Messages sent to the sbm e-mail list (sbm_notaol.com) are posted to this page.
to ensure that you are seeing the latest version
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
sbm
is the e-mail list of the
Site-Based Management Strategy Team
Providence School Department Strategic Plan
"Designing the Future Together"
Team Web Site http://notaol.com/sbm/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Thank you for participating in sbm! You can post messages to the group either by "Reply"ing to any group message, or by composing a new message to sbm_notaol.com. Remember that a "Reply" will go to the whole group, not just to the author of the message. Info on subscribing, unsubscribing, and obtaining the current list can be had by e-mailing listserv_notaol.com with the 2-word message help sbm =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: "Greg Enos"To: sbm_notaol.com Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 10:33:44 PST Subject: [sbm] SBM Team Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Greetings... Welcome to the Site-Based Management Team list-serve, the first step in connecting all our members electronically. Additional names will be added after on meeting March 31. The March 31 meeting will start at 5:30 pm, with the first half hour being used to orient new members. At 6 pm we will move into work on team guidelines, followed by a clarification of our charter. Call me if you have questions. Greg Enos 401-433-7522 Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: GJWL_aol.com Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 19:41:31 EST To: sbm_notaol.com Subject: Re: [sbm] SBM Team Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Greg, This is some information regarding SBM that I though you might like to see. It is from the web site for North Central Regional Lab. Go to www.ncrel.org and then click on PATHWAYS TO sCHOOL IMPROVEMENT. Barbara Ashby Click Here: http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/envrnmnt/go/go100.htm Critical Issue: Transferring Decisionmaking to Local Schools: Site-Based Management =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 04:17:56 -0500 (EST) To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Arrison Subject: [sbm] Team Web Site Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com I spoke to Tony Terceira (P.S.D.'s Director of Technology) on Monday morning. It appears that the department's website would be a difficult place for us to keep information that requires frequent updates. I have put up an interim site at http://users.ids.net/~toman/sbm/ [note: as of 10/20/99, the new location is http://notaol.com/sbm/ ] So far, it contains meeting dates and an archive of all postings to this email list. I will try to add links to other sites as people suggest them in their postings to this list. If anyone would like to help with this, or take it over, or provide a site with a catchier URL :-) PLEASE let me know at tom_notaol.com or 401-421-5505. Tom Arrison =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: "Greg Enos" To: sbm_notaol.com Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 09:12:18 PST Subject: [sbm] SBM Charter Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Site-Based Management Strategy Team Charter Generate the action items to implement the site-based management strategy for the Providence School Department. Approach Utilize the talents of a volunteer team (parents, teachers, administrators, students) to identify best practices and lessons learned, formulate a realistic list of action items, and present findings in a user-friendly format (e.g. video, website) that will enhance understanding and successful implementation. Communications . Weekly meetings . Email . FAX . Telephone clusters . Action Log . Meeting minutes . Electronic file listing . Team roster Team Consensus The action items will be the result of team consensus, using The Cambridge Group Action Plans process. Operating Process Minutes, documentation Consensus process Email operations Meeting dates, times, locations Charter understanding Current: March 24, 1999 =========== [ QUOTATION OF PREVIOUS MESSAGE REMOVED ] ======== Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 20:32:01 -0500 (EST) To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Arrison Subject: [sbm] new list subscriber Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Pat Reilly's email address is JEPH805_aol.com It's been added to the sbm subscription list. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: JWHoward_aol.com Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 10:13:18 EST To: sbm_notaol.com Subject: [sbm] Vidal Perez: April 7 Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com hello, all. Vidal Perez has agreed to attend our meeting on April 7. He will arrive at 7:30, which gives us time to attend to other business. To get the most from his time, I suggest we prepare some questions or issues in advance. If you would like to send these to me (JWHoward_aol.com), I will collect and forward them to Mr. Perez ahead of the meeting. I would like a moment to confirm that this time is OK at ton Mr. Perez is the neutral chair of the SBM technical support committee, although he says it has been dormant due to personnel changes in the past year. Greg, can we please briefly confirm this time as OK at tonight's meeting so I can finalize the appointment with Mr. Perez? Thanks! Jonathan Howard (401) 331-2272 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: "Greg Enos" To: sbm_notaol.com Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 13:22:47 PST Subject: [sbm] Vidal Perez: April 7, 7:30 pm Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Johnathan...thank you...please confirm Vidal for 7:30 pm (from a presentation standpoint)...Frank will be at that meeting, so it is appropriate to invite Vidal earlier as a guest...I expect we will seek Vidal's connection to other information sources...thanks...Greg ============ [ QUOTATION OF PREVIOUS MESSAGE REMOVED ] ========= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: JEPH805_aol.com Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 20:58:19 EST To: sbm_notaol.com Subject: [sbm] Updated Meeting List As Of 3/31/99. Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dates: Wednesday April 7,1999 (Guest Speakers-may run until 8 P.M.) Mondays April 12, 1999 (Vacation April 19-23, 1999 No Meetings) April 26, 1999 May 3, 1999 May 10, 1999 May 17, 1999 May 24, 1999 ( ? Necessary) (If we need extra working time then Tuesdays) Tuesday May 4, 1999 May 11, 1999 May 18, 1999 TIME: 5:30P.M.-7:30P.M. PLACE: SAME ROOM =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 10:24:56 -0400 To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Bacon Subject: [sbm] sbm minutes 3/31/99 Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Hello and Good Morning! The second SBM Meeting was held on 3/31/99 in Board Room C of the Providence Public School Department/School Board building from 5:30 pm until 7:30 pm. It was attended by: G. Enos, F. Gorman, J. Howard, I. Lee, B. Ashby, T. Arrison, A. Ferrara, J. Rich, J. Nota, M. Acevedo, P. Reilly, & T. Bacon. Minutes/Documentation- By April 7th, there will be a system in place hopefully utilizing a laptop computer to record minutes and to keep our Action Log. The Action Log will be a standard format that records dates, times, resources, and individual"jobs" as well as recording the Action Steps in devlopment for SBM. Consensus Process- Two models were discussed concerning team consensus; the Cambridge Group Action Plans Process and another utilizing a process faciltator, time keeper, record keeper, and smaller teams for group work. **If an individual is absent for a meeting, he/she cannot "contest" the consensus decision(s) made at that meeting. Also, it will be noted in the Action Log those items that were not agreed upon- no consensus met. Email Operations- Email will continue through the List Serv and Web Site which we would like to give a "THANK YOU!" to Tom Arrison for developing so quickly. Jonathan Howard has offered his assistance in these areas as well. Anyone wishing to be added to the list serv must be approved by the team and especially Greg Enos. **PLEASE KEEP ALL ITEMS POSTED IN EMAIL FORM! It may take you a few minutes to type , but it would take Tom A. a while to type and/or retype any documents/messages/resources/etc. that are faxed or given to him directly----RESPECT OUR TIME CONSTRAINTS IN THIS MATTER AND IT WILL AID OUR EFFICIENCY! Thanks. Meeting Dates/Times/Locations- These have already been posted to the list serv!!! Charter Understanding- Has been discussed and should be formalized by the April 7th meeting. **MEXT MEETING: Frank Pallotta and Vidal Perez will be guest speakers concerning SBM format, roles, application process(es), and resources. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 16:12:38 -0500 (EST) To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Arrison Subject: [sbm] New List Subscribers Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com John Rich jedrich_lifespan.org and Maria E. Acevedo dreams02907_yahoo.com have been subscribed to the sbm listserv. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 16:18:10 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Arrison Subject: [sbm] Website additions Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Thanks to Tom Bacon for the minutes of the 3/31 meeting, and to Barbara Ashby and Jonathan Howard for the web links. If you haven't recently, please visit the page at http://notaol.com/sbm/ to see the additions. NOTE: When revisiting the site, use your RELOAD or REFRESH button to make sure you see the latest version. REQUEST FOR MINUTES: Would anyone who attended our first (3/24) meeting be willing to attempt to write up minutes? If, like me, you feel your notes are incomplete, you could e-mail them to me tom_notaol.com instead of to the list, and I could combine all submissions into a more complete version. Or, better yet, *you* could volunteer to be the collector of first-meeting notes :-) REQUEST FOR POINTERS TO WEB RESOURCES: Please share the fruits of your browsing with the team; post any SBM-related websites that you discover to this list, and I'll add them to the links on our homepage. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: JWHoward_aol.com Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 12:58:43 EDT To: sbm_notaol.com Subject: [sbm] WORK PLAN RECOMMENDATION- April 5 Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com April 5 To the Site-Based Management Action Team Dear Friends, It has been good to meet you all and I look forward to knowing you better. Greg has guided us through some big process issues quickly and we dig in on SBM itself starting Wednesday. Before we get too far into the facts and details, however, I hope we will organize our task. This is my proposal for a working plan. I offer this framework as one way to decide where we are going and how to get there and in no way to foreclose other options or questions I have overlooked. If anyone has a "friendly amendment" to offer, please post it and I will try to accommodate it. If you have an alternative plan, I urge you to offer it for our consideration. I've run this by Greg, who has asked me to post it to the group. I will look to Greg to let us know on Wednesday how the group can deal with this through the consensus process we agreed last week. Here's my idea: As we've been told, our task is to recommend action steps toward the existing Strategic Plan's strategy #9. These are steps that the Department and the Board would have to implement. The strategy reads: "Develop ways to address the issue of site-based management." I see six big questions stemming from this very general strategy. I propose using these six questions as a structure for our overall task. Any one of these questions could occupy us for months if we let it. Instead, we will need to make quick decisions. The consensus process explained by Tom Arrison last week can help us make good decisions quickly. We should also use "off the shelf" definitions and positions where possible and set fairly tight (yet agreed and very clear) limits on time for and length of response. I suggest we assign each question (or perhaps two questions) to a member or subgroup, asking them to frame the question, to do research and inform us on the issue and to develop a recommended position. A good deal of this could be done via e-mail in advance of our meetings. We will need to assign members to each question and set a schedule for them to report. Questions 1 & 2 are basically background information and we have a made a good start on them already. 1. What is "site-based management"? . In general? . In Providence? 2. What is the current state of SBM? . In general? (have excellent articles and sites to look at) . in Providence? (will hear from two authorities) What additional research is needed? Who will do it and when? How will this be communicated to and considered by the group? Questions 3 & 4 establish our desired outcomes. 3. What is SMB for? We have a starting assumption that we must focus our recommendations on promoting higher student performance. Is that enough, or are there critical subsidiary goals, such as professional development, educational innovation, curriculum control, community or parent involvement, etc.? 4. In what ways should it be "addressed"? . By defining it? . By deciding if it is necessary or desirable? . By making it easier (or harder) to achieve? . By educating teachers and parents and promoting more SBM applications? . Other: ____________________________??? Questions 5 & 6 deal with the action steps themselves and will need some group processing to decide how much of this can be delegated and how much we need to address as a group. 5. How does SBM relate to other important elements of the strategic plan and of good service to students generally? If the District is committed to SBM as a strategy, mustn't action toward each of the other eight strategies be based on school-based planning and implementation? Conversely, we must ensure that our recommendations fit with and promote the other strategic goals, such as attendance, professional development and so on. (This also relates to #2 above: what is SBM for?) 6. What are some feasible action steps for our subcommittee to recommend that PSD could really take in the direction selected? For example: . Render more formal definition of/guidance toward SBM? . Form ongoing committee to explore issues further? . Expand District technical team reviewing applications to include wider groups? . Revise or scrap current application procedures? . Set goals and targets for SBM within PSD? . Develop criteria or checklist for successful SBM? . Other: ____________________________??? That's as far as I've gone with this idea. It's certainly open to discussion whether these are the right questions and whether to tackle them one (or two) at a time or all at once. If you can offer some response via the e-mail group, please do so. Can someone tell me whether Maria Acevedo will get this message via e-mail and, if not, what her fax number is? Thanks. Jonathan Howard =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 13:34:38 -0400 (EDT) To: sbm_notaol.com From: "Rich, John E." Subject: RE: [sbm] WORK PLAN RECOMMENDATION- April 5 Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Jonathan Nice work Jonathan! Congrats! I am responding quickly to your proposed list of questions. Everything there makes sense to me. One item that is not included that is also very important is the notion of measurement, outcomes, indicators, etc. It seems to me that any new program has to have clearly identified expectations to be successfull over time. That would mean, how do we measure the impact of the program, what monitors do we put in place, who and how do we collect the data, who and how do we report it out and who and how do we hold people accountable for progress relative to the goals and outcomes. There is so much related to all that, such as how do the indicators get determined, are they uniform or related to project proposal by site, etc. etc. That is my contribution, for now. John Rich =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 14:49:07 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Arrison Subject: [sbm] OATS Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com There was some discussion at the 3/31 meeting about OATS: Outcomes - Assessments -Teaching Strategies, the Providence model for "student-centered, teacher-driven reform." Although there is more current information available in print, some good background can be found at the OATS website, http://www.ri.net/OATS/ Some of the better material is "hiding" behind a link that requires clicking on the OATS logo, or you can go directly to http://www.ri.net/OATS/oats2.html =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 15:04:59 -0400 To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Bacon Subject: [sbm] sbm "6 Questions" Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Hello folks! Jonathan, your plan looks great! The only things that should be added (& if I missed it I'm sorry to reiterate!)....the actual members on a site-based team, the application itself, and the application process...these questions should be answered at Wednesdays meeting. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: Ritoy_aol.com Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 15:30:36 EDT To: sbm_notaol.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [sbm] Upcoming meetings. Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Dates and locations are confirmed as follows: April 7th -- School Board Room C -- 3rd floor April 12th -- Cafeteria in Basement April 26th -- Cafeteria in Basement May 3 -- School Board Room C -- 3rd floor May 10th -- Cafeteria in Basement May 17th -- School Board Room C -- 3rd floor May 24th -- Cafeteria in Basement. I have not booked the three Tuesdays but there should be no problem finding a space. Keep me posted as to the 4th, 11th and 18th. Thanks. MaryKay Schnare =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: GJWL_aol.com Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 12:50:02 EDT To: sbm_notaol.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [sbm] OATS Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com A good article from Educational Leadership on SBM: Click Here: http://www.ascd.org/pubs/el/decjan/david.html Site-Based Management: Making It Work The Who, What, and Why of Site-Based Management Jane L. David Educational Leadership Vol. 53, No. 5 December 1995/January 1996 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 15:03:44 -0400 (EDT) To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Arrison Subject: [sbm] new list subscriber Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Jeannine Nota anota_msn.com has been subscribed to the sbm listserv. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: JWHoward_aol.com Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 11:12:10 EDT To: sbm_notaol.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: [sbm] Questions for Vidal Perez Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Hello, everybody, Grag asked me to see if Vidal Perez could come earlier, but he cannot come before 7:30 tonight due to an earlier meeting. Here's how I summarized the questions offered for him at last week's meeting: "We need accurate information on the current process and state of SMB in the city. Last night, members offered the following areas of interest that you might address: "What is the recent history of the process? Who has applied and who has been approved or rejected? Have applicant schools withdrawn? Why? "What leads to success? Do applicants use consultants? Is the formal process the whole process, or are informal contacts and go-aheads from the administration or union important? What characterizes applications that are accepted? What leads to rejection?" Meanwhile, I have learned a lot from reading the two applications provided. I would like to share these applications with a colleague -- can whoever brought these last time -- Greg? -- bring extra copies tonight? I've had comments from John Rich and Tom Bacon about my Six Questions. Tom notes the lack of specific process information in my questions- "the actual members on a site-based team, the application itself, and the application process." As Tom notes, Vidal can help us answer these. John brings up the issues of measurement, monitoring, accountability. The article from Educational Leadership posted yesterday also notes that point. I addressed this very briefly under Question 6, Recommendations (to PSD) as "set criteria or checklist for success?" If we agree that the six questions work as a large structure, we can ask the work group addressing #6 to address the critical issue of measures and accountability more specifically. See you later, Jon Howard =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 09:26:31 -0400 (EDT) To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Arrison Subject: [sbm] New list subscriber Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Joyce Stevos, PSD's Director of Strategic Planning, has been added to the sbm listserv: jstevos_aol.com =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: JWHoward_aol.com Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 09:15:05 EDT To: sbm_notaol.com Subject: [sbm] Minutes for Weds, April 7, 1999 Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com SBM Minutes April 7, 1999 5:30 p.m. ATTENDING: Maria Acevedo, Greg Enos, Tom Bacon, Fran Gorman, Pat Reilly, Jonathan Howard, Tom Arrison, Maureen Kenner, Connie Doyle, Lou Schmitt NEW MEMBERS: We were joined by three new members. Providence school teachers Maureen Kenner and Connie Doyle Maureen and Connie are also members of the Site-Based team at Vartan Gregorian (formerly Fox Point) Elementary. Lou Schmitt is a consultant in organizational development. AGENDA: Team Operations, Research Areas, Key Questions, Presenter: Vidal Perez A. OPENING COMMENTS: G. Enos: 1. Frank Pallotta, PSD member of the PSC could not attend tonight's session as scheduled. (will meet on 4/26/99). 2. Greg also spoke by phone with PTU President Phyllis Tennian since our last meeting. She had been unaware of the Strategic Plan work groups. 3. Team Issues: T. Arrison would like a PSD member who worked on the Strategic Planning Document to discuss the "parameters" in the Plan, one of which reads "In the adoption of any activity, we will always attempt to enhance site-based decision-making." J. Howard: Should address our lack of visibility-no one knows we exists, which in turn undermines our likelihood of having an impact. Key players likely to resist us because they have not been informed. J. Howard: Recommends that we make it a practice to go quickly around table at the beginning of each meeting for each member to report contacts, information or issues that have occurred during the week. Agreed B. INFORMAL DISCUSSION OF VARTAN GREGORIAN SBM EXPERIENCE Spontaneous Q&A with our two new members from Vartan Gregorian Site-Based Team gave us a useful picture of SBM as it has actually been achieved. Some key observations: 1. Critical conditions that enabled successful SBM implementation at VG: . Focus on student achievement/teaching and learning . Strong Site Improvement Team "family" committed to consensus decision making. . Vision and leadership from two successive principals . Integration and use of each new initiative - OATS, SALT and own research-based initiative, such as ELLI. . Finding strengths inside the building. 2. Problems and barriers: . Not prepared for some issues - e.g. separate union for teacher assistants. . Uncertainty about recertification process - SBM authorized for one year, ending June 99 - have not been informed what will happen. C. RESEARCH AREAS: 1. Six Questions - J Howard presented his idea for using six questions as framework for our work plan. 1. What is SBM? 2. What is the current state of SBM (theory, reality, research issues???) 3. What is the purpose of SBM? 4. How should SBM be "addressed"? (e.g. define, decide, process, promotion) 5. How does SBM relate to the other areas of the PSD Strategic Plan? 6. What are some of the feasible Action Steps we can propose to PSD? Although there appeared to be agreement with this framework, no formal decision was made on using this framework or assigning members to parts of it. 3. Research areas: Greg called for members to select research areas from list on the agenda. Members will post to the Listserv by April 12. SBM Leadership Roles in other States/areas outside RI Lou Schmitt SBM's Educational History Fran Gorman SBM Working Definition/Mission, Grantwriting Resources Tom Bacon Contacting Phyllis Tennian and Joyce Stevos Greg Enos Comer Model Tom Arrison Parents and SBM in other districts - Jon Howard D. VIDAL PEREZ, Neutral Chairperson on Site-Based Technical Support Team for District (Since so few of us could stay to hear Vidal, I am providing a summary of his important review of the process and perspectives.) Vidal works for the Federally-funded LAB (Northeast and Islands Regional Educational Laboratory) at Brown University and has supported SBM efforts in NYC and other areas. In Providence, he has been a consultant to individual schools applying for SBM as well as nuetral chair to District's team responsible for approving all SBM applications. He provided his LAB report on SMB dated Mar. 9, 1998, which was copied and distrubed to all. It provides definitions, core principles and a general process for instituting SBM in Providence. He also had the starting document from the Leviton SBM experience, which Jon Howard will try to obtain for the group. Where is SBM in Providence right now? In Limbo, since June 1998, when the two senior PSD reps (Supt. Zarella and Asst. Supt. Renzulli) announced their retirements. School Board left vacancies to Feb. 1999, and then its two nominees both left the system. This leaves PSD represented by one member, Geneva Johnson, a teaching assistant at Mt. Pleasant HS. The idea of the Team is to have CEOs and senior executives from management and Union in the room so that decisions made can be final. The Union feels it is useless to meet until PSD has executive representation. There are no pending applications. The Team approved two apps: Gregorian and Fortes, in June 1998 before went into dormancy. History of the process: There were six schools actively pursing SBM in Jan. 1998. Fortes and Lima were required by contract to apply. Windmill, Gregorian, Veazie Street, and ALP had teams. Plan in early 98 was to do 6, double to 12 in 99 and set up network of approved schools to disseminate lessons. In March 1998, the LAB assessed the six and devised framework for progress toward SBM (see the March 1998 report). Keys to process: What is school now? What should it be? How does it need to change? What decisions now made centrally, do you need to control at your school? Vidal and LAB provided technical support at the sites. The process calls for 10 sessions, but sometimes schools can jump ahead. Fox Pt. And ALP went forward (plus Fortes and Lima), other 2 deferred. Gregorian and Fortes approved. Lima and ALP denied. Notes that both denials were unanimous. Approvals were Union 3 in favor, PSD 2 opposed (Zarella and Renzulli) one not present. PSD later changed votes to make approvals unanimous. The Union very promptly fulfilled commitment to waive 11 contract provisions (on issues such as hiring) to enable the two plans in June 1998. The PSD failed to provide the corresponding assurances until December, which led to considerable resistance from Central Office departments on specific deviations from SOP when school opened in fall. This should not have happened, since the Supt. Specifically approved all these deviations in the course of approving the plans. Vidal assesses the Union's position as willing to waive contract when it is clear teachers want it and there are clear educational results. PSD is easy to convince of the educational merits, but lacks any will to change procedures to accommodate. What is the review process: one-year report from each SBM school on achievement of stated goals. Each year, school resubmits new budget. Need big budget change in professional development. Should not be a punitive process. Vidal has responsibility for devising the process and will do so in May - June. Why SBM? All trends favor or rely on school autonomy. "The School" not the district. (Article 31). Central Admin becomes a service provider. Dept of Ed. has said that Art.31-mandated site plans can be SBM applications. Vidal's major concern is to locate the changes schools need control of to create schools people are banging on the doors to get into. Help avoid faddism and deal with fundamentals. Got to help teachers get over being told "no." Gets schools effectively thinking about teaching and learning. What would Vidal change? The application process. Don't wait for applications, but make a decision that school "X" will become SBM, then work with them to achieve it. Look for willing schools, but also set targets by zone or level and cajole participants. Sees SITs bumping up against constraints, esp meeting Art. 31 requirements, which lead them to consider SBM as logical next step. At same time there are Principals and other who do not want to do SBM. Trick is to start where a particular school is right now, be flexible. No new schools in pipeline. Veazie, Windmill and ALP could reactivate. Classical, Perry and one other might join the process in Sept. 1999. If all went well could have 6 new SBMs in spring of 2000. However, need central office to bring people along. Meeting adjourned at 9:15. Submitted by Jonathan Howard with initial notes from Tom Bacon Friday, April 9 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: "Rich, John E." To: "'sbm_mail.notaol.com'" Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 16:53:42 -0400 Subject: RE: [sbm] Minutes for Weds, April 7, 1999 Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Sorry to have missed the last meeting, but Jon certainly did a wonderful job with the minutes. Thanks. My confusion is the following section on research. Are you asking for me to select one of these areas? if so, I choose number 6. Hope I have it right. John Rich C. RESEARCH AREAS: 1. Six Questions - J Howard presented his idea for using six questions as framework for our work plan. 1. What is SBM? 2. What is the current state of SBM (theory, reality, research issues???) 3. What is the purpose of SBM? 4. How should SBM be "addressed"? (e.g. define, decide, process, promotion) 5. How does SBM relate to the other areas of the PSD Strategic Plan? 6. What are some of the feasible Action Steps we can propose to PSD? Although there appeared to be agreement with this framework, no formal decision was made on using this framework or assigning members to parts of it. 3. Research areas: Greg called for members to select research areas from list on the agenda. Members will post to the Listserv by April 12. SBM Leadership Roles in other States/areas outside RI Lou Schmitt SBM's Educational History Fran Gorman SBM Working Definition/Mission, Grantwriting Resources Tom Bacon Contacting Phyllis Tennian and Joyce Stevos Greg Enos C[]omer Model Tom Arrison Parents and SBM in other districts - Jon Howard =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: "Greg Enos" To: sbm_notaol.com Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 12:32:19 PDT Subject: [sbm] Research Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com John...if you have time to do some research, please look at how site-based management team are organized at the school level...the actual assignments people are working on are listed at the end of this message....the 6 questions are a starting point....thanks....please note we are meeting in the cafeteria on Monday....thanks...greg ==== [ QUOTATION OF JOHN'S MESSAGE REMOVED ] ==== =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: FGorman938_aol.com Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 09:47:43 EDT To: sbm_notaol.com Subject: [sbm] (no subject) Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com For information about "site based management" published in Education Week. Go to: WWW.edweek.com You can find a variety of articles going back to 1980 in "The Archives" =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 12:49:56 -0400 (EDT) To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Arrison Subject: [sbm] New Subscribers Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Maureen Kenner mfkenner_aol.com and Lou Schmitt lou_schmitt_compuserve.com have been subscribed to the sbm listserv. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: GJWL_aol.com Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 22:12:51 EDT To: sbm_notaol.com Subject: [sbm] Check out School/Site-based Management Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Click here: http://www.ascd.org/services/eric/sbm.html School/Site-based Management An interesting article on our topic. Barbara =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: JWHoward_aol.com Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 09:02:28 EDT To: sbm_notaol.com Subject: Re: [sbm] Check out School/Site-based Management Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Dear Barbara, Thanks for sharing that article. I was tantalized by some of the abstracts in the site you connected us to, which appear to be from ERIC Digest. Can we get full text over the web on these back articles? If not, where can back issues of be found in RI? Jon Howard =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: GJWLEE_aol.com Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 13:30:01 EDT To: GJWL_aol.com, sbm_notaol.com Subject: Re: [sbm] Check out ED357436 May 93 Who Runs the Schools? The Principal'sView. Researc Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com In a message dated 4/13/99 3:09:11 AM, you wrote: << Click here: ED357436 May 93 Who Runs the Schools? The Principal's View. Research Report. http://oeri2.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed357436.html >> This is information regarding principals and site based management. Isabella =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: GJWL_aol.com Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 22:22:02 EDT To: sbm_notaol.com Subject: Re: [sbm] Check out School/Site-based Management Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com In a message dated 4/13/99 9:03:03 AM Eastern Daylight Time, JWHoward_aol.com writes: << Thanks for sharing that article. I was tantalized by some of the abstracts in the site you connected us to, which appear to be from ERIC Digest. Can we get full text over the web on these back articles? If not, where can back issues of be found in RI? Jon Howard >> Hi John, The articles cited in the abstracts may be available at the Professional Development Library at 797 Westminister St. The library is located on the 3rd floor. I know they have School Administrator. I may have the Phi Delta Kappan article at my school, I will check. The ERIC documents can be ordered if you do not find them online. You can search the ERIC website by searching under "ERIC and education". You can search by subject or document number. You could also call the library at RIC or Brown. Good luck. Barbara =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 09:07:41 -0400 To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Bacon Subject: [sbm] Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com SBM Minutes: 4/12/99 5:30-7:30 p.m. **REMEMBER: This is PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE!!! AGENDA: Team Feedback, SBM Advantages & Disadvantages, Research Reports/Assignments Present: G. Enos, T. Arrison, B. Ashby, J. Howard, F. Gorman, T. Bacon, J. Rich, L. Schmitt, and M. Kenner Team Feedback: -Joyce Stevos has been contacted and is working with the team. -Carl Squier was a consultant for the Vartan Gregorian School _ Fox Point, V. Gregorian has "sub-committees" under the SBM Team. These committees focus on utilizing the school's resources (Academic Team for example, School Improvement Team, Curriculum Committee, etc.) **May 7th _ 8:00 a.m.= open invitation for anyone wishing to attend V. Gregorian's School Improvement Team meeting. These meetings will be held every two weeks from then -Nomination of SBM and/or SIT (School Improvement Team)= committee nomination and a vote; self-nominations are also probable. -SBM Team _ V. Gregorian = 8 teachers, 4 parents, 2 community partners, School Dept. Representative (Non-Voter), RIDE Rep. (also non-voting). -AYP (Average Yearly Progress); percentage of students who should increase in a given year. Standards to achieve in a given year-Benchmarks (realistic and attainable) Advantages of SBM for Providence School Dept.: 1. Ability to build staff based on the school's individual needs (hiring & firing practices, postings) 2. Input on decisions that effect student population (Curriculum for example) 3. SBMs receive Waivers to get past the "NO" (contract rules) 4. Accelerated rate of change 5. Budget manipulation/control to assist with needs assessment 6. Greater opportunity to reflect on scores and how to achieve better scores (related to budget) 7. Community partners, parents, etc. (Non-School "Investors") can raise issues that teachers/staff may not 8. Parents have more input on teaching and Learning 9. Shared leadership 10. Increased professional development 11. Ability to restructure staff 12. Constant Review and Self-Evaluation of the school (Self Study): Data-driven and child-centered 13. **Improved Student Performance 14. Increased morale 15. Element of trust; everyone's voice is heard and validated ACTION LOG: Research reports & Assignments -L. Schmitt on Leadership: still researching over the net and have found success stories of smaller school districts. **To be posted by 4/16/99 -F. Gorman on History if SBM: 2-5 articles to be posted asap to allow for a universal knowledge base -T. Bacon on SBM Working Definition: [amended and] accepted and will be posted 4/13/99 along withGrant writing resources/writing tips, etc. -T. Arrison: Comer Model; also to be posted. James Comer is a Child Psychologist who has written about Education and child-centeredness -J. Howard: Parental issue and involvemen = ongoing research -J. Rich: To speak again to Vidal Perez on information and feedback -M. Kenner: Recertification process - Where does V. Gregorian go next?? (or any other SBM?) -B. Ashby: How SBM relates to the other areas of the Prov. School Dept.'s Strategic Plan -G. Enos: Will speak to I. Lee as to the Principal's role, insights, concerns for and from SBM APPENDIX W: SITE-BASED MANAGEMENT: Union Language from contract; to be read & [decided] as to its posting _ next meeting NEXT MEETING: 4/26/99 Providence School Dept. in Basement Cafeteria ************************ AMENDMENT: Minutes amended by the Team at the 5/3/99 meeting to delete the word "voted" [changes shown in square brackets, above] to reflect the Team's decision to operate by consensus, not by voting. ************************ =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 09:22:57 -0400 To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Bacon Subject: [sbm] Sorry for any delays!! Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com I will explain _ our next meeting for the delays in sending the minutes and other information promised to the team....SORRY!!! Everything should be in place by Friday, 4/16/99. Tom Bacon =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: "Greg Enos" To: sbm_notaol.com Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 12:58:50 PDT Subject: [sbm] Subject Listings Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Greetings... Please be sure to fill in the subject block with a descriptive title that is easy to find. As our volume increases, this will become more important. Thanks....Greg _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 11:33:53 -0400 From: "Louis R. Schmitt" To: sbm Subject: [sbm] Leadership issue Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Fellow team members - In my research on the issue of leadership models for site-based management, there has been little written about specific case implementations of SBM and the leadership model/style utilized to foster change and ultimate successful implementation. However, much of what relates to leadership focuses upon the principal as the key to success in any change effort in schools, whether SBM or other initiatives. And a contributing factor to any change effort is the size of the school system and centralized control structures. In general, small school districts raise the voice of the principal to a higher level among all participants in the efforts, with commensurate responsibility for change. In business, we use a term "centers of excellence". These are departments or divisions that operate at a much higher level than other parts of the organization, and it is most often due to the leadership of an individual who chose to make a difference and began to shape the vision of what will be for that segment under his or her responsibility. He or she then would work diligently to foster work group accountability, removal of obstacles to success, and establishing clear communication methods to keep everyone abreast of how it was going. It is often a high-risk position, with that manager acting as the buffer with the "outside world": the rest of the organization, where progress is somewhat foreign; and the centralized leadership of the executive group, where as long as results are achieved and you don't cause added turmoil elsewhere, you are tolerated. The biggest failing of COE's are that they are often only as sustainable as the strength and survivability of the leader, because the outside influences to revert are so great. That said, the long term success of SBM in Providence lies not in a few COE-type schools, but in a system-wide implementation of SBM. What that requires is a cadre of very capable leaders in the principals' positions at every school, and an extraordinary leader in the superintendent's seat to facilitate the political shift from centralized to site-based management. This is a monumental task and involves substantial resources and internal changes to make it happen. And it is a shift from absolute hierarchical leadership to a participative form, where administrators, principals, teachers, and other stakeholders in the educational process work together to alter the state of the existing system to support SBM. The Office of Research, Office of Educational Research and Improvement of the United States Department of Education produced two reports: "Who Runs the Schools: The Principal's View" [1] and "Who Runs the Schools: The Teacher's View" [2]. The results were not really surprising. Principals felt that the school districts maintained substantial control over issues such as curriculum, hiring and discipline policies. The influence was always judged to be greater with larger district size. And teachers did not believe that they had much influence over these areas. For site based management to be successful, those perceptions and the reality in Providence must change. A document entitled "Critical Issue: Leading and Managing Change and Improvement" [3] states the following: "Principals and other key school leaders should help teachers and other stakeholders build effective teams by developing new organizational structures and creating a shared vision that focuses on authentic student learning. Such inspired and informed leadership is critical to the success of schools". Also: For school improvement efforts to be successful, teachers, parents, community and business partners, administrators, and students must share leadership functions. Likewise, the principal's role must change from that of a top-down supervisor to a facilitator, architect, steward, instructional leader, coach, and strategic partner". A final document, "School Leadership: A Profile Document" [4] was developed at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education at the University of Toronto. With only minor "cultural" modifications, this profiling matrix provides a comprehensive way of evaluating the current state and offers insight into the levels of performance relating to the following leadership attributes for a principal: - The Principal as Manager - The Principal as Instructional Leader/Program Facilitator - The Principal as School-Community Facilitator - The Principal as Visionary - The Principal as Problem Solver Based on what I know of the desired outcomes for SBM in Providence, this is likely the most comprehensive resource for determining what should be the leadership model for PSD principals and a tool to potentially evaluate the current state of the incumbents. Lou Schmitt Suggested links: [1] "Who Runs the Schools: The Principal's View", located at http://www.ed.gov/pubs/OR/ResearchRpts/prinview.html [Back to text] [2] "Who Runs the Schools: The Teacher's View", located at http://www.ed.gov/pubs/OR/ResearchRpts/teachvie.html [Back to text] [3] "Critical Issue: Leading and Managing Change and Improvement", located at http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/educatrs/leadrshp/le500.htm [Back to text] [4] "School Leadership: A Profile Document", located at http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/~vsvede/index.html [Back to text] =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: JWHoward_aol.com Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 11:45:47 EDT To: sbm_notaol.com Subject: [sbm] "Voting" in the minutes Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Friends, I should have reacted earlier, but I've been busier this week. The minutes refer to an upcoming "vote" at the next meeting. This should read "decision." We have not yet followed our own agreed process for formal consensus decision-making. Tom and Fran have practical experience here and I propose that we let them oversee the decision-making at tomorrow's meeting. As I understand it, "consensus" does not mean "informal". As another point of business, I would like to agree on the road map of the trip we are taking -- that is the steps we plan to take and the goals we expect to achieve. I'm pleased that we have begun to dig into issues, but I'm still confused about how and when we will get to "action steps" and how we will present these to the Strategic Planning Committee. Regards, Jonathan Howard =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 18:16:12 -0400 To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Bacon Subject: [sbm] sbm and grants Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Here is what I promised the listserv the other day! [A Word 8.0 document was attached to this message; the listserv can't post file attachments to this archive. The first of the three enclosed files, "School-Based Management and Student Performance" by David Peterson, ERIC Digest, Number 62, ED336845 Oct 91, is available at http://www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed336845.html The second file, "Site-Based Teams: At the Seat of Power", in the October 1995 issue of School Planning & Management Magazine, is available at http://notaol.com/sbm/spm.htm ] ***************************************************************** The difference between fiction and reality? Fiction has to make sense. -- Tom Clancy otliam: rif00142_ride.ri.net Marilyn Salisbury R.F.Kennedy School, Providence Computer Teacher 1998 RIF Trainer =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 12:29:23 -0400 (EDT) To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Arrison Subject: [sbm] No attachments, please Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Please do not attach files to messages sent to the sbm mailing list address. There are two reasons for this request: 1) Not all group members may have the software (such as MS Word) to open the attached file. 2) The software that automatically posts these messages to the website can not deal with attachments. ALTERNATIVES TO FILE ATTACHMENTS: 1) Copy the text out of the source file and paste it directly into an e-mail message to the group. 2) E-mail the file as an attachment to me, tom_notaol.com, and I will post it to the website, the sbm list (as text), or both. Thank you, Tom Arrison =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: "Greg Enos"To: sbm_notaol.com Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 05:40:44 PDT Subject: [sbm] Action Team Leader Meeting Two Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com The Action Team Leaders met April 16 to review concerns/celebrations/needs/problems and receive a draft sample of the Action Plan with Action Steps. I reported on the SBM website, projected videotape plans, and the research progress to date. A copy of the sample action plan will be distributed at our 4/26 meeting. Most other teams are making good progress. The Attendance Team((#1) headed by Dan Corley has specifically requested that attendance be included in SBM plans. Blank Professional Development Credit Report forms are available for team members who can use them. Greg Enos =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: "Greg Enos" To: sbm_notaol.com Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 05:54:58 PDT Subject: [sbm] Reading Item Sequence Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com I would like Barbara, John and Fran to work as a team to formulate a recommendation for the 4/26 meeting. Situation: The SBM team is collecting and generating a number of significant documents that would be useful to a person who wants to learn about SBM management. Items are added to the website (Resources) in the order received. Idea: Post research/documents/links to the Resource section in a logical order, so a website visitor could read them in an understandable sequence. Specifically, it should be easy to use by members of the Providence School Planning Team (names listed in the draft strategy brochure). I believe we want them to read selected items before the June 8 meeting (full Planning Team meeting to review the action plans). Starting Throughts: The Who, What, Why article and LAB report seem like good items to start with. Fran, John, and Barbara --- please connect and come to the meeting with a recommendation. Plan on a maximum of 5 minutes of discussion during meeting. Other Team Members ---- feel free to communicate your thoughts to Fran, John, and Barbara. Thanks...Greg (401-433-7522) _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: "Greg Enos" To: sbm_notaol.com Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 05:27:14 PDT [REVISED Fri, 23 Apr 1999 07:53:30 PDT] Subject: [sbm] Team Update Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Good morning... You deserve more information and I am making a commitment to do the following: 1. provide a review of the Strategy Action Team Leader meeting(4/16/99) by COB 4/21/99. 2. post the 4/26/99 meeting agenda by noon 4/23/99. Please be sure to review it so we can make the most of our meeting time. 3. sketch out the milestones we need to meet between now and June 8. Thank you for your constructive comments. Keep them coming. Greg _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 13:04:10 -0400 (EDT) To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Arrison Subject: [sbm] Change of "Our Charter" Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Per team leader Greg Enos, "Our Charter", at the top of our homepage, has been changed from > To generate the action items to implement the site-based > management strategy for the Providence School Department to > To generate the action items to implement the site-based > management strategy for the Providence School Department > that improves student performance Also per Greg, the LAB's report to the School Board, which Vidal Perez distributed at the 4/7 meeting, has been posted to the homepage. Many thanks to Vidal Perez and Grace Rivera of the LAB at Brown for permission to do so, and for providing the report in electronic form. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 15:19:13 -0400 (EDT) To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Arrison Subject: [sbm] Working Definition of SBM Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com At the April 12 meeting, team member Tom Bacon submitted, and the team amended, a "Working Definition of Site-Based Management". Team leader Greg Enos has asked me to post it to the website. I'd like to make sure that my mark-up correctly reflects the team's consensus. Those who attended, please check your hand-outs: ................................................ SBM: SITE-BASED MANAGEMENT SBM is a consensus-driven learning environment which is linked to decentralization and driven by the School Improvement Team. Having greater control over decisions regarding budget, personnel, and curriculum, it focuses on the following: student performance, teaching and learning, needs assessment, accountability, professional development, review, and evaluation. It is representative of the entire school community. Through the involvement of Principals, Teachers/Staff, Parents, Community Partners, and Students in the decision-making processes, more effective learning environments are created. ................................................ I will post the definition to the homepage before the 4/26 meeting. Thanks, Tom Arrison =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: GJWL_aol.com Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 13:31:50 EDT To: sbm_notaol.com Subject: Re: [sbm] Working Definition of SBM Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sounds good to me. Barbara A. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: "Greg Enos" To: sbm_notaol.com Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 07:32:03 PDT Subject: [sbm] Minutes for March 24 Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com SBM Minutes March 24, 1999 6-8 p.m. ATTENDING: P. Reilly, T. Bacon, B. Ashley, I. Lee, J. Howard, M. Torrance, F. Gorman, T. Arrison, G. Enos AGENDA: Charter, Introductions, Focus A. Charter Generate action items to implement site-based management strategy in Providence schools. G. Enos provided basic information on the strategy process. B. Introductions Team members participated in a simple listening-introduction exercise. C. Focus Improve student performance. Urban school districts with 25,000 students and 2-5 years of site-based management experience will be research targets. D. Administrative Team members were given printed reports, strategy, and school progress reviews. Meetings will primarily be used to share learnings and answer questions. Telephone and email addresses were collected. A listserve will be established. Submitted by G. Enos _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: "Greg Enos" To: sbm_notaol.com Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 07:36:26 PDT Subject: [sbm] Agenda - April 26 Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com SBM Meeting Agenda - April 26, 1999 Dr. Frank Pallotta Overview of Site-Based Management Team Operations Issues Website Organization Contract Language Posting to Website Research Reports Research Action Items Current: April 23, 1999 _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 13:47:57 -0400 (EDT) To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Arrison Subject: [sbm] Safe Schools Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Maureen Kenner sent me this link: Click here: Safe Schools http://www.ascd.org/safeschools With her permission, I'm passing it on to the group. As she says, "I think it's important considering the tragedy this week. School safety should be in the front of any program!" I would add that school safety is a good example of a "quality of school life" issue that should be on the table of any school site team. Tom Arrison =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 13:47:52 -0400 (EDT) To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Arrison Subject: [sbm] Invitation from Gregorian SBM Team Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Maureen Kenner also passed on the following reminder: "The invitation to attend Gregorian's SIT meeting on May 7 at 8:00a.m. is extended to our group (we meet every other Friday from then)" =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: "Rich, John E." To: "'sbm_mail.notaol.com'" Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 17:37:57 -0400 Subject: RE: [sbm] Team Update-Corrected Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Greg Sorry to be missing the meeting on 4.26, but after a week away, I am still plugging away here at work. Thought I would be able to make it. Will be there next week with my report. Thanks John Rich =========== [ QUOTATION OF PREVIOUS MESSAGE REMOVED ] ======== =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 03:22:33 -0400 (EDT) To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Arrison Subject: [sbm] Comer Schools Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Greetings! At the Monday 4/26 meeting I handed out my report (so far) on the Comer School Development program as it applies to SBM. Here it is for those of you not at the meeting. Last week I added the Comer Schools homepage to our web links, and this week I plan to add more links to their web pages. ............................... Aspects of the Comer School Development Program Applicable to Site-Based Management in Providence 1) As at least two Team members have pointed out, The Comer SDP is offered only to entire districts, not to individual schools. The point is not that we should advocate for the adoption of the Comer SDP (not a bad idea, in my opinion, but well outside the parameters of our Team), but rather, that we should look at their approach to SBM. Why? They are very early practitioners of SBM, and have much hard-earned experience. 2) The SDP revolves around an "atmosphere of learning" and insists that the adults who run schools should model, and not just prescribe, the behavior that leads to learning. Democracy and respect for others can best be demonstrated daily in the management of each school. 3) Comer Schools are primarily in "majority minority" districts such as ours. They show that all parents and the wider community have a role in ensuring the quality of their children's education. 4) They are chlld-centered. The background of Dr. Comer and the SDP is in child development as well as in education. 5) They support a strong sub-committee system to ensure that SBM Teams: a) steer the fine line between excessive attention to detail, on one hand, and endless discussion without action on the other. b) Include as many school community members as possible in actual management decision-making and implementation. 6) They have a wider view of the areas of concern to Site Teams than we currently hold in Providence. 7) They insist that SBM can not be successful without TRAINING at the school level in SBM and consensus management for ALL members of the team. The Comer SDP Website is http://info.med.yale.edu/comer/ More specific links will be posted this week. Submitted by Tom Arrison =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: MFKenner_aol.com Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 20:27:32 EDT To: sbm_notaol.com Subject: [sbm] Bravo to work done by committee! Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Hello everyone, Missed Monday's meeting but wanted to congratulate all on a very professional job and educational opportunity on the webpage! Bravo! See you next week. Maureen Kenner =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: JWHoward_aol.com Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 10:45:15 EDT To: sbm_notaol.com Subject: [sbm] Minutes - Monday, April 26, 1999 Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Site-Based Management Strategy Team Minutes - Monday, April 26, 1999 Present: Greg Enos, Fran Gorman, Maria Acevedo, Lou Schmidt, Barbara Ashby, Tom Arrison, Jonathan Howard The meeting opened at 5:30 PM 1. GUEST: DR. FRANK PALLOTTA, ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING A. Site improvement teams vs. site improvement teams. Dr. Pallotta prefers "site improvement teams" (SIT) to "site based management" (SBM) to avoid "connotations of control." Later, he noted the RI Dept. of Ed. has mandated that each school have a three-year action plan by November of 1999 and that each plan shall be created by a SIT (which can be a SBM team) with at least 2 parents, 2 teachers and the principal. Dr. Pallotta passed out RIDE's "short guide" for SITs. B. Dr. Pallotta offered some observations on what makes for successful SITs. - Coherent vision, mission, goals and objectives - Diversity and representation of the community - Agreeing to disagree - The concept of "teaming" - how to work in a team - Consensus decision-making; unless skillfully facilitated, voting is divisive. - Strong facilitator, preferably the school principal, but if not, then someone principal relies upon for leadership in the school. (The assumption that principals would know how to facilitate teams has turned out to be wrong.) - Clear agenda as a starting point for discussion - work and issues will evolve from here. - Understanding what to talk about and what not. - Constitution and by-laws governing team discipline, succession, etc. - To be avoided: "self-serving," "my child" attitude or blaming specific teacher. Does or should the SIT have the final word on educational issues? Dr. Pallotta's own view is not fixed, but contractually, teachers have the right to vote on curriculum and teaching methods. What do SITs talk about? Not specific implementation, but general direction.. For instance, don't second-guess specific suspension, but do set overall discipline process. Principals must buy-in to SIT's influence, which is part of forming a SIT. C. Questions: Have principals been trained to work with SITs? The old corps was trained, but newer promotions have not been systematically trained. The strategic plan parameters say "we will always attempt to enhance site-based decision-making", while, of the nine actual strategies, SBM is the least clear. How did the strategic planning team arrive at this result? Dr.. Pallotta sas the term "site-based management" is used loosely. His view: why go through the whole formal SBM process when SIT has the same effect? People who think there is special funding for SBM schools should realize the money for SBM as such will dry up. Is the zone administrator position useful in changing administration from manager to resource provider for schools? Yes. Zone administrators sit in on SITs and carry lessons from site to site. Also, they evaluate principals and link schools to resources. Schools call one person they know, not many. How do you keep schools consistent under SIT/SBM? OATs is the key and Providence is way ahead of the rest of the state on that score. New hires are trained. You deal with staff turnover by continuity of vision. Can SIT's influence staff selection? Yes. First, schools have authority now to change the nature of a given staff position. For example, a school can change a social worker to a counselor in its budget submission. Downside here is that you take the first person off transfer list. Another route is negotiating a specific building-wide exemption from contract so that SIT can interview and select. If the SIT wanted this exemption, it would go to superintendent, who would approach PTU. PTU would probably agree providing the union's building rep had no objection. Thus, schools have the potential to win a major (perhaps the major) advantage of SBM without going through the SBM process. Five schools besides the two SBM sites (e.g. Veazie St.) have staff selection authority. Dr. Pallotta concluded with the plea that our recommendations result in setting consistent parameters across all schools in the District. 2. TEAM ISSUES: Greg A. Calendar: Meetings now scheduled for Mondays: May 3, 10, 17 and 24. Greg wants to set Tuesday, May 18 as firm meeting date. His intention is that we will meet in working groups on May 17 and finalize our presentation on May18. May 24 would be a wrap-up, perhaps to create a video. B. We present to the larger planning group on Tuesday, June 8. Greg was told we would present first at 9 AM. Will need to decide who will present. We will have 20 minutes. C. Website organization. Greg suggested Barbara, Fran and John Rich structure links and materials on our website in terms of priorities so that new members and the planning team can quickly visit and get up to speed. There was no agreement on the need for this and this issue was deferred to next week. D. Stucture and work plan: Jon Howard suggested that an issue like structuring links and documents on the website would fall into place if we had an agreed "structure of inquiry." Greg responded that we will finalize this structure at next week's meeting. 3. APPENDIX W Should we post "Appendix W", the contractual provision governing formal SBM in the District? This was agreed by consensus. 4. RESEARCH REPORTS Greg held Lou's report on leadership out as a model for research reports. A. Parental involvement - Jon Howard - Has found relatively little on SBM and parents -- national PTO has standards for parental involvement, one of which addresses local decision-making. His report with links will be posted later.. B. Comer model - Tom Arrison. Tom handed out his summary of how Comer is relevant to SBM. 4. REPORT OUT FORMAT Greg handed out the report of Action Team #2, which was put forward as the model for team output at a recent team leader meeting. The format of their report: 1. Cover letter 2. Original goal & three new action objectives 3. Action steps (5 to 8steps) for each objective 4. Cost/benefit (tangible and intangible) matrices for each plan. Group members were surprised by the cost estimates in the plan. We are not necessarily bound by this precedent, but this seems to be what the planning team is prepared for. The meeting ajourned at 8:30. Our next meeting is Monday, May 3 at 5:30 PM. We meet in School Board meeting room C at the School Department building. Submitted by Jonathan Howard =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: JWHoward_aol.com Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 12:29:03 EDT To: sbm_notaol.com Subject: Re: [sbm] Invitation from Gregorian SBM Team Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Dear Maureen, I'd like to attend. I'll just present myself at the front door a little before 8. Let me know if I need special directions. Jon Howard (331-2272) =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 12:23:12 EDT To: sbm_notaol.com From: JWHoward_aol.com Subject: [sbm] Parents and SBM Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Parental Roles in Site-Based Management Here is what I found on the web (rather little) with some of my own observations and conclusions. Parental involvement in a child's education is one of the few factors clearly correlated with improved student performance, which has been identified as a key objective for SBM in Providence. Vigorous and well-planned parental involvement can be an important "equalizer" for children in poorer districts such as Providence. "... regardless of parents' education, parental involvement with children's schooling is associated with better attendance, higher achievement test scores, and stronger cognitive skills. In addition, when parents help elementary school children with their schoolwork, social class and education become far less important factors in predicting the children's academic success (Dauber & Epstein, 1993)." (Connard, with Novick, Ecology of the Family, http://www.nwrel.org/cfc/publications/ecology2) The National PTO summarizes a wide range of benefits: better social behavior: lower dropout rates, higher vocational achievement as well as improved report cards. (http://www.pta.org/programs) Nevertheless, there is little touching on parents and SBM specifically. To take this from the other end, what do parents need from schools? The National PTO has also developed and promotes national standards for parental involvement in six areas. Here are their core standards: Standard I: Communicating-Communication between home and school is regular, two-way, and meaningful. Standard II: Parenting-Parenting skills are promoted and supported. Standard III: Student Learning-Parents play an integral role in assisting student learning. Standard IV: Volunteering-Parents are welcome in the school, and their support and assistance are sought. Standard V: School Decision Making and Advocacy-Parents are full partners in the decisions that affect children and families. Standard VI: Collaborating with Community-Community resources are used to strengthen schools, families, and student learning. In relation to Standard V, which directly relates to SBM and other school governance, the PTO offers the following success criteria: Successful programs: 1. Provide understandable, accessible, and well-publicized processes for influencing decisions, raising issues or concerns, appealing decisions, and resolving problems. 2. Encourage the formation of PTAs or other parent groups to identify and respond to issues of interest to parents. 3. Include parents on all decision-making and advisory committees, and ensure adequate training for such areas as policy, curriculum, budget, school reform initiatives, safety, and personnel. Where site governance bodies exist, give equal representation to parents. 4. Provide parents with current information regarding school policies, practices, and both student and school performance data. 5. Enable parents to participate as partners when setting school goals, developing or evaluating programs and policies, or responding to performance data. 6. Encourage and facilitate active parent participation in the decisions that affect students, such as student placement, course selection, and individual personalized education plans. 7. Treat parental concerns with respect and demonstrate genuine interest in developing solutions. 8. Promote parent participation on school district, state, and national committees and issues. 9. Provide training for staff and parents on collaborative partnering and shared decision making. Not much to ask, really, far less than full-blown site-based management. Nevertheless, accomplishing this standard in Providence requires some major cultural change. Here are my own parental observations from 17 parent-years in Providence schools. Parents usually don't speak the language of education. Many Providence parents don't speak English, the language in which school business is conducted. Yet, even well-educated parents will be unacquainted with more than a few of the theories, doctrines, methods and laws that inform and govern educational practice. No matter the spoken language or educational background, the "language barrier" can be an obstacle for all parents. Educators are professionals, paid to instruct and to organize education all day every day. Parents are amateurs. They must take time from their jobs, their families or their leisure to participate. In a complicated educational environment, just staying up to speed over the long term is perhaps impossible for all but a very few parents. These handicaps are magnified when important information fails to reach parents. From individual student performance to school-wide and district-wide changes and issues, the system tends to communicate in writing, using one of the least reliable delivery mechanisms known - the student backpack. Generally, the communication dynamic is basic: one-way information flow to parents, with the occasional signature requested. The communication goal is often to purge the system of liability (permissions, waivers and warnings) and less often to inform parents, engage them in education or learn from them. The assumption is that once sent, the message is binding whether or not it was received or understood (which is rarely measured). Lack of frutiful communication is hardly surprising, since educators are not trained to work with parents. A survey by the national PTA showed that training and competence in parental involvement is rarely provided or required for teaching standards, degrees or certification. (PTO) Educational researchers, asked to list the most critical teaching skills, did not mention working with parents among their list of 37 skills. (Connard/Novick) Whether as cause or effect of these disadvantages (or yet others), parents have little formal status or influence on school decision-making. Parents (in the role of parents) are at the end of the line. They are assumed to have less to contribute to decision-making and policy and are less often consulted or recruited than teachers, administrators, state officials, consultants, political leaders, community and business representatives. Finally, I will offer some conclusions, which are entirely my own: Parents are not experts on educational theory or administration. They are experts on their own kids and how families work. Most care little for theories, but care passionately about individual student achievement. They are the primary responsible (adult) customers of the system. Ultimately, the political base supporting the system rests on parents. Parents should focus on and be consulted primarly on ends, and less on means. In SBM terms, this might mean that parents play a very large role in setting the goals and measuring student outcomes, while professionals design and manage the system to achieve those outcomes. Jon Howard =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: MFKenner_aol.com Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 17:21:10 EDT To: sbm_notaol.com Subject: [sbm] Invitation from Gregorian SBM Team Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Jon has accepted our open invitation to attend the Friday, May 7, 1999, SIT meeting at Gregorian School. We have a security buzzer at the main door. Please ring and announce as SIT guest. Thanks. Maureen Kenner =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: "Greg Enos" To: sbm_notaol.com Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 07:44:31 PDT Subject: [sbm] SBM Team Agenda - May 3, 1999 5:30-7:30 p.m. Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com SBM Team Agenda - May 3, 1999 5:30-7:30 p.m. 1. Phyllis Tennian - Providence Teacher Union 2. Key Questions & Research Assignments 3. Team Schedule _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 18:31:23 -0400 (EDT) To: sbm_notaol.com From: Tom Arrison Subject: [sbm] Issue Page at EdWeek Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com At the 4/26 team meeting, Fran Gorman showed us a printout of the SBM page at the EdWeek website. It's a good collection of background information, and printed and web resources: Click Here: http://www.edweek.org/context/topics/schbased.htm =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= From: "Greg Enos" To: sbm_notaol.com Date: Sun, 02 May 1999 11:28:19 PDT Subject: [sbm] Preparation for May 3 Meeting Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com Good afternoon... Please review the agenda for the May 3 meeting and bring your calendar with you. If you will not be able to attend, please call me at 401-433-7522 on Monday. Thanks....Greg _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: FGorman938_aol.com
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 12:44:09 EDT
To: sbm_notaol.com
Subject: [sbm] SBM History and Thoughts
Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com
Hi,
Below you will find some of my findings in the research on the history of SBM
as well as some of the issues and concerns about SBM.
Fran
SBM History
May 1, 1999
Background:
(www.edweek.com/context/topics/schbased.htm)
School (Site) based management is not a new concept in fact it was
the norm in the one-room schoolhouse of the past where the teacher was the
academic leader and the business manager. Over the years school systems
became larger and more complex and various levels of decision making
evolved. Power shifted from the teacher, to the principal, to the district
superintendent and school board, then to state councils, state
superintendent, and up to governors and federal officials.
By the 1980s the school business as many other industries were
perceived to be top-heavy, employed top down management and did not
effectively use the experience and abilities of the front-line worker.
Conversely researchers were finding there were real advantages to teachers,
principals, and students having a sense of ownership and the
freedom to go about achieving their goals.
School-based management (SBM) is generally agreed to be a strategy
to improve education by transferring significant decision making authority
from state and district offices to individual schools. SBM provides
principals, teachers, students, parents and community representatives
greater control over the education process by giving responsibility for
decisions about the budget, personnel, and the curriculum.
Proponents ( AASA, NAESP, NASSP and other sources)say SBM can:
(http://www.ed.gov/pubs/OR/ConsumerGuides/baseman.html)
1. Allow competent individuals in the schools to make
decisions that will improve learning;
2. Give the entire school community a voice in key decisions;
3. Focus accountability for decisions;
4. Lead to greater creativity in the design of programs;
5. Redirect resources to support the goals developed in each
school;
6. Lead to realistic budgeting as parent and teachers become
more aware of the school's financial status, spending
limitations, and the cost of its program; and,
7. Improve morale of teachers and nurture leadership at all
levels.
Why are School Districts Decentralizing?
(http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/envrnmnt/go/93-1why.htm)
According to the North Central Regional Education Laboratory there
are five primary pressures:
1. Demands from powerful constituencies - in particular parents,
community groups, legislators, business, and in some instances
teachers' unions - for more input into and control over the
schooling process and tougher accountability measures
2. Strong agreement among these constituencies that the current
educational structure is not working well for an increasing
number of students
3. The inability of massive bureaucracies - with their
characteristic policies, common work rules, and top-down
decision-making structures to respond to the widely varying
needs of local schools and communities
4. The rapidly changing nature of work and the workplace, and the
concomitant perception that schools are not keeping pace with
the current demands of society
5. Growing competition for public school dollars and students
from the advocates for school choice, vouchers, and privatization
These pressures create a climate of crisis that demands substantive changes
in the ways schools structure the learning environment, deliver educational
services, govern themselves, and are held accountable.
Why School-Based Management Fails
(http://www.ed.gov/pubs/SER/SchBasedMgmt/execsum.html)
1. SBM is adopted as an end in itself. As a form of governance. SBM
in of itself will not generate improvement in school performance.
Instead, it is simply a means through which school-level
decisions makers can implement various reform that can improve
teaching and learning. Some schools get bogged down in issues of
power, who can vote, who can attend meeting instead of connecting
and placing efforts on curriculum and instructional reform.
2. Principals work from their own agenda, not helping to develop a
common one. Principals appeared to dominate or be autocratic in
all decisions. They presented a vision for the school --fait
accompli-- to staff. This has lead to power struggles. Teachers
have little sense of ownership and accountability to the plan.
3. Decision making power is centered in a single council. Struggling
SBM schools tended to concentrate power in a single council that
was composed of a small committed group who were aware they did
not have broad representation. They can get bogged down in power
issues, develop strong feelings of alienation among other faculty
members, "we" vs. "they" factions can develop.
4. Business as usual. Too many schools have assumed that SBM occurs
with average levels of commitment and energy. Research indicates
that SBM is time consuming and a complicated process that places
high demands on all individuals involved. Schools struggle with
SBM when they simply layered SBM on top of what they were already
doing. Meetings after school poorly attended. Schools did not
redesign their schedules to encourage staff to meet during the
regular school day. Feelings of isolation among teachers due to
the absence of meetings that allowed staff and stakeholders to
interact around specific projects and tasks.
Strategies for Success
(www.ed.gov/pubs/CPRE/fb2sbm.html)
Strategies for success according to Priscilla Wohlsetter and Susan
Albers Mohraman who researched and studied the practices of
decentralization in the private sector and who have been implementing
"high-involvement management" over several decades. They suggest that
high-involvement management is most appropriate where the work (like
teaching in schools) is complex; is best done collegially or in teams;
involves uncertainty in its day-to-day tasks; and exists in a rapidly
changing environment.
Research in the private sector also indicates that control over four
resources needs to be decentralized throughout the organization in order to
maximize performance improvement:
Power to make decisions that influence organizational
practices, policies and directions
Knowledge that enables employees to understand and
contribute to organizational performance including
technical knowledge to do the job or provide the
service, interpersonal skills, and managerial knowledge
and expertise;
Information about the performance of the organization,
including revenues, expenditure, unit performance, and
strategic information on the broader policy and economic
environment; and
Rewards that are based on the performance of the
organization and the contributions of individuals.
In the education arena, school based management has been viewed largely as a
political reform that transfers power (authority) over budget, personnel and
curriculum to individual schools. Little attention has been given to
empowering school sites with control over information, professional
development (knowledge) or compensation systems (rewards).
Power:
The main question, "Who at the school site is the power given to?"
In SBM power is shifted from central administration to a council at the
school site. Groups who typically have not had much power in managing
schools. However, group empowerment may not be the most effective means of
school management. Strong central leadership, like a school principal, is
key to successful management. Effective leaders set the schools vision,
serve as instructional leader, coordinate reform efforts and rally support
for the school.
A second question is what power should be given to school sites? The
most effective SBM programs would be ones where schools are given lump-sum
budgets to allocate according to local needs and the authority to hire and
fire school staff, including principals and teachers.
A strategy to empower SBM and to increase performance could be to
establish self-contained teams who produce a defined product or deliver a
service to a defined customer, this could be by defined by grade level or
department.
A second strategy could be to set mini-enterprises in schools where
students are organized into "houses" or "cadres" and taught by teams of
teachers. These mini-enterprises could be empowered to make decisions about
resource allocation and given incentives to optimize performance.
A third approach could be Quality improvement teams with
representatives from various levels who build consensus among groups with
different responsibilities on what organizational improvements should be
made and how changes should be designed.
A fourth strategy could be the establishment of Task Teams to enable
groups to have input into decisions that are best done uniformly throughout
the organization for reasons that include economies of scale in the areas
of curriculum, teaching and day to day operations, and in the areas of
demands of constituencies or legal requirements.
Knowledge:
Employees need training to expand their job skills and increase the
breadth of their perspectives, so they can contribute in more ways to the
organization and make more knowledgeable decisions about improvement. In
schools this can be accomplished by expanding teachers' knowledge about
instructional and programmatic changes of the schools, including knowledge
about teaching, learning and curriculum. This area has not been usually
considered as part of SBM and usually more professional development is needed.
Secondly individuals need teamwork skills for high involvement
management, problem-solving, decision-making and communications skills. This
area is frequently undeserved and districts with SBM have done little to
develop general organizational skills among SBM participants.
Thirdly, individuals need organizational knowledge. This includes
budgeting and personnel skills, as well as an understanding of the
environment and strategies for responding to changes in the environment.
Fourthly, there has been an absence of training for district office
personnel whose roles change under SBM. School district implementing
decentralized management need to encourage a wide variety of training
experiences that support operating practices in both the district office and
school site.
District offices often provide training and consulting services to
the schools. It isoften believed that central office staff have the
knowledge that the individuals at the site lack. Sometimes this is true,
often it is not. Participants in SBM need a complex understanding of both
decentralized school governance and instructional reform. Studies indicate
that promising approaches are joint efforts that draw upon the knowledge
of teachers, administrators and outside experts and feature ongoing
staff development in which participants at all levels enrich the system
with their acquired knowledge and insight, while drawing on new source of
understanding.
Information:
Power can only be decentralized if individuals to whom the power is
entrusted have access to the information necessary to make good decisions.
In public schools implementing decentralized management have not focused
much attention on sharing information among participants, particularly at
the school site. The major focus in districts under SBM appears to be how
information is shared vertically between individual schools and the
district office and whether schools are adhering to regulatory policies.
Many district provide schools with standardized test data.
School district under SBM are just beginning to provide sites with
information about organizational performance needed to develop school-based
plans. To meet district wide goals, individuals at the school site need
information about their performance relative to those goals. Schools must
have information about their performance relative to other schools, whether
or not they are competing with others as in a market-based plan.
Schools need information about the extent to which they are meeting
client -- parent and student--needs. This information needs to be available
in a timely fashion so modifications can be made to improve organizational
performance.
A mission statement is one tool that a school site can use to define
school goals, measure progress toward reaching the goals, and to share
information with the community-at-large. Mission statement define the school
culture and environment. Independent schools whose survival depends on their
ability to communicate unique attributes to parents and students may stress
business information about finances, salaries, enrollments, sources of income
and types of expenditures.
How information is transmitted in the school community is important.
Public schools informal methods of communication most prevalent are:
parent-teacher conferences, collegial sharing among teachers and ad hoc
meetings with visible, accessible administrators. Independent schools favor
formalized approaches with explicit written codes of conduct.
Procedure for dealing with conflict management, faculty compensation,
job descriptions, strategic plans, and methods and timetables for meeting
goals are typically written down and distributed to the school community.
Effective public schools suggest they also transmit formal written
information about performance expectations for students and staff, but not
to the extent of independent schools.
School districts under SBM need to develop more systematic
strategies for sharing information at the school site, with the district
office, and with schools serving similar populations.
Rewards:
This area is a great challenge to SBM. A key lesson from the private
sector is that decentralized management is most effective when there is
consensus on performance measures and units can be held accountable for
performance. Employees need to see the relationship between pay and
performance. Such conditions do not often exist in education. It is
understood in the private sector that high performance will lead to greater
profits, but funding in public education is rarely affected by evidence
about performance.
Few districts engaged in SBM have decentralized financial rewards.
Teachers are paid on standardized salary scale and districts allocate funds
on a per pupil basis. There exists a value difference that divides educators
and the community.
Policy makers would often like to reward successful schools with
resources but budget constraints would oblige them to allocate less to
schools that are failing an untenable approach to school improvement.
Extrinsic rewards besides monetary, could be sabbaticals or
opportunities to pursue full-time study, mentor teacher positions,
attendance at professional conference, classes at local colleges and
universities, involvement in teacher networks focused on curriculum,
teaching and assessment.
Research indicates that an effective reward system also must
include opportunities for achieving intrinsic (internal) rewards. Many
teachers are strongly motivated by factors such as achieving success with
students or enjoying collaborative work with peers.
School districts need to devise new approaches --both extrinsic and
intrinsic-- to reward participants. Rewards can motivate individuals to use
their enhanced resources (power, information and knowledge) to further
districtwide and school-based goals. Rewards can be used to align the goals
of the people at the district office and school sites who have different
preferences and value different outcomes.
Managing the Change to SBM
The transition to SBM entails large-scale change in educational
organizations. Successful decentralization requires that systems and
processes be redesigned so power, knowledge and information accrue at the
operating levels of the school, and that rewards are contingent on
performance and contribution. Recruitment practices need to attract people
who thrive on the challenge of working in a decentralized setting;
development practices must be altered and supplemented to ensure
participants have needed competencies.
The transformation eventually involves all organizational
components, including strategy, structure, technology, processes, rewards
and other human resource systems.
Large scale change is threatening to the people involved, because it
entails new roles and responsibilities and because it challenges traditional
assumptions and values. The change process has to be carefully managed.
SBM will not be successful unless a compelling case is made for it.
Districts embarking on SBM should be very clear about the need for change
and the ultimate purpose for the change process.
Understanding the need for change: What does change entail?
Defining "high performance" that can be agreed upon by all
stakeholders who become partners in the effort. The focus on educational
outcomes frames the change in SBM in a way that it replaces issues of who
gains and who loses power.
Develop a shared vision for the organization that involves all
levels of stakeholders and:
a. links people together
b. provides goals
c. " criteria
d. " change activities
e " ongoing decisions
Changes in structures and roles.
In SBM creating an empowering the site council often has been the
main change intervention. They are expected to make decisions that change
the nature and effectiveness of the education that takes place in the
school. Councils become change agents and should be educated accordingly.
They will have to know:
a. design change
b. the dynamics of change
c. the natural stages of transition
d. the resistance associated with change
SBM councils will need:
a. training in group process
b. however, a more extensive group of skills and knowledge
will be required
The role of school management--principals and superintendents:
a. changes from directive and control oriented to a role
that involves creating an empowering environment in which
teachers can easily try new approaches
b. the role includes facilitating and coaching for high
performance
c. ensuring proper resources are in place
d. making certain that development needs of participants are
addressed
e. freeing teachers up to make changes so school sites truly
become focus of continuous improvement
Superintendents will have to:
a. actively model new leadership roles
b. set expectations and provide feedback to district-level
managers and school principals about the change expected
in how they perform their roles
Principals will have to:
a. provide leadership in the organizational transition
b. model and reinforce the new behaviors
c. exert leadership in collective forums, where their
influence is exercised as a group member rather than
hierarchically.
Teachers will have to extend their focus to include participating:
a. in shaping the school environment
b. creating the school vision
c. working with other stakeholders to determine goals and
objective
d. taking responsibility for resource allocation and use
e. influence shifts from individual classroom to influence
exercised in collective forums, including councils,
problem solving groups, and various work teams
Participation by parents, students and community stakeholders:
a. shifts from an advocating personal viewpoint to
b. participating in a forum that takes a schoolwide view
c. addresses concerns of many different stakeholders
This will require considerable team building to develop trust and
willingness to workthrough differences and develop consensus. The
transition to SBM is not simply atransfer of power. It is the
establishment of new roles of stakeholders and it will not be successful
unless its development is planned and the resources provided.
Resources:
Time, energy and money over an extended period of time will
be required. School districts will have to invest in new site-based
information systems. Including measurement and feedback systems,
financial and budgeting systems and reward systems. These will take
expert time but should be done in a participative way so the various
stakeholders understand and help shape them. People will have to be
freed up to participate.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 23:11:51 -0400 (EDT)
To: sbm_notaol.com
From: Tom Arrison
Subject: [sbm] PROBE report
Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com
At tonight's meeting, Maureen asked about the PROBE sbm recommendations.
I posted Recommendation 21 to the web page a while ago, but I forgot to
announce to the list that I'd found it and posted it, so here's the link:
Report of the PROBE
Commission -- Chapter 5, Recommendation 21 -- School-Based Management
http://notaol.com/sbm/probe.htm
Thanks to Ben McOsker and Dan Challener at Public Education Fund / PROBE for
copyright permission to post the material to our website. Unfortunately, the
complete report is not available online, but paper copies are still
available from
Public Education Fund
15 Westminster Street
Providence, RI 02903
Telephone (401)454-1050
Tom Arrison
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 09:48:38 -0400
From: "Louis R. Schmitt"
To: sbm
Subject: [sbm] Followup to last night's discussion
Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com
>From Lou Schmitt
Dear SBM members:
As I shared a model which I use in my work around leadership and systems in
change, it seemed as if this might be better shared in a more complete form.
To that end here's a more complete description of what I was talking about.
Whenever I work with an organization, my company, Success Horizons, considers
how three balancing systems affect an organization's overall effectiveness
and how each system may be enhanced to improve the organization. The
elements of this model include:
Leadership / direction -- people in an organization need to be clear on where
an organization is going in order to do their best on its behalf. Leaders
have far more responsibility than just understanding the environment in which
the organization is immersed; they must translate their understanding of the
vision into its lower level components, cultivate accountability for results,
reinforce efforts consistent with the desired results, and take a personal
stake in the continuing development of the workforce. By openly accepting
feedback on their performance as leaders and responding with their own
developmental actions, the leadership sets an example and recognizes the
importance and difficulty of personal adaptation for the benefit of the
organization. Clear and consistent communication, of news both good and bad,
strengthens the bond to perform at high levels. Leadership at every level
(in this case the superintendent, the zone administrators, the principals,
and any other leader position) must be working from a common vision of what
is to be achieved; their roles in support of that vision are different.
Each level of leadership must possess the capability to translate this
higher view into workable terms for their direct reports, so that the
"what does this mean for me and my work" questions are answered and
understood. Commitment has to be in both words and action;
inconsistencies are extremely obvious and lead to questions about the
seriousness of the leaders to make it work.
Process / control -- processes capture the mechanics of work; that is, they
establish how work is performed to achieve a desired result. Controls
establish how issues such as quality, compliance to regulations, and
repeatability of the results will be attained within a process, or throughout
the organization as a whole. Ignoring required controls is not advisable and
may be legally risky. Organizations do have the latitude to change their
processes and still maintain control. Effective organizations encourage
workforce improvement of processes that provide measurable gains in
significant areas while preserving the necessary controls. By establishing
process authority at the lowest levels, and being clear on control
maintenance, individuals can make significant improvements in the delivery
of product or service, lowering cost and improving delivery without placing
the organization or its people at risk. In SBM, clarity on delineation of
authority between site and central administration and crisp policies for
schools on compliance matters will permit expedite the process improvement
at the site level. When limits are known, the rules of the game are more
easily understood and compliance is less of an afterthought, as the
requirements to be met are available and clear.
Engagement / renewal -- different members of a workforce can vary greatly in
their actual performance of the same task; this is the result of how well an
individual is engaged in the work at any time. Often this is a reflection
of the degree to which an organization captured the hands, mind and heart
of the employee, so that she will fully contribute to the cause. Until an
organization more fully understands the unique individual and values what the
individual has to contribute to the effort, it will not likely see the best
possible performance. Organizations also need to concern themselves with
future development of the workforce. Creating renewal opportunities, i.e.,
training and development relating to employment preservation and improvement
in the future, reduces the loss of organizational intellect and minimizes the
costs associated with layoffs, replacement, and loss of productivity. In the
case of SBM, engagement and renewal are immediate concerns. Leadership, team
building, consensus training, process evaluation and improvement methods are
all development needs for participants in SBM. Viewed as an investment in
"new infrastructure" rather than an additional cost, the return will be
substantive.
I consider organizational effectiveness to be a systems matter. Making a
change in one area can bring about change in another part of the system,
sometimes positive and expected, and other times negative and unanticipated.
Any organization considering how to increase its effectiveness must be
sensitive to the possibility of systems disruption and explore solution
opportunities for such consequences before implementation.
Each of the three elements exert influence on each other, while combined
they act to support the effectiveness of the organization.
I hope that this is helpful to those who were trying to make some sense of
what I way saying last night. If you have questions, please feel free to
pose them to me.
Lou Schmitt
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: MFKenner_aol.com
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 21:06:43 EDT
To: sbm_notaol.com
Subject: Re: [sbm] Followup to last night's discussion
Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com
Thank you Lou and Fran for some very interesting reading material. Connie
and I plan to reflect on the info when we sit down with our principal
tomorrow.
Maureen
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: JWHoward_aol.com
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 10:02:47 EDT
To: sbm_notaol.com
Subject: [sbm] Lou's model
Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com
Lou, I got your emails. I believe I got all of the original message in both,
although the formatting had odd returns and extra lines. It was worth the
effort to search and replace these. (I'll send the Word for Windows file to
anyone who wants it.)
This model provides a clear and simple framework for breaking SBM down into
parts we can address. In my quick review, I think it touches on the core
problems.
I will thry to frame my eventual draft objectives within these three
catagories. Maybe if we all do the same, it could help us divide the
thinking and working we need to do to finish.
Thanks,
Jon
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: MFKenner_aol.com
Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 20:52:23 EDT
To: sbm_notaol.com
Subject: [sbm] Vartan Gregorian objectives
Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com
Hello all,
Hope everyone is well. Connie and I sat with Mary Brennan, our principal,
and tried to create some objectives for SBM. We began by asking ourselves
"What are we presently doing as a SBM school?"
I. SHARED DECISION MAKING
Administrators, teachers, parents (and students) share equal,
interconnected opportunities and responsibilities for making decisions that
affect school improvement. The concepts of a school as a "community of
leaders"* and a "community of learners"* must be supported in order for a
professional culture to exist in a school. (*Roland S. Barth, lecturer on
education at Harvard )
II. TEACHING AND LEARNING
To promote strong instructional leadership with a focus on teaching and
learning, commitment to new ideas, and delegation of responsibilities for
implementing the changes needed to improve student performance.
III. BUDGET
To align school budget with teaching and learning and to allow adequate
flexibility with finances. High priority must be placed on ongoing
professional development and training, innovative practice and communication,
which is necessary to provide a common knowledge base and common skills.
Ability to restructure the design of the school so that it reflects teaching
and learning.
We have found that our objectives are interconnected, woven together.
Presently, SBM serves as the mechanism to enable all participants at Vartan
Gregorian to improve performance. Hope these contributions are on the right
track. Would appreciate your feedback.
Have a nice weekend. See you Tuesday night.
Maureen and Connie
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: FGorman938_aol.com
Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 09:48:44 EDT
To: sbm_notaol.com
Subject: [sbm] SBM ojectives
Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com
Hi,
After reviewing the PROBE Report on Recommendation 21, our research,
interviews and discussions it occurs to me that there should be an objective
that deals with a means, methods, strategies to monitor and evaluate the
roles of each individual, groups and the processes (design, development,
implementation and products of SBM) in each of the Providence schools and the
Central Office. This would help to identify and share promising practices as
well as identify those areas and strategies that need to be modified in the
development of high achieving and effective learners throughout the
community. This could be part of the "accountability" piece in the evolution
of SBM in the Providence Public Schools.
Fran
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: JWHoward_aol.com
Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 10:56:20 EDT
To: sbm_notaol.com
Subject: [sbm] 1. Gregorian SBM 2. Amend Maureen's post
Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com
Hello all,
1. Gregorian SMB meeting
This morning, Pat Reilly, Tom Arrison and I attended the Gregorian SBM team
meeting as observors. The observations which follow are entirely mine and
I'll rely on everyone who attended to amplify, dispute or correct them.
This was a very good meeting. It stayed on point, but there were lots of
discrete and non-disruptive exchanges of information on the side between two
or three people. Members were very good about making their point quickly and
staying within the scope of the issue on the table, but valuable bits of
information kept coming up spontaneously. The group laughed a lot. It was
focused, informative, interesting, fun. And, it ended on time (of course it
had to).
More than 20 people (excluding us 3) gathered at 8AM. Since Principle Mary
Brennen was late, Connie Doyle opened the meeting, and briskly called for
reports. She allowed limited side comments for information, but headed off
potential distractions smoothly.
Questions on reports were about how one project or initiative connected to
others. There's a summer kindergarten starting in July. Special Ed teachers
have related questions that connect to scheduling and transportation for
summer programs. How does mid-summer school connect to school opening in
Sept? As chair, Connie drew out what was learned from each activity and on
recording the problems and issues for planning the next similar activity.
Important bits of information came out: Emily noted her special ed. group
had found money for buses in the budget (applause). Maureen, as recorder,
takes even more notes than me. She releases trped one-page minutes to all
members and posts them on bulletin boards.
A good deal of the meeting was taken up by a presentation from Ralph Bregard,
seeking Gregorian's participation in a statewide arts integration program
(SPECTRA).
Ralph described kids doing the Dance of the Atoms. ("You're an electron.").
One teacher noted enviously she'd just taught the unit on volumes
lecture-style yesterday: "I was dying up there." Other teachers saw
connections to ideas they already use: multiple intelligences, core
knowledge. Other positive comment: new outlets for kids who don't have art
opportunities, other ways for "restless" kids to shine, new ways for quieter
kids to sharpen seeing, listening and processing. Concerns were about time
resources for training, but the people in the room were looking at ways to
make it work, not obstacles.
The meeting broke up quickly as school opened and a special meeting for all
teachers was set for next week to discuss and decide on the arts program.
I sought out one of the three parents in the room after the meeting. Shawn
Johnson has two young kids at VG. She loves SBM. Although no parent spoke
at this meeting, she says she often does. Teachers and others report from
expertise -- she reports what she observes at home. For instance, her 2nd
grader has poor handwriting, but her kindergartner does better due to
concentration on letterforms in her kindergarten. She was able to share this
with the kindergarten team, which was thinking about easing up on this
element, through SBM.
Another observation: a lot of links to big players in the room. Dept. of Ed
staff, a couple of Brown University people, one of whom works with the Supt.
Search Committee. These people provide critical support, information,
linkage according to Maureen. Competition for attention by these kinds of
participants will grow with SBM.
Thanks to Connie, Maureen and everyone at V. Gregorian School!
2. Maureen's amendments.
Maureen is away this weekend. She asked me to amend her earlier posting on
objectives on her behalf.
A. In Part One add the element of "community partners."
B. In Parts 2 & 3 the practice of "embedded reflection" is critical.
My own ideas on objectives will follow.
Regards,
Jon
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: JWHoward_aol.com
Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 11:34:23 EDT
To: sbm_notaol.com
Subject: [sbm] My objective offerings
Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com
Hello again.
Here are my offered objectives. Given the lack of commitment and movement in
the district, not only to SBM but to any coherent program for change, I
believe we must define big objectives closely aligned to SBM principles and
to the ultimate student performance objectives. I also think that as we
discuss all of the objectives and action steps we not try to solve all
problems. You can't micro-manage autonomy.
We also have latitude to limit our action steps to the short term. Perhaps
focusing on getting the ball rolling in 1999-2000 is more important than
attempting to envision the year 2010 (or even 2001).
Objectives:
1. Make individual school communities the key innovators in efforts to
improve student performance and make classroom teachers the primary actors in
these efforts. (Promote and encourage site-based planning and management.)
2. Empower school communities to choose and quickly implement the teaching
and learning methods and policies that best respond to their student
performance goals.
3. Create and support a management style in schools and the District which
focuses primarily and persistently on support for school-based strategies for
improving student performance.
4. Recognize the school community as the collaborative team of teachers,
students parents, administrators and all others with the interest and
enthusiasm to learn, teach and contribute to the core objective of educating
children.
See you all Tuesday,
Jon
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 12:09:29 -0400
From: "Thomas E. Bacon Jr."
To: sbm_notaol.com
Subject: [sbm] SBM "Action Objectives", T. Bacon
Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com
Hello folks! Here is my "homework" pertaining to SBM's three Action
Objectives:
1. To implement programs and strategies that promote, as well as
improve, Student Performance and Achievement (constant review and
self-evaluation; reflecting on students' scores and how to improve
them).
2. To allow the individual school greater control over budget with
respect to that school's Needs Assessment (i.e.student needs,
community needs, learning styles, professional development, curriculum,
etc.)
3. To secure and maintain Community Partnerships which further enhance
the school's mission, vision, and goals.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: LRSSUCCESS_cs.com
Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 16:31:01 EDT
To: sbm_notaol.com
Subject: [sbm] Objectives
Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com
Team Members:
Sorry for the delay in posting this.
My thoughts fro objectives:
1) Establish a consistent model of leadership throughout the entire
structure of SBM in PSD
2) Establish clear delineation of responsibility and authority between sit
and central admin.
3) Support professional development as necessary for the effective
implementation and perpetuation of SBM at all approved sites.
4) Definition of scope of SBM in Providence school system (percentage of
schools, limits to acceptance, exceptions, etc.)
Hope this helps. Enjoy the weekend and see you Tuesday.
Lou Schmitt
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: "Greg Enos"
To: sbm_notaol.com
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 07:03:54 PDT
Subject: [sbm] May 11 and other thoughts
Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com
Good Monday morning to all...
I have several thoughts this morning:
1. Thank you to all who have contributed to the listserve discussion
concerning objectives. This will help us create the objectives and action
items for the site-based strategy.
2. Our next meeting is Tuesday, May 11, starting at 5:30 p.m. We will
confirm the key objectives, establish sub-teams to draft the language, and
resolve concerns. Please bring your positive energy and open minds.
3. There has been some excellent reporting and research published on the
listserve since last Monday. Please take time to read it.
4. Call me (401-433-7522) if you will be unable to attend the May 11
meeting.
5. Our scheduled meetings:
a. May 11
b. May 17 - sub-teams working on objectives and action items
c. May 18 - final draft work for written report
d. May 24 - videotape session at Hope HS
e. June 8 - Providence School Strategy meeting
Thanks....Greg
_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: JWHoward_aol.com
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 09:36:13 EDT
To: sbm_notaol.com
Subject: [sbm] Fwd: K-12 public schools grantwriting
Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com
Dear friends,
My wife spotted this post to a listserv on fundraising. It's not really SBM,
but I know the teachers among us may be interested.
See you tonight,
Jon
> ----------
> From: Pamela Kress
> Reply To: cfrnet_medicine.wustl.edu
> Sent: Monday, May 10, 1999 1:43 PM
> To: cfrnet_medicine.wustl.edu; Cfrnet_wustl.edu
> Subject: K-12 public schools grantwriting
>
> I have several questions regarding public schools (K-12):
>
> 1. Do any of you work as grantwriters (full- or part-time) for public
> schools?
> 2. If not, do you know if your public school system has a professional
> grantwriter? Full or part time? Do they have a standing committee devoted
> to researching or writing grants?
> 3. If you are a grant writer for a college or university, do you ever
> help your public school system with grant writing? For a fee, or pro bono?
>
> If you have any experience and/or knowledge of how your local schools go
> after state or federal grants, I'm very interested. I have worked with
> our school district once on a grant that involved my college's Education
> Department, and have also lent some help on other grants that did not
> involve us. I'd like to know what others do.
>
> Thanks,
> Pam Kress
>
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 15:12:51 -0700
Reply-To: cfrnet_medicine.wustl.edu
Sender: owner-cfrnet_medicine.wustl.edu
From: Suzanne Marriott
To: "'cfrnet_medicine.wustl.edu'"
Subject: RE: K-12 public schools grantwriting
Pamela,
I write grant proposals for a K-12 district in California. For the
past three years I've done this part time in addition to teaching, but next
year I will be full time in this capacity. We have no standing committee
devoted to researching; I do that in addition to developing programs with
teachers and administrators that meet grant guidelines and researching
grants to fit existing programs. Most of the grants we go for are state
grants. The RFPs usually are sent to the Superintendent, and they get
routed to me. I also subscribe to a few grant newsletters: Grants for
School Districts (Quinlan Publishing Group) and Education Grants Alert
(Aspen Publishers). Our local County Office of Education is another
resource as they have a grants office offering research information on CD,
workshops, etc. They also publish a newsletter called Funding Alert. The
Chronicle of Philanthropy is a good resource for finding information on
private foundations.
Suzanne Marriott
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 12:12:12 -0400 (EDT)
To: sbm_notaol.com
From: Tom Arrison
Subject: [sbm] Fwd: Minutes of 5/3 Meeting from Greg
Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com
SBM Meeting 5/3/99
Attended by: G. Enos, T. Arrison, J. Howard, F. Gorman, L. Schmitt, M.
Kenner, P. Reilly, T. Bacon, P. Tennian, J. Rich, M. Acevedo, C. Doyle.
Dates/Action Items:
5/10 CANCELLED
5/11 discussion of objectives
5/17 Sub Teams draft specific objectives
5/18 FINAL DRAFT due
5/24 video recording of presentation
6/8 Strategy Team _ 9 am to present SBM Strategies
1. Guest Speaker: Phyllis Tennian
Union issues/concerns- SBM is a good vehicle for designing a school
(Teachers and Parents especially). Tough for some teachers to work in
groups, some teachers just want to teach, teacher selection, etc. Union
helped to develop the RFP for SBM and the Language involved to develop the
school's Philosophy and then work towards Program(s). Difficult to define
SBM; it took one year to define it. Assurances are needed from both sides
for any SBM plan and its support. **The children must be kept in their
schools (restricted mobility) because SBM is tailored to those students and
their individual needs (Community needs as well)!! Changes in
administration cause you to "re-educate" these new individuals and this
takes even more time; Also-original assurances may not be followed through
because of this "administrative turnover". Parameters were set between the
central admini- stration and the SBM schools (**SEE LAB DOCUMENT pages 5 &
6: "Administrative/Central Office Parameters"). Every year there has to be
a review , evaluation/assessment---Were the goals and objectives met? and
How can we meet and/or improve on those next year? The "Job Model" as it
stands under SBM allows those teachers/staff/principals to "opt out" and
work at another school if that individual's personal teaching philosophy
does not reflect and/or adhere to the SBM model and that school's
philosophy/program. Parents Making a Difference can assist with any
information dissemina-
tion. SBM is a "culture". Union will assist if "management" (central
office admin.) wants to move towards SBM, the PTU obviously cannot advocate
it or not…the union does not decide/prescribe program. Needs are not
static, be wary of what each school/program needs and the resources to
implement. Building Principal is key and his/her balance between empowering
and leading. SBM forces one to critically view him/herself and the school.
There are possibly 4 schools ready to become SBM. There are plenty of
prototypes to examine. SBM needs to be implemented quickly or it may phase
out. Although there is a re-commitment to SBM, there will not be 20 or even
15 schools who are SBM by 2001 (or even 2005). Any language affecting
contractual language and work environment; National Labor Relations Board
has advised that 51 percent of labor force must agree by vote. SBM Team at
the school must be able t interview EVERY individual who works at that
school
(custodial staff, teacher assistants, clerical, etc.).
2. Strategy and Objectives: Review of language and draft(s)
BY 5/18 we will have decided by consensus, the strategy , the number
of objectives, and the action items under each objective.
**MUST BE "PRESCRIPTIVE" IN WHAT WE SAY!!
**PLEASE consider and post to the list serv your recommended objectives by
noon Friday (5/7/99)!!
3. Next Meeting: ***MEETING DATE CHANGED TO 5/11/99 (TUES.) Time= 5:30 -
8:30? Please be at the school dept. 5 minutes early.
4.Amendment to Minutes of April 12, 1999 Team Meeting:
The team decided to amend the minutes of the April 12 meeting to
change 2 references to "voting", to reflect the Team's decision to
operate by consensus. [Changes made to website and listserv archive
on 5/11/99 - Tom Arrison]
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: MFKenner_aol.com
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 22:08:26 EDT
To: sbm_notaol.com
Subject: Re: [sbm] Fwd: Minutes of 5/3 Meeting from Greg
Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com
Please note for the attendance Maureen Kenner and Connie Doyle were also
present at the May 3 meeting. Thanks.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 00:19:12 -0400 (EDT)
To: sbm_notaol.com
From: Tom Arrison
Subject: [sbm] Power-Empowerment Action Items
Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com
Here are the proposed Action Items that were assigned -- or
should I say "adhered" -- to the "Power-Empowerment" sub-team,
Fran Gorman and Tom Arrison.
All are welcomed -- nay, encouraged -- to submit new ones, to
suggest transfers between this group and the other three, and
to submit explanatory remarks and/or amendments to any of these
fifteen:
1. Determine how to evaluate the implementation process of SBM at
each site. 3/1/2000
2. Identify which "services" will continue to be performed at
central admin. for all school sites.
3. Require SBM certification process to flow from demonstrated
achievement through SIT process rather than focus on paper-
based application.
4. Establish how decisions will be made at each school. 1/1/2000
5. School budget will be aligned with teaching and learning.
( Adequate flexibility with $ )
6. Determine the roles of Central Office in supporting SBM at each
site by 1/1/2000.
7. District will (Date: 99-00 school year) pilot "Delegation Conferences":
1 with one of two existing SBM schools
1 with new applicant, with process included in their application
8. Create master plan with goals, objectives and outcomes targets
for school consideration relative to SBM by 8/99.
9. Determine if there are any school sites where SBM will not be
applied.
10. Align admin and teachers around leadership and success
indicators by 6/2000
11. Reconstitute SBM Technical Review Committee by 8/1/99
12. Committee Nomination: Self-Nomination to SIT?
13. Contributor is "contracted" for a "term" (1 yr., 2 yrs. ???)
determined by SIT and individual school's needs.
14. Central Office must adhere to and administer background checks
(BCI) on said persons.
15. U/B SBMTSC will (by DATE: __/__ ) consider modifying the
"Application" (RFP) to include:
"A plan to allow parents to select their own representatives
on SBM teams."
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 00:30:14 -0400 (EDT)
To: sbm_notaol.com
From: Tom Arrison
Subject: Re: [sbm] Fwd: Minutes of 5/3 Meeting from Greg
Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com
At 10:08 PM 5/11/99 EDT, Maureen Kenner wrote:
>Please note for the attendance Maureen Kenner and Connie Doyle were also
>present at the May 3 meeting. Thanks.
Hi, Maureen,
You were shown as present in the minutes as posted.
The minutes on the website and in the listserv archive
have already been amended to show the presence of
Connie (sorry, Connie) and the absence of Martha Torrance.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: JWHoward_aol.com
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 08:15:28 EDT
To: sbm_notaol.com
Subject: [sbm] Draft SBM action items "Information"
Reply-To: sbm_notaol.com
Proposed (draft) action steps - May 11, 1999
Grouped under
"Information"
- Develop critical indicators for successful educational change by 10/99.
- Create process to involve community - parents, students teachers,
administration and staff - in SBM by 8/99.
- Publish application/recertification process by 7