sionaldevelopmentforparticipating

schools,OUSDSSOadministrators

invitedothercentralofficestaff,in

thewordsofone,“todefinewhatthe

autonomieswere,whatwasnegotiable

andwasn’tnegotiable,andtocome

andprovideinformation[toparticipat-

ingschoolprincipals]aboutthelogisti-

calstuffaroundstartingaschooland

beavailabletoanswerquestions.”

torswiththeirownworkchallenges,

because“whenIsolvethoselittle

problems,Icreatetrust;andthen

whenIcometotheseotherproblems

[relatedtotheparticipatingschools],

theywilltrustme.”

InOUSD,sucheffortsincluded

anSSOadministratorfacilitatingmeet-

ingsofthesuperintendent’scabinet.

Theadministratorexplained,“Iknewif

I[wanted]them[othercentraloffice

administrators]workingontheground

forthe. . .schools. . . ,somethings

neededtohappenwiththeassistant

sups[superintendents].Theyneededa

connectiontothework.”OneOUSD

SSOadministratorworkedwitheach

majorcentralofficedepartment,as

oneexplained,“sothatwewouldget

toknowandbuildrelationshipswith

onedepartment.”Accordingtoone

administrator,throughtheseprocesses

othercentralofficeadministratorscame

tounderstandthattheirownwork

demandedthattheyunderstand“more

whattheschoolsreallyneeded”and

thattheyneededtobe“willingtogo

outsidetheirlittledefinedjobtogetit.”


Anothercentralofficeadmin-

istratordescribedthesemeetingsas

focusedonclarifyingstateandcentral

officepoliciesschoolsshouldfollow

asashort-termstrategytohelpwith

implementationwhiletheybuiltcen-

tralofficeadministrators’knowledge

ofandrelationshipswiththeinitiative

forfuturepolicyandpracticechanges

moresupportiveofschools’local

improvementplans.Allcentraloffice

administratorswhoparticipatedin

thesepresentationsreportedthattheir

knowledgeofparticipatingschools

increasedthroughtheirparticipationin

thesepresentationsandthattheirpar-

ticipationpromptedthemtodevelop

strategiesforincreasingtheiroffice’s

responsivenesstoparticipatingschools.

buffering

Bufferingincludedactivitiesthatlim-

itedcontactbetweenthecentraloffice

andschools,generallywiththeaimof

helpingschoolsavoidpotentially

unproductiveinspectionandinterven-

tionbyothercentralofficesadministra-

tors–inspectionandinterventionthat

threatenedtoderailimplementation

ofschools’localimprovementplans.

Specificbufferingactivitiesincluded

thefollowing:

1.Providing schoollevel assistance:

limiting central office intervention

with schools by mediating schoollevel

conflicts themselves and coaching

school improvement.

InCPS,wheretheinitiativemainly

involvedtheconversionoflargehigh

schoolsintosmallerunitssharingthe

samecampus,suchassistancefrequently

involvedSSOadministratorsresolving

conflictsthatarosebetweennewsmall

Centralofficeadministratorscame

tounderstandthattheirownwork

demandedthattheyunderstand

“morewhattheschoolsreally

needed”andthattheyneededto

be“willingtogooutsidetheirlittle

definedjobtogetit.”

autonomousschoolsonthesame

schoolcampuses.Onecentraloffice

administratorexplainedthatsuch

conflictsthreatenedtocreatea“really

negativefeelingbetweenCPS. . .and

thoseschools”andtoincreasepoten-

tiallyunproductivecentralofficeinter-

ventioninthoseschools.Asonemain

strategyformitigatingsuchconflicts,

SSOadministratorslobbiedforand

eventuallysecuredthecreationofa

“campusmanager”positionateach

convertinghighschooltoresolveschool

conflictsonsitebeforetheyescalatedto

othercentralofficeadministrators.

Accountabilitypoliciesineffectat

thetimeofmystudycalledforcentral

officeadministratorstointervenein

schoolswithlimitedacademicgains.

SSOadministratorsbufferedschools

fromsuchinterventionbycoaching

schoolsonimprovingthequality

oftheiracademicprograms.InCPS,

thededicatedacademicaffairsdirector

withintheSSOand,eventually,the

AIOassignedtotheparticipatingschools


providedsuchacademicsupports.In

OUSD,overtime,theparticipating

principalsreporteddirectlytothe

superintendent,whoprovideddirect

supportforprincipals’instructional

leadership.Forexample,whenasked

aboutthefocusoftheirregularmeet-

ingswiththesuperintendent,principals

generallymadecommentssimilarto

onewhosaid,“Mostly. . .mypersonal

growth.Hepushesyou.”Principals

typicallyreflectedthattheirdirect

contactwiththesuperintendenthelped

themavoid,inoneprincipal’swords,

“someonecominginsuddenlyand

saying‘Whyareyoudoingthat?’or

‘Youneedtoworkwith[aparticular

school-supportorganization],’when

noneofthoseprovidersgetswhatwe

aretryingtodo.”

2.Absorbing potential and actual scru

tiny: limiting central office intervention

by taking responsibility for schools’

deviations from central office policies

and practices.

Forexample,inCPStwoSSOadmin-

istratorsdescribedhowaschool

developedanapplicationprocessfor

studentsinterestedinattendingtheir

schoolthatsomeintheschooland

communitybelievedviolatedthenew

smallautonomousschoolspolicythat

participatingschoolshave“openenroll-

ment.”Theschoolprincipaltoldan

SSOadministratorthattheydidnot

intendtosystematicallyexcludestu-

dents,whichdidviolatecentraloffice

policy,buttoensurethattheirschool

includedstudentswhosupportedtheir

particularschoolphilosophyandthat

suchsupportwasessentialtotheir

implementation.

AnSSOadministratorsubse-

quentlydevelopedaprocessfor

negotiatingschool-specificenrollment

policieswiththeSSOoffice,aspartof

whichtheadministratorwouldrunthe

decisionsbyexecutivecentraloffice

Principalstypicallyreflectedthattheirdirectcontactwiththe

superintendenthelpedthemavoid,inoneprincipal’swords,

“someonecominginsuddenlyandsaying‘Whyareyoudoing

that?’or‘Youneedtoworkwith[aparticularschool-support

organization],’whennoneofthoseprovidersgetswhatweare

tryingtodo.”


staffandothers–notforpermission,

butasa“noticeofdisclosureandthen

proceed”process.Theadministra-

torexplainedthatothercentraloffice

administratorsmightdisagreewith

theirapproachtoenrollment,butthat

suchdisagreementwouldthenbecome

amatterofnegotiationbetweenthe

SSOandothercentralofficeunitswhile

theparticipatingschoolsoperated

underacentraloffice“policyofasort.”

InanexamplefromOUSD,an

SSOadministratordescribedone

schoolthatwantedtoopenasan

“innovativeschoolorganizedaround

internshipswithkidsworkingontheir

ownindividualizedlearningplans”

andlowteacher-to-studentratios.The

superintendentwantedto“pull”this

schoolbecausehedidnotthinkthe

school’splanningprocesshadprovided

asufficientfoundationforsuccess.

TheSSOadministratorarguedthat

theschoolhadadequatecurricular

plansandotherstructuresinplaceand

thattheadministratorwouldtakeper-

sonalresponsibilityforsupportingthe

school.Thesuperintendentreportedly

responded,“Ifitisamess,thenitis

onyourhead,becauseI’mnotautho-

rizingit.”

Laterinimplementation,theSSO

administratorreported,“Iwas. . .there

yesterdayattheirexhibits[presenta-

tionsofstudentwork]. . .andtheyare

doinggreat . . .andnowIamfighting

fornextyearsotheycanmoveand

growtheirschool . . .untilwegetour

shinkicked.”

Selected Implications for PracticeThelessonssuggestedbythisstudy

haveimportantimplicationsforthose

interestedinsupportingurbanschool

districtcentralofficeadministrators

inparticipatingproductivelyinthe

implementationofnewsmallautono-

mousschoolsinitiativesandother

effortsthatcallforcentralofficeadmin-

istratorstopartnerwithschoolsinnew,

supportiveways.

Invest in building central

office capacity.

Inadeparturefromthemajorityof

researchstudiesonnewsmallautono-

mousschoolsinitiativesthatfocuson

schools,thisstudyrevealstheimpor-

tantwayscentralofficeadministrators

enableimplementation.Suchbridging

andbufferingactivitiesareafarcry

fromcentralofficeadministration-as-

usualinsomedistricts,wherecentral

officeadministratorstraditionallyhave

notengagedinsuchstrategic,problem-

solving,school-supportrelationships

withschools.Suchtraditionssuggest


thatcentralofficeadministratorsmay

nothavethereadycapacitytoengage

insuchworkpractices.

Inpartialsupportofthisclaim,

theSSOadministratorsinthisstudy

seemedtodosowellinpartbecause

theywerenottraditionalcentraloffice

employees.Intheircentralofficepolicy

andpracticedevelopmentandcapacity-

buildingwork,theygenerallyfound

themselvesswimmingupstream–help-

ingothercentraladministratorsbuild

theircapacityforsteppingoutsidethe

traditionaltrappingsoftheirlongstand-

ingworktosupportschools.

Theirexperienceraisestheques-

tion:Howcancentralofficeleaders,

funders,andothersmakestrategic

investments,notonlyinschools,but

alsoinbuildingcentralofficeadminis-

trators’capacityforengaginginwork

practicesthatsupportimplementation

ofpromisingschool-improvement

efforts?Suchinvestmentsmightfocus

ontheidentificationandfurtherdevel-

opmentofnewcentralofficework

practicessuchasbridgingandbuffer-

ing,aswellasprofessionalsupportsfor

centralofficeadministratorstoengage

inthosepractices.Suchinvestments

maychallengefunders,too–especially

thoseaccustomedtoinvestingmainly

inschoolsandnotincentralofficesas

keyleversforschoolimprovement–

toswimagainstthetideoftheirown

longstandingpractices.

Build out ecologies of support for

new central office work.

Evenwithsuchinvestmentsincentral

offices,centralofficeparticipationin

initiativeslikenewsmallautonomous

schoolslikelywillremainprofoundly

challengingforcentralofficeadminis-

trators.Centralofficeadministrators’

abilitytomanagesuchchallenges

maydependsignificantlyonbroader

ecologiesofsupportfortheirnewwork

practices.Externalcentralofficesupport

organizationsseemessentialpartici-

pantsinsuchanecologyofsupport

(Honigunderreview,2004).Whole

industrieshavebuiltuparoundhelp-

ingschoolsengageinparticularreform

approachesandworkpractices.How

cantheseorotherorganizationsbuild

theircapacitytosupportcentral office

administratorsincreatingthecondi-

tionsandrelationshipswithschools

obviouslyessentialtoenablingsuch

reformapproaches?

Howcancentralofficeleaders,funders,andothersmakestrategic

investments,notonlyinschools,butalsoinbuildingcentraloffice

administrators’capacityforengaginginworkpracticesthat

supportimplementationofpromisingschool-improvementefforts?


References

AmericanInstitutesforResearchandSRIInternational.2004.National School District and Network Grants Program, Year 2 Evaluation Report.Washington,DC:AIRandSRI.

AmericanInstitutesforResearchandSRIInternational.2003.High Time for High School Reform: Early Findings from the Evaluation of the National School District and Network Grants Program.Washington,DC:AIRandSRI.

Burch,P.,andJ.Spillane.2004.Leading from the Middle: MidLevel District Staff and Instructional Improvement.Chicago:Cross-CityCampaignforUrbanSchoolReform.

Darling-Hammond,L.,J.Ancess,andS.W.Ort.2002.“ReinventingHighSchool:OutcomesoftheCoalitionCampusSchoolsProject,”American Educational Research Journal39,no.3:639–673.

Honig,M.I.Underreview.“BeyondTechnicalAssistance:‘External’OrganizationsandtheDynamicsofUrbanDistrictCentralOfficeLeadership.”

Honig,M.I.Inpress.“NoSmallThing:SchoolDistrictCentralOfficeBureaucraciesandtheImplementationofNewSmallAutonomousSchoolsInitiatives,”American Educational Research Journal.

Honig,M.I.2006.“Street-LevelBureaucracyRevisited:FrontlineDistrictCentralOfficeAdministratorsasBoundarySpannersinEducationPolicyImplementation,”Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis28,no.4:357–383.

Honig,M.I.2004.“DistrictCentralOffice–CommunityPartnerships:FromContractstoCollaborationtoControl.”InEducational Administration, Policy, and Reform: Research and Measurement,editedbyW.Hoy&C.Miskel,pp.59–90.Greenwich,CT:InformationAgePublishing.

Raywid,M.A.2002.“ThePolicyEnvironmentsofSmallSchoolsandSchools-Within-Schools,”Educational Leadership59,no.5:47–51.

Raywid,M.A.,G.Schmerler,S.E.Phillips,andG.A.Smith.2003.Not So Easy Going: The Policy Environments of Small Urban Schools and SchoolsWithinSchools.Charleston,SC:ERICClearinghouseonRuralEducationandSmallSchools.

Sporte,S.,M.Correa,J.Kahne,andJ.Q.Easton.2003.Chicago High School Redesign Initiative: A Snapshot of the First Year of Implementation.Chicago:ConsortiumforChicagoSchoolReform.

Wallach,C.A.,andC.Gallucci.2004.Elevating the Conversation: Building Professional Community in Small High Schools.Seattle,WA:SmallSchoolsProject.

Wallach,C.A.,andR.Lear.2003.An Early Report on Comprehensive High School Conversions.Seattle,WA:SmallSchoolsProject.


Thecentralofficesoflargeurban

schooldistrictsare,inmanyways,quite

similartothecorporatecentersof

largecorporationsorotherorganiza-

tions.Whendesignedeffectively,these

centersensurethattheirkeyoperating

units–whetherahandfulofrelated

businessesoradiversesetofunitsin

thousandsoflocations–canachieve

theirsharedperformancegoals(in

termsofincomeandotherkeymet-

rics).Similarly,thecentralofficesof

largeurbanschooldistrictsexistto

ensurethattheirprimaryoperating

units–individualschools–consis-

tentlyproduceeffectiveteachingand

learning,whichhasthemostdirect

impactonthedistrict’sperformance

goals(intermsofstudentoutcome

andothermetrics).Thecentraloffices

ofmostlargeurbanschooldistricts,

however,oftenareseenasineffective

bureaucracies,whichimpede,rather

thanenhance,thecoreeffortsoftheir

schoolstoimprovestudentoutcomes

(Ucelli,Foley&Mishook2007).

Whilenearlyalllargeurbanschool

districtsregularlyarticulateambitious

goalsandproducestrategicplansto

achievethem,fewhaverigorously

evaluatedtheroletheircentraloffices

shouldplaytoensurethesuccessof

thosestrategies.Instead,mostcentral

officescontrolawiderangeofactivities

–fromsettingcurricularpoliciesand

providingrelatedtrainingtorecruiting

andplacingstaffinschoolstomanag-

ingschoolfacilitiesandprovidingback-

officeservices–forhistoricalreasons,as

opposedtoclearstrategicrationaleor

evenanunderstandingofthespecific

valuetheyprovidetosupporteffective

teachingandlearningintheirschools.

Asaresult,thereisoftenamisalign-

mentbetweenwhatthecentraloffice

ofalargeurbandistrictdoesandwhat

theschoolsmightactuallyneed.

Thereisagrowingrecognition

thattomeettheambitiousgoalsof

largeurbanschooldistricts–interms

ofdramaticallyimprovedstudentout-

comesandeliminationofachievement

gaps–asignificantrevampingofthe

centralofficesisnecessary(Ucelli,Foley

&Mishook2007).Tothatend,large

urbanschooldistrictsmightlooktothe

experiencesofcorporationsorother

largeorganizationswitheffectivecorpo-

ratecenters.

Specifically,suchorganizations

recognizethechallengesofmanag-

inglarge,complexentitiescentrally

andpushtodefineasmaller“true”

Andrew Moffit is senior consultant with McKinsey & Company’s Global Education Practice, based in Boston.

Redesigning the Central Office to Deliver Better Value

AndrewMoffit

The corporate sector offers lessons in how district central offices might be redesigned to

serve schools more effectively.


corporatecenter,responsibleonlyfor

thoseactivitieswithaclearrationalefor

centralization,suchassignificantstra-

tegicadvantagesoreconomiesofscale.

Theseorganizationsalsorestructure

theircentersexplicitlyarounddelivering

thesenarrowedsetsofactivities.

Tobesure,thereisgreatvariation

intheeffectivenessofcorporatecenters,

andnotallexamplesfromtheprivate

orothersectorsarerelevantforlarge

urbanschooldistricts.Nonetheless,

theexperiencesofcorporationsor

organizations–forwhichtheimpactof

effectiveorganizationaldesignontheir

performancehasbeenrecognized(see,

generally,Bryan&Joyce2007)–can

beinstructive.

Thereisnosingleanswerforthe

roleordesignofthecenterofany

organization,andanyorganization’s

answercanshiftovertime,depending

ontheorganization’scontextandits

performancegoals.However,thereare

threekeystepsthateffectivecorpora-

tionsororganizations–regardlessof

industryorsector–followtoensure

theircenteraddsvaluetoitsoperating

unitsandisaneffectivedriverofoverall

performance:

•Ensureaclearstrategicmandate

forthecenter,guidedbyinvolve-

mentofkeyinternalstakeholders,

inalignmentwithoverallstrategy.

•Informedbythisstrategicman-

date,categorizekeyactivities

accordingtothevaluetheycreate

anddeterminethecenter’srolein

theirprovision.

•Designformalorganizational

structureandkeysupporting

mechanismsaccordingly.

Thisarticleexploreshowthe

centralofficesoflargeurbanschool

districtsmightapplythesekeysteps

toensurethattheydeliverstrategic

valuetotheirschoolsand,ultimately,

enhancethedistrict’sstudentoutcome

performancegoals.Itincorporates

examplesfromselectlargeurban

schooldistrictsthathavereexamined

thestrategicroleoftheircentraloffices

andredesignedtheircentralfunctions

accordingly.

Ensure a Clear Strategic Mandate Frequently,discussionsaboutoptimiz-

ingthecenterfocusimmediatelyon

organizationaldesign.However,itis

importantfirsttodefineaclearstrategic

mandateforthecenter–inlightofthe

overallstrategyforthecorporationor

organization–detailinghowthecenter

willaddvaluetoitsoperatingunits.

Thisstrategicmandatewillvarybythe

uniquecontextandrelativestrengthsof


tiontotheschools(e.g.,Singapore),

whileothersystemshavepushedmuch

greaterautonomytotheirschools(e.g.,

NewZealand,Sweden).Ingeneral,

thereisatrendtowardgreaterschool-

levelautonomy,which,researchsug-

gests,undertherightconditions,can

driveoverallperformance.1

Afewlargeurbanschooldistricts,

includingNewYorkCity,Oakland,and

Edmonton,haveadopteddistrictwide

strategiesthatemphasizedevolving

significantcontroloverkeybudget-

aryandoperatingdecisionstotheir

schools.Thesedistrictsalsohavetaken

theimportantstepofredefiningtheir

strategicmandatefortheircentral

offices–principally,tofocusonsetting

clearexpectationsandaccountability

measuresandprovidingselectivesup-

portstotheirschools–inalignment

withthoseoverallstrategies.Inso

doing,theypurposefullyhavenarrowed

thekeyareasinwhichthecentraloffice

attemptstoaddvaluetoitsschools

andhavereorganizedmanyoftheir

centralactivitiesandfunctionsaccord-

ingly.Selectexamplesoftheapplication

ofthesestrategicdecisionsfortheir

centralofficesareaddressedmorefully

inthenextsectionofthisarticle.

Regardlessoftheresultingnature

ofthisstrategicmandate,itisimpor-

tantforkeyinternalstakeholdersto

bedirectlyinvolvedintheprocessof

definingit.Engagingleadersofboth

centralofficedepartmentsandschools

canbeinstrumentaltoaccurately

definingtheneedsoftheschoolsand

1 “Systemfactorthatwasassociatedwithperfor-manceevenafteraccountingforsocio-economicbackground:Educationsystemswhereschoolsreportedahigherdegreeofautonomyinbudget-ing(studentsineducationsystemswithoneadditionalstandarddeviationontheindexofautonomyinbudgetingscore25.7pointshigher,allotherthingsbeingequal)”(OECD2007,p.44).

thecenter,butitisimportanttofocus

thecenteronlyonthoseactivitiesin

whichitcanprovideuniquevaluetoits

units.Asexamples,thecorporatecenter

mandateofmanyfinancialinstitutions

focusesonbuildingandmaintaining

customerrelationshipsandmanaging

riskacrossamultitudeofdiversebusi-

nesses;atGeneralElectric,incontrast,

thestrategicmandatehasbeenmore

internallyfocused,famouslyrevolv-

ingarounddevelopingandmanag-

ingaworld-classmanagementteam,

entrustedtomakecriticaldecisionsfor

theirunits.

High-performingschoolsystems

varyinthemandateandrolethey

definefortheircenters.Somehigh-

performingschoolsystemsarehighly

centralized,leavingverylittlebutexecu-

Andrew Moffit | V.U.E. Winter 2009 27

acrossthesystem,andpromoting

synergiesacrosstheunits.Asthey

havesignificantpotentialtocreateor

destroyvalueandexponentiallyimpact

attainmentofoverallgoals,thecenter’s

rolemustbechosencarefully.

Foralltheactivitiesineachcat-

egory,thepotentialbenefitsofretaining

controlinthecenter,givenitsstrategic

mandateandrelativecapacity,canbe

weighedagainstthoseassociatedwith

devolvingcontroloverdecisionmaking

totheoperatingunits,whichareclosest

totheneedsontheground.

Simplyidentifyingthekeyactivities

tobecontrolledbythecenter,however,

doesnotfullyinformtheroleofthe

centerinprovidingeachactivity.Certain

servicescontrolledbythecentercould

bedeliveredbythirdpartiesthrough

acontractarrangement(whichthe

centerwouldmanage);alternatively,

foractivitiescontrolledbytheunits,

thecenter–dependingonitsrelative

capacity–couldserveasoneofseveral

eligibleprovidersofthatactivity.

evaluatinghowwellthecentraloffice

currentlymeetsthoseneeds.Moreover,

thistypeofengagementcanproduce

thenecessarybuy-inandcommitment

tothenewstrategicmandateforsuc-

cessfulimplementation.

Categorize Key ActivitiesOncethestrategicmandateforthecen-

terhasbeendefined,theentirerosterof

activitiespotentiallyperformedbythe

centercanbeevaluatedtodetermine

whoshouldcontroland/orprovide

them.Althoughthemostappropri-

ateapproachdiffersbycontext,highly

effectivecentersfocusonthelean-

estdesignpossible,pushingdecision

makingtotheoperatingunitswhere

possible,unlessthereisacompelling

reason,suchassignificantstrategic

consequencesoreconomiesofscale,

tocentralize.Thisisparticularlytrue

incomplexorganizationssuchaslarge

urbanschooldistricts,wheresignificant

localvariationintheneedsofindividual

unitssuchasschoolsisoftenpresent.

Therearethreedistincttypes

ofactivitiesforwhichthecenter

canaddvaluetoitsoperatingunits:

safeguarding,servicing,andshaping.

Safeguardingactivitiesprimarilyserve

toprotecttheentityfromthreatsto

itssurvival,generallywithlittleupside

potential.Thesearethecorefiduciary

andcompliancetasksofthecenter.

Servicingactivitiesrefertoservicesthat

generatecostsavingsifconsolidated.

Theytypicallyhavemodestpotentialto

improveoverallperformance.Shaping

activitiestypicallyreflecttheprimary

strategicrationaleforthecenterand

mostimpacttheorganization’score

businessesandtheirperformance.

Theseactivitiescouldincludeproviding

strategicguidancetotheunits,setting

expectationsandmanagingtheir

performance,buildingcorecapabilities

Highlyeffectivecentersfocusonthe

leanestdesignpossible,pushing

decisionmakingtotheoperating

unitswherepossible,unlessthereisa

compellingreason,suchassignificant

strategicconsequencesoreconomies

ofscale,tocentralize.


Safeguarding

Safeguardingactivitiesprotectanentity

fromthreatstoitsbasicsurvival,but

generallydolittletohelpachievethe

organization’sperformancegoals.

Intheprivatesector,thesemightmean

handlingfinancialdistress,major

lawsuits,reputationproblems,or

criminalproblems.Astheyimplicate

corefiduciaryorcomplianceresponsi-

bilities,thecenternearlyalwaysowns

theseactivities.

Schooldistrictsfaceananalogous

setofregulatory,financial,andpolitical

“threats”thatmustberigorouslymoni-

toredandactivelymanaged.Specifically,

districtsneedregularprocessesfor

setting,andensuringcompliancewith,

bothinternalandexternalpoliciesor

regulations–forexample,useoffunds,

specialeducationprograms,workforce

provisions–toavoidriskoflawsuits.

Moreover,inlightofstateaccountabil-

itysystems,districtsmusteffectively

andconsistentlymeasureperformance

oftheirschools.Theyalsoneedtrans-

parentfinancialreportingandcontrols

inplacetopreventbudget-driven

interruptionstoongoingoperations.

Finally,theyalsoneedeffectiveexternal

relationsandcommunicationsfunctions

toensureconsistentmessagingto,and

properengagementof,keystakeholders,

particularlythosemembersofschool

boardsorotheroversightbodies,parents,

orotherlocalleaderswithsignificant

influenceonthedistrict’sstrategicdirec-

tion(anditsleadership,inparticular).

Giventheircriticalimportance

tothebasicexistenceoftheschool

district(andrisksassociatedwithvari-

ancesintheirapproach),theseactivities

areuniformlycontrolled,andnearly

alwaysdelivered,bythecentraloffice

ofschooldistricts.

Servicing

Servicing activitiesderivetheirprimary

benefitfromaggregationacrossthe

system,buttheirexecutiongenerally

haslimitedpotentialtoimpactkey

performancegoals.Assuch,thereisa

presumptionthatthecentershould

controltheirprovisionasthebenefits

ofscaletypicallyoutweighanybenefits

Schooldistrictsregularlyaggregatedemandacrosstheirsystem

–andinsodoing,enjoyscalebenefits–bycontrollingawide

rangeofkeyservicingactivities,suchasthoserelatedtohuman

resources(payrollprocessing,benefitsmanagement),information

technology,transportation,foodservice,andprocurement.


accruedthroughempoweringindividual

units.Theseincludeactivitiesthat,

whenaggregated,aremoreefficiently

performedforatleastthesamequal-

ity,orthosethatcanonlybedone

cost-effectivelywhenaggregated(e.g.,

variousprocurement,humanresources,

orinformationtechnologyfunctions;

transportation;foodservices).

Forsuchactivities,corporations

typicallycreateinternal“sharedservices”

functions(iftheybelievetheyhave

significantinternalcapacitytodeliver

iteffectively)ormanageacontract

withathirdparty(iftheybelievecosts

associatedwithdevelopingrequisite

internalcapacityarenotjustified).

Thereisanemergingtrendin“profes-

sionalizing”sharedservicesthrough

service-levelagreements(SLAs),which

incorporatekeyperformanceindicators

(oftenmadeeasierbythetransactional

oroperationalnatureofsuchactivities),

orotheraccountabilityprovisions.

Schooldistrictsregularlyaggregate

demandacrosstheirsystem–and

insodoing,enjoyscalebenefits–by

controllingawiderangeofkeyservic-

ingactivities,suchasthoserelatedto

humanresources(payrollprocessing,

benefitsmanagement),informa-

tiontechnology,transportation,food

service,andprocurement.However,

exceptfortransportationandfood

service,largeurbanschooldistrictsare

muchlessapttomanagecontracts

withthird-partyprovidersforservicing

activities.Moreimportant,perhaps,

evenfewerlargeurbanschooldistricts

haveestablishedclearmetricsto

managetheperformanceoftheirservice

providers(whetherinternalorexter-

nal).AnotableexceptionisOakland

UnifiedSchoolDistrict(OUSD),which

utilizesasetofoperatingperformance

metricstoevaluateallofitscentral

officefunctionsandserviceproviders.

Shaping

Shaping activitiestypicallyreflectthe

primarystrategicrationaleforthecen-

terandmostimpact(or“shape”)the

organization’sbusinessunitsandtheir

resultingperformance.Thecenter’srole

inshapingactivitiestypicallyshowsthe

greatestvariance,aseffectivecorpora-

tionsorotherlargeorganizationsstrive

todefineonlyafewareas–oftencalled

“centersofexcellence”–inwhichthey

cantrulyaddvaluetotheiroperating

units.Mostoften,corporatecenter

shaping activitiesrevolvearoundthe

toptalentdevelopment,business

performancemanagement,andmerg-

ersandacquisitions.Otheractivities,

suchasstaffselection,training,and

development,areoftenmanagedwithin

businessunits.

Inmostlargeurbanschooldis-

tricts,ontheotherhand,abroadsetof

keyshapingactivities–rangingfrom

staffrecruitment,selectionandplace-


ment,professionaldevelopmentand

trainingstudentsupports–remain

thedominionofthecentraloffice.In

fact,mostdistrictsdonotdifferentiate

betweenthecontrolneededforsafe-

guardingandservicingactivitiesfrom

thatmostappropriateforshapingactiv-

ities.Ofcourse,therearemanyshaping

activities–suchasinterveninginlow-

performingschools,managingaschool

portfoliotoensureappropriateoptions,

creatingapipelineoftalentedappli-

cants,managingtheperformanceof

schoolleaders–whichshouldremain

undercontrolofthecentraloffice,in

nearlyallcases,forstrategicand/or

scalereasons.Butfortheremaining

activities(whichpotentiallycouldbe

controlledbyeithercentralofficeor

theschools),thereisanopportunity

fordistrictleaderstorigorouslyexam-

ineand,basedonthedistrict’srelative

capacityandstrategicmandate,identify

thenarrowsetforwhichthecentral

officecanprovidesignificantvalueto

itsschools.

Itisimportanttoaddressmechanisms

thatalignincentiveswiththese

organizationalstructurechanges,

inculcatethechangesinemployees,

anddriveaccountabilityforthe

changesacrosstheorganization.

Asmentionedearlier,severallarge

urbanschooldistrictshaveempow-

eredtheirschoolstocontrolprovi-

sionofselectshapingactivities,which

significantlychangedtheroleoftheir

centraloffices.Forexample,since1994,

EdmontonPublicSchools(EPS)has

provideditsschoolswithsignificant

controlovertheirbudgets,including

theabilitytoselectfromvarious

servicesandproviders.Inresponse,the

district’scentralofficewasrenamed

CentralServices,whichcontinuesto

provideteacherprofessionaldevelop-

mentandstudentassessmenttoolsto

schools,incompetitionwithoutside

vendors.Similarly,theNewYorkCity

DepartmentofEducation(NYCDOE)

enablesitsschoolleaderstoselect

theproviderforasuiteofteaching

andlearningfunctions,including

instructionalcoaching,professional

development,andstudentsupports,

fromamongasetofexternaland

internaloptions(tocreatethelatter,

NYCDOEtransformedkeyportions

ofitsTeachingandLearningdepart-

mentintoindependentLearning

SupportOrganizationstocompetewith

oneanotherandotherproviders).In

bothinstances,however,thecentral

officeretainedcontrolofkeyshap-

ingactivities,suchassettingcurricular

guidelines,managingaccountabilityof

schools,developingknowledgeman-

agementopportunities,andbuildinga

pipelineofqualifiedteachersandprinci-

pals,forwhichitdetermineditwasbest

positionedtoaddvaluetoitsschools.

Rigorouslydeterminingtheappro-

priateroleofthecentralofficeinthe

provisionofkeyactivitiesineachof

thesethreecategoriescanbeacritical

steptoensuringthatthestrategic

mandateofthecentralofficeisactually

putintopractice.


Design the Formal Organizational Structure and Key Supporting MechanismsAwell-definedstrategicmandatefor

thecentralofficecanprovideclear

criteriatoredesignitsformalorganiza-

tionalstructureaccordingly(e.g.,Which

activitiesshouldbegroupedtogether?

Whoshouldreporttowhom?Are

staffinglevelsofcentralfunctions

alignedwithrevisedstrategicrole?).Itis

equallyimportant,however,toaddress

mechanismsthatalignincentiveswith

theseorganizationalstructurechanges,

inculcatethechangesinemployees,

anddriveaccountabilityforthechanges

acrosstheorganization.

Toensureclarityregardingrespec-

tiveresponsibilities,bothNYCDOE

andOUSDpublishdetailedguides

fortheirschoolleaders,describingthe

natureandpromisedoutputofkey

services,identifyingkeycontactsfor

particularservices,andoutlining

processesforcustomerservice.To

ensureaccountability,theperformance

expectationsforeachsuchservicein

NYCDOEandOUSDwereformalized

inSLAs,whichdetailnotonlywhat

servicelevelscustomerscanexpectto

receive,butwhathappensifthoselevels

arenotsatisfactorilymet.OUSD,EPS,

andothersystemsutilizefeedback

surveysoftheircustomersandwidely

publishtheirresults.Finally,both

NYCDOEandOUSDusestraightfor-

wardselectionprocessestoensurethat

artificial“barrierstoswitching”donot

materiallydepressincentivestoperform.

Separately,thecentraloffice’s

organizationalculture–thepredisposi-

tionofitspeopletobehaveincertain

ways–needstobealignedwithits

strategicrole.Suchculturalchange

mustbeginwithclearandregular

articulationofthekindsofchangethe

centralofficedesiresandvisibleeffort

ofleaderstolistentostaffreactions.

Employeesmustbelievethattheyhave

theabilitytobehaveinnewways,which

mightinvolveprogramstoupgrade

talent(hiring,replacing,retaining)

and/orbuildcapabilities(on-the-job

development,trainingprograms,

supporttools).Topromoteitsnew

focusoncustomerservice,OUSD

supplementedsignificanttrainingand

developmentopportunitieswithother

“softer”efforts,includingapopular

T-shirt(modeledontheOakland

Raidersfootballteamlogo)highlight-

ingOUSD’skeycustomerserviceaspira-

tions,whichcentralofficestaffcould

wearonselectFridays.Marryingorgani-

zationalchangeswithreinforcing


mechanismsincreasesthelikelihoodof

achievingculturechange.

Athoughtfulandrigorousexami-

nationoftheirstrategicrole–aprocess

whichmightberevisitedeveryfew

years–canimprovetheabilityofcentral

officesoflargeurbandistrictstodeliver

strategicvaluetotheirschoolsand,in

sodoing,achievetheirstudentoutcome

performancegoals.

References

Bryan,L.L.,andC.I.Joyce.2007.Mobilizing Minds: Creating Wealth from Talent in the 21st Century Organization.NewYork:McGraw-Hill.

OrganizationforEconomicCooperationandDevelopment.2007.Program for International Student Assessment, 2006: Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World.ExecutiveSummary.Paris:OECD.Availableonlineat<www.oecd.org/dataoecd/15/13/39725224.pdf>.

Ucelli,M.,E.Foley,andJ.Mishook.2007.“SmartDistrictsastheEntryPointstoSmartEducationSystems.”InCity Schools: How Districts and Communities Can Create Smart Education Systems,editedbyR.Rothman.Cambridge,MA:HarvardEducationPress.


Toward a “RelationshipBased Industry”: Connecting Central Offices and Communities

Engaging parents and the community effectively requires more proactive efforts by

district central office leaders.

From your experience, how would you

characterize the relationship between dis

trict central offices and the community?

Ithinkthatmoreoftenthannot,the

relationshipisonewherethecommu-

nityisseekingsomethinginresponse

tosomedispleasure,andthecentral

office,therefore,isinareactionary

mode.That’smyobservationinthe

timethatIwitnessed[therelationship]

ascloselyasIdid,inthecaseofProvi-

dence,RhodeIsland.IcannotsaythatI

cancommentabouttherelationship

betweenthecentralofficeandthecom-

munity,otherthanthecloserelationship

IhadforsixyearsinProvidence.

Moreoftenthannot,it’sareaction-

arypostureonthepartofthecentral

office,reactingtosomecomplaintor

Mary Sylvia Harrison is vice president of programs at the Nellie Mae Education Foundation.

concernorneedthecommunitystates.

Ididobservethattherewereattempts,

andthereareaspectsofcentraloffice

behaviorthataremorespecifically

proactiveinthenatureofoutreach,

clientservice–thingsthatarestrategies

thoughtofprettymuchascommunica-

tionsstrategies.

Did the district have a structure to initiate

these, or were they more ad hoc?

Structurewasdefinitelypresentinthe

formofdedicatedstaff,andmaybe

thatbyitselfisapositivesignofatleast

anintentionofthecentralofficeto

beproactive–totheextentthatthere

havebeenacoupleof,ormore,full-

MarySylviaHarrison

Forfourteenyears,MarySylviaHarrisonservedaspresidentoftheCollegeCrusade

[formerlytheChildren’sCrusade]ofRhodeIsland,anorganizationthatprovides

mentorships,college-readinessprograms,andscholarshipsforlow-incomestudents

fromgradesixthroughhighschool.Forsixofthoseyears,theorganizationworked

closelywiththeProvidenceSchoolDepartmentastheleadpartnerinamajorhigh

schoolredesigninitiativefundedbyCarnegieCorporationofNewYork.

Currently,HarrisonisvicepresidentofprogramsattheNellieMaeEducation

Foundation,whichinNovember2008helpedlaunchamajorinitiativetoredesign

highschoolsinfourNewEnglandstates.

HarrisonspokewithVoices in Urban EducationeditorRobertRothmanabout

therelationshipsbetweenschooldistrictcentralofficesandthecommunity.


timepeoplestaffinga“parentoffice”

or“parentandcommunityinvolvement

office.”InProvidence,Ibelievethey

combinedthosetwoconstituencies

togetherinstaffinguptheservicesor

linkstothem.Sothere’sanactual

office,andthereforetheremustbea

wholebudget–twoormorepeople.

WhatIknowaboutProvidencein

recentyearsisthatthereobviouslyisan

intentiontohaveabetterrelationship.

Iknowunder[formersuperintendent]

DonnieEvans,customerrelations,

clientsatisfaction,wasputoutthere

assomethingtovalueandattendto.

Sosomeofthestaffbehaviorwascarry-

ingoutstrategiespursuanttothat.For

thelastcoupleofyearstherehavebeen

annualconferencesbringingparents

togetheronahostofissuesthatwould

helpthem,tobeabletohearmore

aboutorbeabletodiscusswithother

people,tolearnaboutresourcesassoci-

atedwiththem.Ibelievethosehave

beenreceivedfavorably.

Therehavebeenattemptsto

improvecommunicationsfromthe

centralofficetotheparentsand

stakeholdergroupsintheformofa

newslettergoingouttoparents.That

startedafewsuperintendentsago,

startingwithSuperintendentDiana

Lam,andIthinkit’sbeenmaintained.

Successorsofhershavekeptupthat

practiceof[producing]awritten

quarterlypublicationtoparents.

Aside from these efforts, you started

out by saying that a lot of districts tend

to be reactive. Why do you think that’s

the case?

Thehistoryoftherebeingaseparation

betweenthecommunityandschools

andfamiliessetupthemodusoperandi

inthecentralofficetobehaveinmore

ofasiloedfashionthanonewould

thinkmakessenseforthisindustry.

Butwiththemandatesthathavecome

down,eitherthroughstateregulation

orfederalregulation–inthecaseof

RhodeIsland,it’sSchoolAccountability

forLearningandTeaching(SALT),and

NoChildLeftBehindatthefederal

level–statingclearexpectationsfor

districtstohaverelationshipsacross

schoolandcommunitylines,across

schoolandfamilylines,thereisincreased

consciousnesstodosomething.Butit’s

notquitethesameasifit’sthecentral

office’sinventiononitsown.

Inotherwords,therehavebeena

numberofthingsdoneinresponseto

mandatestogetparentsatthetable,

togetcommunityorganizationsatthe

table,buttheydon’treallyplayoutas

authenticengagementofthosestake-

holders.Ithinkthewaythattheywould

isifthecentralofficeswereinitiating

thoseideasforengagingparentsand

communitymembersontheirown.

Icertainlyhavesatonmany,manycommitteesasamember

ofthecommunity,whereitfeltitwasmorelikepeoplegoing

throughthemotionsandnotreallyknowingfullywhyorwhat

valuecouldbegainedbymypresenceatthetable.

Mary Sylvia Harrison | V.U.E. Winter 2009 35

theschooldistrictwouldgiveway

towardidentifyingcommonterritory

forcollaboration.Withoutapredicate

understandingofwhypeopleshould

beworkingtogetherortalkingwith

oneanotherorvalidatingoneanother,

youreallyhavepeoplejustgoing

throughmotionsasopposedtohaving

thebuy-inthat’sgeneratedbythat

basicunderstanding.

So would each community be unique,

based on the community conditions?

Absolutely.Thecommunityconditions

woulddrivethenatureofthecentral

officerelationship.Foronething,I

don’tthinkifyouaskedcommunity

people,betweenschoolsandthe

centraloffice,whatistheirgreatest

concern–Ithinkyou’dfindthey’re

mostconcernedaboutschoolsbeing

goodforkids.Thecentralofficeis

inconsequential,excepttotheextent

thatcommunityisbeinggivengood

schoolsfortheirchildren.

Buildinganunderstandingin

aparticularcommunityofwhythe

centralofficeisneeded,whatitdoes,

wouldhelpthecommunitytoformu-

latetheunderstandingtheyneedfor

settingupreasonableexpectationsfor

Icertainlyhavesatonmany,

manycommitteesasamemberof

thecommunity,asaleaderofacom-

munityorganization,aswellasbeing

aparentofapublicschoolstudentin

Providence,whereitfeltitwasmore

likepeoplegoingthroughthemotions

andnotreallyknowingfullywhyor

whatvaluecouldbegainedbymy

presenceatthetable.

Envisioning the Ideal Relationship

Ideally, how would the relationship

work? How would a central office be

structured to fully engage parents and

community members?

Thatissomethingthatacommunity

wouldhavetodecideandtherefore

Ithinkaconversationstartedand

openedupbythecentralofficewith

thecommunityaroundwhatthe

commoninterestsarebetweenthe

communityandthecentralofficeof


thatcentraloffice.Idon’tthinkthe

averagepersonreallyunderstandswhy

acentralofficeisneeded.I’mnotan

averageperson,perse,aseducation

goes;I’mnotaneducator,butIhave

workedinthisfieldfortwentyyears.I

dohaveaprettygoodunderstanding

ofwhyacentralofficeisneeded.Atthe

sametime,Ifeelverystronglythatwe

haveanoverblownideathesedaysof

whyweshouldhaveacentraloffice.

Ithinkit’stimeforustoreexaminethe

needforacentralofficeinthecurrent

paradigmofeducation.

Ithink,basically,theidealcentral

officeisonethatonlyexistsbecauseit

isperceivedbythosewhomitserves

asneeded,helpful,andvalue-added.

Andit’smainlymeanttoserveschools,

asfarasIunderstand.Idon’tknow

whatresearchwouldtellusaboutthe

perceptionspeopleinschoolshave

ofcentraloffice.Myobservationis

thatitisnotahighopinion.There’s

somethingfundamentallywrong.If

theonlyreasonforacentralofficeisto

beofservicetoschools,thenitwould

seemtomethatitwouldbemainly

theschoolsthemselvesandthestudents

andparentsthattheschoolsoperatefor

thatwouldbethebarometerofwhether

thecentralofficeisperforminganeeded,

essential,value-addedfunction.

District Leadership Turnover: A Barrier to Effective Relationships

What do you see as the obstacles that

are keeping central offices from operating

more effectively, particularly in relationship

to the community?

Oneoftherealproblems,notonlyasit

relatestoacommunityexpectationor

totheefficacyofacentralofficethese

days,isthatthereissomuchtransience

ofleadershipincentralofficefunctions.

Notinthelower-levelpositions–there

seemstobe,atleastinProvidence,a

highdegreeofstabilityinlower-level

positions,andtheoppositeforhigher-

levelpositions.Institutionalmemory


isabsent.Sowhenitcomestogetting

somewhere–makingsomeprogress,

withtheunderstandingofwhythe

communityhasarightfulplaceinthe

educationconversation,shouldhavea

seatatthetableofeducationdiscus-

sionsanddecisions–iftheleadership

thathasengagedthecommunityor

validatedthecommunityashavinga

rightfulplaceinthesethings,ifthat

leadershipcomesandgoes,it’slike

you’realwaysstartingsomethingand

nevergettingtosecondbasewithit.

Asanexample,inmytwentyyears

inthecommunityinProvidence,oper-

atinganonprofitthatprovidesservice

toProvidencestudents,supportingthe

missionithasforitsstudents,being

seatedatvarioustableswherecommu-

nityinputwassoughtandsupposedly

withtheintentthatitbeused,Ifelt

manytimesthatwewerebeingasked

thesamequestions,ascommunity

members,thatwehadbeenaskedtwo

yearsprior,fouryears,sixyears,ten

years,twelveyearsprior.We’repretty

consistentascommunitymembersin

showingupandsayingthesamethings

aboutwhatourconcernsareandwhat

ourdesiresareandwhatourwilling-

nessandreadinesstohelpandwhat

ourresourcesare,andnotseeinga

responseofthosethingsactuallybeing

manifestedinanything.

AsfarasIcansee,that’ssubstan-

tiallyrelatedtothegoingandcoming

ofpeopleinleadershippositionswhose

jobitistoconvenecommunitymem-

bersortogetcommunityinput.Maybe

Providenceisjustabadexample,but

it’stheonlyoneIcanactuallyspeak

from.Maybeit’sanexampleofthe

worstofthekindofthingswe’re

talkingabout,totheextentthatwehad

somanysuperintendentsinthelast

sixyears.

I don’t think that’s unique to Providence.

I’mprettysureit’snot.Iknowthere’sa

2.7yearexpectedtenureofasuperin-

tendent.Andwhat’snotstatedbythat

factisthatwhensuperintendentsleave,

so,too,dotheirhigh-leveladministra-

torsingreatnumbers;andmiddle-level

managersinthecentraloffice,who

tendtohavesomedegreeofstability,

getmovedaround,servingmultiple

functions,differentfunctions,moved

fromonejobtoanother,becausethose

jobsthemselveschangewiththenew

administration.Sothesepeopleget

recycledintodifferentroles.


It’satragedyhowmuchinstitu-

tionalmemoryislost.It’satragedy,and

it’sagrosswasteofpublicresources

inthelimited-resourceerathatwe’re

in.Evenifwehadabundantresources,

that’sjustnotanefficaciouswaytorun

apublicoperation–oranyoperation,

forthatmatter.

The Role of Community Organizations

What can community organizations, like

the one you used to head, do to support

central offices more effectively, or promote

better relationships between central offices

and communities?

Theonlyreasonpeopleinthecom-

munityhaveanyinterestinthecentral

officeisbecausethey’reinterestedin

theachievementofstudents.There

areentitiesinthecommunitythat

haveotherinterests–namelyseeing

toitthattherearefairemployment

practicesorsuitablehiringpracticesor

promotionalpractices–thoseinthe

communitywhosemissionsaretobe

watchfulofsuchthings.Forthemost

part,peopleandcommunityorganiza-

tionsreallyonlycareaboutwhetherthe

studentsinthatcommunityaregetting

agoodeducation.

Idon’tthinkpeopleinthecom-

munityunderstandtheconnection

betweenthecentralofficeandhow

ourkidsarelearning.Ithinkthere’sa

lotofworktobedonetojustifythe

centralofficerelativetoraisingstudent

achievementandmakingitpossible

forteacherstothriveintheircraftand

besupportedandgrowandbeheld

accountable.Idon’tthinkthatthere’sa

clearunderstandinginthecommunity

oranappreciationofhowmuchof

thatisneededandhowtheycanbe

helpfultoit.

Inthecentraloffice,that’sthekind

ofstuffwherethere’snotalotofinter-

estincommunityengagementaround.

Do the organizations themselves have a

role in that education process?

Yes.SchoolboardaffairsiswhereIsee

aroleforthecommunityalongthose

lines.Thepoliciesoftheschoolboard


Ithinkthere’salotofwork

tobedonetojustifythecentral

officerelativetoraisingstudent

achievementandmakingit

possibleforteacherstothrivein

theircraft.

arounddeliveringaqualityeducation–

anddoingsoinawaywherethere’s

demonstrableevidencethatthere’s

regular,incrementalprogressinraising

studentachievement,throughthe

practicesatcentralofficeandschool

levels–isreallywherethere’san

importantcommunityrole.Because

ifyourpoliciesarenotright,andthe

policy-makingbodyisaccountablefor

theexecutionofthosemandatesand

thosepoliciesinschoolpractice

andincentralofficepractice,thenthe

policy-makersthemselvesarenotdoing

theirjobs.

There’salotmorethatneedsto

bedonetounderstandboardrole

vis-à-viscentralofficerolevis-à-vis

accountabilitytothecommunity.For

example,inRhodeIsland,there’san

expectationthateveryyeartherebe

thoughtfulconsiderationoftheannual

planforhowadistrictwillraiseitsstu-

dents’achievement.There’sanexpecta-

tionthatthecommunitybeengaged

inthatprocess,inunderstandingthe

placethedistrictisinandwhatitneeds

tomovetoward,andinunderstanding

ataschool-by-schoollevelwhatthose

nuancesare.There’sanexpectationof

communityinputinagreeingtostrate-

gies–notthingsthatarepurelyinstruc-

tional.Thecommunityissupposedto

bewellinformedonthesemattersand

haveaseatatthetablethatdecides

whattodoaboutthesethings.Ithink

there’sreallypoorperformanceagainst

thoseexpectations,maybeinRhode

IslandoverallbutcertainlyinProvidence.

Theideaitselfmakesagreatdeal

ofsense,butI’llpointtoitasanexam-

pleofamandate–whyitexistsisn’t

appreciatedamongthosewhohaveto

implementit.

Communitiescanplayveryimpor-

tantroles.Intheabsenceofacommu-

nityrole,youhaveaweakereducation

strategy.Foronething,communities

tendtohavedistinctpersonalities,

culturalproclivities,norms,andvalues,

which,eveniftheydonotgettogether

andarticulatetheseandagreeandvote

onthemasacommunity,nonetheless

exist.Andthesameistrueofindividual

schoolsandindividualdistricts:they

tendtohavetheirownculturalnorms,

practices,andproclivities.Ifthere’s

neveraconsiderationofhowsimilar

ordifferentthesenorms,proclivities,

values,andculturalpracticesareacross

schools,centraloffice,andcommuni-


ties,thenyoushouldfullyexpectthat

there’dbeconflictbetweenthesediffer-

entsegments.

Toputitpositively,Ithinkthe

moreauthenticoutreachthatadis-

trictmakestotrytoidentifywhatthe

commoninterestsareacrossschools

andthecommunity,andwhatcanbe

donetotrytobreakdownbarriersthat

preventpeoplefromhavingmeetings

ofthemindabouthowtheircommon

interestswillbeworkedonincollabor-

ativeways,themoreyoucanmaximize

theuseofthecommunityasanasset

andthefamilyasanasset.Or,con-

versely,yousetyourselfup–byhaving

suchopenconversationsandmaking

authenticplans–tobuildrelationships

thataneducationsystemoughttohave

inordertodevelopandeducateits

childrenandpreparethemtobeadults.

Education,totheextentit’saboutkids,

andbecausedevelopmentisallabout

effectiveandpositiverelationships,

needstobearelationship-basedindus-

trymorethanitisthesedays.

Non Profit Org.

US Postage

PAID

Providence, RI

Permit #202

Annenberg Institute for School ReformBrown University Box 1985Providence, Rhode Island 02912

at brown university

Winter 2009

Getting Smarter: A Framework for DistrictsEllen Foley and David Sigler

Urban School District Central Offices and the Implementation of New Small Autonomous Schools InitiativesMeredith I. Honig

Redesigning the Central Office to Deliver Better ValueAndrew Moffit

Toward a “Relationship-Based Industry”: Connecting Central Offices and CommunitiesMary Sylvia Harrison


Annenberg Institute for School Reform | Voices in Urban Education

Voices in U

rban Education Redesigning the “Central O

ffice”W

inter 2009

this book is printed on environment® Paper. this 100 percent recycled paper reduces solid waste disposal and lessens landfill dependency. by utilizing this paper,• 15.85 trees were preserved for the future.• 11,226,800 BTUs of energy were conserved.• 45.77 pounds of waterborne waste were not created.• 745 pounds of solid waste were not generated.• 6,733 gallons of wastewater flow were saved.• 1,467 pounds of greenhouse gases were prevented from forming.

at brown university - annenberg institute for school...

Documents