BEYOND THE TALK: TAKING ACTION to EDUCATE EVERY …Without a district of highly engaged and joyful...

BEYOND THE TALK:

TAKING ACTION

to EDUCATE EVERY CHILD NOW

Working Draft

for the Board of Education May 8, 2008

BEYOND THE TALK: TAKING ACTION to EDUCATE EVERY CHILD NOW

1

“The San Francisco Unified School District sees the

achievement gap as the greatest social justice/civil rights

issue facing our country today; there cannot be justice for

all without closing this gap.”

Carlos A. Garcia

Superintendent, SFUSD

I. INTRODUCTION

The mission of the San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) is to provide each

student with an equal opportunity to succeed by promoting intellectual growth, creativity,

self-discipline, cultural and linguistic sensitivity, democratic responsibility, economic

competence, and physical and mental health so that each student can achieve his or her

maximum potential.

As described in our mission, we are committed to helping every student maximize her

or his potential while increasing the achievement of already high performing students and

dramatically accelerating the achievement of those who are currently less academically

successful. The ideas and actions described in this plan are focused on one main idea:

every child has the right to be well-educated. Currently, no urban education system in

the United States fulfills this fundamental right. The political, emotional, technical and

strategic work necessary to create a system of high quality schools that prepare every

student for full and meaningful community participation in our 21st century global world

is one of our country’s greatest challenges. In San Francisco, a progressive city that

holds itself in high regard as a political and intellectual leader, we exhibit some of the

deepest racial, socio-economic and linguistic inequities in the United States.

For seven consecutive years San Francisco public schools have delivered a greater

percentage of students to academic proficiency levels than any other large urban district


2

in California. At the same time, the district’s achievement gap, the discrepancy between

the academic proficiency of students by race, ethnicity, class and language, has continued

to widen. This discrepancy is often referred to as the achievement gap. For far too long

demographics, specifically the socio-economic, linguistic and racial backgrounds of our

children, have often closely correlated to their success in school. We refer to this

historical trend as the “predictive power of demographics.”

Closing this unacceptable achievement gap will require significant changes in our

capacity to teach culturally and linguistically diverse students effectively. These changes

demand that we relinquish pretense and embrace the simple truth that we all have to learn

how to do this work better: from the Board Room to the classroom. The actions

described in our plan require each one of us in the SFUSD to recognize our strengths,

identify our areas of growth, and take full responsibility for diminishing the predictive

power of demographics on academic and social outcomes.

In the process of creating the District Scorecard, our long range plan for SFUSD, we

have listened to years of community input and analyzed a wide range of data. In a recent

series of community conversations around the Student Enrollment, Recruitment and

Retention Plan (SERR) co-led by SFUSD, the San Francisco Education Fund, Parents for

Public Schools, the Parents Advisory Council, and other community leaders, we heard

from almost one thousand parents and students from all parts of the city. They told us

that quality schools are defined by engaging and challenging material, caring and

committed teachers, strong and visible leaders, and instruction modified to meet each


3

child’s needs. They told us that the district needed to share a proactive, clear and long-

term plan for how we will assure that every school is a quality school. We agree.

We invite you to consider this plan, the District Scorecard, and we hope that it

reflects your greatest aspirations. As called for by a unanimous vote of the School Board

on April 22, 2008, with fantastic community support, in Resolution no.82-26A1,

“Closing the Achievement Gap in SFUSD,” our District Scorecard is transparent,

measurable, and rooted in a deep understanding of where we are and where we must go –

THIS IS OUR CALL TO ACTION. From this point forward you will see our progress

every step of the way as we strive to keep our promises to students and families to engage

high achieving and joyful learners, and make social justice a reality.

II. STRATEGIC PLAN SUMMARY

Problem Statement – Two Competing Truths

San Francisco has the highest average student performance of the large urban districts in

California and the widest gap between the district average and the lowest performing

students.


4


5

Table 1: Two Competing Truths

Academ

ic Perform

ance Index (2006) by subgroups in California’s largest urban districts. Color codes highlight highest and second-

highest perform

ing subgroups in blue and lowest and second-lowest perform

ing subgroups in orange.

District

Average

African

American

American

Indian

Asian

Filipino Hispanic Pacific

Islander

White

Socio-

Economically

Disadvantaged

English

Learner

Disabled

San Francisco Unified 753

576

687

841

747

643

634

838

720

717

515

San Diego Unified

731

658

759

818

812

658

743

830

669

630

539

Long Beach Unified

722

658

752

787

828

688

693

831

685

662

486

Sacramento City

Unified

706

629

684

753

790

662

668

783

668

666

482

Fresno Unified

658

609

679

671

782

630

737

763

631

606

433

Los Angeles Unified

655

606

684

846

797

630

696

807

635

606

457

Oakland Unified

651

599

683

766

725

608

594

881

625

622

468

San Bernardino City

Unified

634

598

656

758

809

622

621

713

616

601

497

California

721

635

691

847

808

656

714

801

654

637

518


6

Solution – Addressing the Root Causes

There are no immediate or simple solutions to remedy the historic injustices

described above. However, by incorporating years of community input, taking an honest

look at where we now stand, holding numerous conversations with key partners, and

building partnerships to share the work, we believe we have a plan of action that

immediately begins to address the root causes of the existing achievement gap. To

increase the achievement of ALL groups of students and dramatically accelerate the

achievement of targeted groups of students (African-American, English Learner, Latino,

Pacific Islander, Samoan, and Special Education students) we are focused on three areas:

Access and Equity, Achievement, and Accountability.

ACCESS & EQUITY

We believe access and equity are at the heart of making social justice a reality.

The politics and ideology of social justice are empty without daily actions that improve

the living and learning conditions for the children of San Francisco. Do our teachers

have a broad range of teaching styles and skills to draw on; are they fully aware of

current research on human development; do they know their content deeply; and are they

able to know all groups of students, including our target groups (African-American,

English Learner, Latino, Pacific Islander, Samoan, and Special Education students) while

also knowing the unique gifts and talents of the individual? Our answer has to be YES,

YES, YES, YES! We must create an organization that ensures every student has access


7

to these capable teachers, and we must be an organization that knows and supports

teachers. Authentic access and equity will exist when our families, students and teachers

report that they are clear about what is expected and have the support they need to meet

those expectations.

ACHIEVEMENT

Without a district of highly engaged and joyful learners we will have failed to live

our mission. Our picture of achievement is every student graduating college and career

path ready and fully prepared with the skills/capacities required for successful 21st

century citizenship. We must create learning environments in our schools, and

throughout our city, that foster caring and innovation so that our students are prepared to

transform our world, rather than accept the status quo and existing inequities.

ACCOUNTABILITY

We believe accountability for the work described in our plan requires personal

commitment. We will keep our promises to students and families and enlist everyone in

the community to join us in doing so. In an age of testing, measuring, and mandating,

San Francisco Unified School District is calling for relational accountability. While we

will continue to lead the country in our use and development of thoughtful metrics, we

are equally committed to developing new relationships that put students, families and

community at the center and ask us to keep pretense, personal agendas and egos to the


8

side. We are striving for the genuine accountability you feel when you promise someone

you love that you will do something that is important to her or him.

IMPLEMENTATION - EVERYONE TAKING INITIATIVE

To begin the mammoth undertaking of school, district, and community

transformation we have three discrete initiatives to organize our efforts. We know we

need to increase the personal and professional capacity of every employee in SFUSD.

We believe all our work must be equity-centered. And we are determined to transform

our curriculum in order to truly prepare our students for today and tomorrow.

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT INITIATIVE

Building on the idea that everyone, from students to the superintendent, must have

sufficient resources, information, and support to have efficacy in their endeavors, SFUSD

is designing and implementing a comprehensive system of performance management that

will lead to a culture of leadership in support of our District Scorecard. The performance

management initiative will focus our conversations on District Scorecard data – so that

all staff know and understand their role in supporting student achievement, are provided

the support and professional development required for success in their roles, and have

voice and power in adjusting the plan over time. Our initial phase of work is increasing

the leadership capacity of district managers to support and manage staff and to ensure the

high quality implementation of the site, department and district level scorecards.


9

EQUITY-CENTERED PROFESSIONAL LEARNING INITIATIVE

Creating and sustaining professional learning communities is essential to the

pursuit of equity in our classrooms, our schools and our district. Board members, staff,

students, families and our partners need to ask hard questions, look honestly at

inequitable practices and policies, hold ourselves accountable like we would with those

we care most about, and embrace the uncertainties and tensions inevitably involved in

equity-centered change. This initiative will increase equity-centered conditions and

structures within SFUSD so that we can deliberately and explicitly challenge all forms of

inequity, learn from each other, and celebrate our accomplishments.

21st CENTURY CURRICULUM INITIATIVE

From straight-A students to students who are pushed out of the education system,

what we’re teaching is not keeping pace with our kids' aspirations. We are educating

children to a world that doesn’t exist anymore. Learning a second or third language is

required in other countries like China, where students often begin language study in

elementary school. Will all of our students be prepared to address the deepest social and

political issues facing our country if we don’t change what we are teaching our schools?

Will all of our students be as prepared to work with people from other countries or to

open businesses abroad?

San Francisco and the American public recognize the urgency to move our education

system into the 21st century. We must better prepare all of our students to succeed in and

shape an increasingly competitive world, one already divided by socio-economics,


10

language, and race. Our district can not accomplish this work with a 20th century

education model that uses a one-size-fits-all approach to learning, offers a diluted and

narrow curriculum, and tests students using limited assessment systems like those found

under No Child Left Behind.

SFUSD believes a 21st century education should build on a foundation of

personalized, relevant learning that is meaningful and engaging for each student. We

know our students must learn from and collaborate with diverse peers of different races,

religions and origins. For truly socially conscious and globally competitive students, we

must also embed 21st century learning, such as technology literacy and critical and

creative thinking skills, in all the subjects that compose this broader, more rigorous

curriculum.

III. PROCESS OVERVIEW

Community Input & Key Data that informed this plan

The goals and objectives of “Beyond the Talk” build on a seven year legacy of

strong planning that resulted in steady academic performance growth for all groups of

students. Former superintendent Arlene Ackerman instituted the five year “Excellence for

All” plan in 2000, which made important improvements to the ways that school site

budgets were developed, using Weighted Student Formula site-based budgeting.

“Excellence for All” also spearheaded the creation of the Dream and STAR schools

initiatives for closing the achievement gap at low-performing schools. These initiatives


11

yielded improved academic performance in the aggregate though seldom at the rate of

acceleration needed to raise overall performance and close the wide gap in achievement.

Also during this time, the district began a Secondary School Redesign Initiative.

In 2001, the District convened task forces to address the fact that San Francisco’s middle

schools and high schools fail to adequately serve a large proportion of our students.

Identifying significant concerns with achievement, attendance, dropout rates, graduation

rates, college going rates and other indicators of student success, these broad-based task

forces developed research-based guiding principles for change and articulated four key

elements of success for secondary students.

The four key elements that grew out of the Secondary School Redesign Initiative

established the basis for creating new, and improving existing, secondary schools:

• Personalization. Schools need to create learning communities in which students are

known by all adults.

• Academic Rigor. All students need access to a rigorous academic curriculum and high

quality instruction, based on content and performance standards.

• Opportunities to Apply Learning. All students need to have learning in context and to

have academic learning linked with preparation for post-secondary education and for a

high-skill economy.

• Access to Powerful Teaching. Schools must create environments that allow well-

prepared teachers to continually reflect on and improve their practice.

The SSRI sought to create schools characterized by these elements of success, in order to

meet five goals:

• Increase choices for families and provide effective schools where students need them

• Improve student achievement: raise the bar and close the gap

• Increase student engagement


12

• Increase community and stakeholder support

• Transform central office to be a service center

We are continuing these efforts and building on this strong foundation with our District

Scorecard.

In March of 2006, during interim superintendent Gwen Chan’s tenure, the Board

of Education called for a new long range planning process called the Student Enrollment

and Recruitment (SERR) Initiative to support closing the achievement gap, provide all

students equitable access to high-quality education in integrated learning environments,

and sustain and build student enrollment to strengthen the district’s fiscal condition.

The district, in partnership with the San Francisco Education Fund, the Parent

Advisory Committee to the Board of Education and Parents for Public Schools, led a

community engagement initiative to understand the values, hopes and goals of the San

Francisco community in relation to public schools. These conversations about public

schools happened in a different way than most previous community input sessions; they

took place in small intimate groups of 8 to 15 people in every corner of the city with

racially and linguistically diverse participants reflective of both the diversity of our

schools and our city (insert chart of SERR participant demographics). The input of the

900 parents, students and community members who took part in the SERR community

conversations has also been an important foundation for the development of “Beyond the

Talk.”

In August 2007, at the beginning of Superintendent Carlos Garcia’s tenure, the

superintendent and Board of Education convened to set shared priorities for the district.

At these retreats the Board and superintendent unanimously agreed that student


13

achievement, and specifically, closing the achievement gap while continuing to elevate

the performance of all students, was the most important focus for the district for the next

five years.

Community recommendations gathered over the last seven years, current district

metrics on student achievement and retention, and the bold vision of the current Board of

Education have all played an important role in shaping the goals, objectives and

initiatives of the District Scorecard.

The BSC (cascading, specific, measurable, goal owners)

When the district set out to create the framework that will guide our future work

over the next five years, we chose a different strategy than was used in the past. We

wanted to ensure that we didn’t create a plan that was only read once and then placed on

a shelf to collect dust. We wanted a plan that was visionary enough that we could stay

focused on our goals over the long haul while still having enough flexibility to

incorporate ongoing feedback. “The Balanced Scorecard,” is a framework for translating

strategy into action developed by Robert Norton and David Kaplan (1996). In order to

create and sustain a district of high quality schools we needed a plan to guide our

strategic investment in our people, our systems and our procedures. Our aspiration is to

develop the self-sufficiency and optimism in SFUSD that will ensure that we continue to

meet new challenges as our schools and our city change and grow. We wanted to

develop a clear plan that uses multiple measures of our progress that is easily updated and

accessible to the whole community.


14

Finally, and most importantly, we wanted a plan that would hold each and every

individual in our schools and community accountable for creating the best outcomes for

children. That is why we chose the Balanced Scorecard, a strategic management system

that translates vision into specific metrics. The district is in the first phase of a multi-year

effort to create new systems centered on the three primary goals of this plan. Within the

year, each district stakeholder group, from the Board of Education to individual school

sites, will have a scorecard. We are calling this the cascading process; every part of the

organization creating a scorecard that describes their share of the work to achieve our

desired outcomes. The Board of Education Scorecard (BSC 1) is the compass for the

district, it sets the overall direction. The District Scorecard (BSC 2) is the map for

district administrators; it has the same measures as the BOE Scorecard plus additional

measures that will serve as a day-to-day guide.

These two scorecards are just the first step. The most important scorecards are at

the school site level. The School Site Scorecards are where each school community will

describe their goals, objectives and initiatives. Over the next year, the district will work

with staff, students, families and community to create shared understanding of our efforts

and to develop the systems necessary to support each school community. This work is at

the heart of the central office becoming a true service organization.

The School Quality, Equity and Access Matrix

Across the nation and especially in San Francisco, there is a trend for some

groups of students to perform better on standardized tests and to graduate from high


15

school more prepared to pursue college and careers of choice than other groups of

students. The San Francisco Unified School District believes our success should be

determined by our ability to increase the current achievement of all groups of students

and to dramatically accelerate the achievement of targeted groups of students who are

currently less academically successful.

Therefore, with the implementation of our strategic plan, we will measure school

quality, and overall district performance, in a new way: how well each school serves each

and every student based on that school’s ability to disrupt the historically predictive

power of racial, ethnic, linguistic and socio-economic student attributes.

The School Quality, Equity, and Access Matrix provides a simple visual model of

complex data to assist families, school sites and district policy-makers in exploring

important differences among the district’s schools. The matrix reveals trends and

practices worth celebrating and will direct intervention with greater accuracy on behalf of

its lowest performers. The more precisely an intervention addresses a school’s individual

needs and builds on its strengths, the more effectively available resources are utilized and

the greater the chances of creating sustained improvement in student outcomes.

To date, the assessment of student performance is anchored in the absolute

performance of schools and districts on the California STAR tests, known as the

Academic Performance Index (API). While setting and monitoring the state’s standards

and goals, the API offers only limited intelligence on how to reach higher performance

levels through targeted interventions and supports.


16

A second dimension of school performance is measured through the Equity and

Access Matrix – relative peer-to-peer performance –and provides a much needed

complementary perspective. This dimension is captured by benchmark analytics that

adjust statistically for each school’s demographic context and other starting conditions. In

doing so, benchmarks level the playing field for meaningful school-to-school

comparisons.

Truly meaningful school-to-

school comparisons distinguish those

low performers that have least

managed to disrupt the historically

predictive power of socio-economic

student attributes – and, on the upside,

to pinpoint even among low

performers the emerging lighthouses

that are beating the district trend by a

wide margin.

The figure on the right illustrates

the space of strategic categories spanned

by these two dimensions of absolute

performance and relative benchmarks.

Each data point in this chart represents a

SFUSD school.

SFUSD Matrix: Shown are all SFUSD Elementary

Schools in a preliminary illustration. The top-to-bottom

scale represents the schools’ performance on California

State standards tests at a given grade level. The left-to-

right benchmark gaps represent the degree to which a

school has managed to positively disrupt the predictive

power of the demographic variables that are monitored in

the School Equity and Access Matrix. Highlighted is the

performance of two schools with similar proportions of

English Learners and students with Free or Reduced

Lunch – two highly predictive variables – but with

drastically different relative as well as absolute outcomes.


17

The top-to-bottom benchmark gaps represent the school’s performance on California

Standards Tests (CSTs). The left-to-right benchmark gaps represent the degree to which

a school has managed to positively disrupt the predictive power of its starting conditions.

Imagine being able to “play a movie,” in which progress can be measured over

time, from district-wide performance, right down to individual schools. Trends will

become more visible, and practices that are having a positive effect will become more

evident. As we learn what’s working well we’ll share it broadly with our whole

community.

That is what we at SFUSD intend to do: shed light on and multiply the best

practices in our midst – the schools that are beating the odds for every student regardless

of race, ethnicity, economic status, disability, English language status, parental education,

migrant status or gender.

IV. Appendices

A. The Board of Education Stakeholder Scorecard

The Board of Education Scorecard (BSC 1) is the compass for the district, it sets

the overall direction. The BSC 1 must be approved and adopted by the Board of

Education before district leaders finalize the district level, department and school site

scorecards and implement the strategic plan.


18

B. Current Baseline Data

The district has been using data to inform its work for many years. The objectives

in the Scorecard will require SFUSD to create several more measures. This chart outlines

the measures contained in both the Board of Education Stakeholder and the District

Scorecards for which we already have current baseline data.

C. Work plan & Milestones (still in development)

One, three, and five year work targets are essential components to any high quality

strategic plan. It is imperative that we both know where we’re going and how we will get

there. Through doing the work described here, we will create the public schools that all

San Francisco’s children, families, and communities deserve.

D. Glossary of Terms (still in development)

The District Scorecard is a school district tool to assist in our redesign efforts. The

contents were developed by education professionals in partnership with community

stakeholders. Some of the language in the plan is specific to education and may be

difficult for people who have not studied or worked in the field of education to

understand. This glossary attempts to define some of the terms contained in this

document to make the work more accessible to the whole community.


19

San Francisco Unified




School District

School District

School District

School District

Board of Education

Stakeholder Scorecard*

DRAFT

* See baseline & target measures Appendix B

Last Updated: May 5, 2008

Objective

Measure

Base-

Line

2008-

2009

Target

/

Actual

2009-

2010

Target

/

Actual

2010-

2011

Target

/

Actual

2011-

2012

Initiative

Budget

Statu

s

Owner

1.1)Diminish the historic

power of demographics

Diminish the predictive

power of all demographic

data on high and equitable

student achievement by

increasing the

achievement of all groups

of students and

dramatically accelerating

the achievement of

targeted groups of

students (African-

American, English

Language Learners,

Latino, Pacific Islanders,

Samoan, Special

Education)

�Be California’s highest perform

ing

district in school quality, equity, and

access as measured by the District

Matrix

�Reduce and elim

inate variability in

achievement between the district’s

highest and lowest perform

ing

subgroups at all levels and content

areas as measured by the District

Matrix

Equity centered

professional learning

Tony

Smith

Goal #1: Access and Equity

Make social justice a reality

5/05/2008

2SFUSD Stakeholder Scorecard

Objective

Measure

Base-

Line

2008-

2009

Target

/

Actual

2009-

2010

Target

/

Actual

2010-

2011

Target

/

Actual

2011-

2012

Initiative

Budget

Statu

s

Owner

1.2) Center professional

learning on equity

Create equity centered


communities, networks,

and communities of

practice within and across

schools and central office

to anchor the discussion,

learning, and actions

related to District Matrix

analysis and school

improvement plans.

The core outcomes of this

objective are students that

reflect high levels of

engagement, self-efficacy,

and effort optimism and

staff that reflect high levels

of personal and

professional efficacy.

�Completion of framework and

training for district wide equity

centered professional learning within

schools, among schools, and around

instructional needs (professional

learning communities, professional

learning school networks, and

communities of practice)

�Completion of common protocols

for quarterly reviews of Matrix

analysis

�Percentage of staff that reflect high

levels of personal and professional

efficacy as m

easured by TBD

�Percentage of students, by

subgroup and level, who report high

levels of engagement, self-efficacy,

and effort optimism

Equity centered


Tony

Smith



5/05/2008


Objective

Measure

Base-

Line

2008-

2009

Target

/

Actual

2009-

2010

Target

/

Actual

2010-

2011

Target

/

Actual

2011-

2012

Initiative

Budget

Statu

s

Owner

1.3) Create an

environment for

students to flourish

Create a safe, affirming,

and enriched environment

for participatory and

inclusive learning for every

group of students

�Percentage of schools that are

safe, secure, and attractive as

measured by feedback of staff,

students, and parents


subgroup, who report having caring

and supportive relationships with

adults and peers in school

�Percentage of parents, by

subgroup, who report that their

culture and language is recognized

and respected in schools


subgroup, who report that their

culture and language is recognized

and respected in schools

•Percentage of students, by

subgroup, who report that they are

included in school and classroom

decision-m

aking

•Percentage of parents, by

subgroup, who report that they are

included in school decision-m

aking

Equity centered


Tony

Smith



5/05/2008


Objective

Measure

Base-

Line

2008-

2009

Target

/

Actual

2009-

2010

Target

/

Actual

2010-

2011

Target

/

Actual

2011-

2012

Initiative

Budget

Statu

s

Owner

1.3) Create an

environment for

students to flourish

Create a safe, affirming,

and enriched environment

for participatory and

inclusive learning for every

group of students

�Number of schools that parents,

families, students, and community

feel safe attending and participating

in activities from very early in the

morning to very late at night

�Reduction in disparate impact on all

subgroups of suspensions,

expulsions, transfers, County and

court school attendance, and

participation in honors and/or AP

classes

�Number of schools that reflect and

build on students’language,

cultures, and lived experiences and

that provide access to resources

that close the access and

achievement gaps, including the

digital divide

�Percentage of schools that are fully

integrated racially, ethnically and

socio economically as m

easured by

TBD

Equity centered


Tony

Smith



5/05/2008


Objective

Measure

Base-

Line

2008-

2009

Target

/

Actual

2009-

2010

Target

/

Actual

2010-

2011

Target

/

Actual

2011-

2012

Initiative

Budget

Statu

s

Owner

1.4) Provide the

infrastructure for

successful learning

Develop and support a

school environment that

ensures safe access to

environmentally sound,

high quality schools with

the technological

infrastructure to reduce the

digital divide

�Percentage of schools that meet

the local definition for

environmentally sound buildings

�Percentage of schools that operate

at environmentally sound capacity

standards

�Percentage of SFUSD teachers

with a district supplied laptop that is

functional and has current software

�Percentage of SFUSD students

with a district supplied laptop that is

functional and has current software

�Percentage of schools that meet or

exceed district standards for safe,

secure, and attractive schools

�Percentage of schools that are

ADA accessible

Equity centered


Tony

Smith



5/05/2008


Ob

ject

ive

Mea

sure

Bas

e-

Lin

e

Tar

get

/

Act

ual

2009

-

2010

Tar

get

/

Act

ual

2010

-

2011

Tar

get

/

Act

ual

2011

-

2012

Init

iati

veB

ud

get

Sta

tus

Ow

ner

2.1)

Au

then

tic

lear

nin

g

for

ever

y st

ud

ent

Stude

nts will m

eet o

r

exceed SFUSD grade

level standards in all core

curriculum

areas

(lang

uage arts/literacy,

mathe

matics, scien

ce,

history/social scien

ce,

world languages,

visual/perform

ing arts)

�Percentage of students (by subgroup, level and

content area) who com

plete the year mee

ting or

exceed

ing grade level standards as mea

sured by

SFUSD perform

ance assessm

ents

�Percentage of Star Schoo

ls with a positive

benchm

ark gap as measured by the District

Matrix

�Percentage of Dream

Schoo

ls with a positive

benchm

ark gap as m

easured by the District

Matrix

�Num

ber and pe

rcen

tage of schools exiting

Program

Improvem

ent S

tatus

�Num

ber and pe

rcen

tage of schools who

have

frozen their Program

Improvem

ent status

�Num

ber and pe

rcen

tage of schools entering

Program

Improvem

ent status

�Num

ber and pe

rcen

tage of students who drop

out of schoo

l between grades 6-12

2007

-08: 7.8%

2006

-07: 7.4%

2005

-06: 21.2%

2007

-08: 38.5%

2006

-07: 22.2%

2005

-06: 21.2%

2007

-08: 11.5%

2006

-07: 11.1%

2005

-06: 9.1%

2007

-08: 2.5% (to 4/15)

2006

-07: 1.7%

2005

-06: 1.7%

2004

-05: 1.7%

21stcentury

curriculum

initiative

Francisca

San

chez

Goal #2: Student Achievement

Engage high achieving and joyful learners

5/05/2008


Ob

ject

ive

Mea

sure

Bas

e-

Lin

e

Tar

get

/

Act

ual

2009

-

2010

Tar

get

/

Act

ual

2010

-

2011

Tar

get

/

Act

ual

2011

-

2012

Init

iati

veB

ud

get

Sta

tus

Ow

ner

2.2)

Pre

par

e th

e ci

tize

ns

of

tom

orr

ow

Graduate all students

college

and

career path

ready and prepared with

the skills/capa

cities

require

d for successful

21stCentury citizenship

(academic com

petence;

technological fluency;

crea

tive/critical/inn

ovative

thinking

, rea

soning

, and

solution seeking; high

level m

ulti-mod

al

commun

ication skills;

environm

ental, civic, and

social respo

nsibility;

strength of cha

racter, high

level

multilingu

al/m

ulticultural

skills; aesthetic

sensibility;

collabo

rative/team

orientations)

�Num

ber and pe

rcen

tage of students, by

subg

roup, w

ho are accepted at four-yea

r

college

s, universities, o

r other accred

ited post-

secondary institutions

�Num

ber and pe

rcen


subg

roup, w

ho attend

four-yea

r college

s,

universities, or other accredited post-seconda

ry

institutions

�Num

ber and pe

rcen


subg

roup, w

ho com

plete four-year college

s,

universities, or other accredited post-seconda

ry

institutions within six yea

rs

�Num

ber and pe

rcen

tage of students taking the

PSAT

�Num

ber and pe

rcen

tage of students who have

taken the SAT and scored at or above 500 on

the

math and verbal subtests durin

g their high school

career

�Num

ber and pe

rcen

tage of students who have

taken at least one AP cou

rse and scored

3 or

better du

ring their high

school caree

r

2007

-08: 13%

2007

: 33.9%

(N = 950)

2006

: 37.2%

(N = 1080)

AP Enrl

AP Exam

2007

: 16.1%

11.3%

2006

: 15.7%

11.0%

2005

: 15.5%

10.8%

21stcentury

curriculum

initiative

Francisca

San

chez



5/05/2008


Objective

Measure

Base-

Line

Target

/

Actual

2009-

2010

Target

/

Actual

2010-

2011

Target

/

Actual

2011-

2012

Initiative

BudgetStatu

s

Owner

2.3) Learning beyond the

classroom

Foster, encourage,

support, and fund

opportunities for students

to engage in their school,

community, and larger

world in ways that support

maximum identity

investm

ent and cognitive

emotional engagement

�Number and percentage of

students regularly engaged in

defining, describing, and shaping an

empowering and joyful school

experience


students participating in at least two

community service events per year


students who are enrolled in courses

and have their talents (academic,

artistic, athletic, social) showcased

in venues outside of SFUSD


students who have a SFUSD

sponsored international experience

�Number and percentage student

who vote in their local student

government elections


students who report having at least

five positive adult relationships in

their life


students participating in district

activities outside the regular school

day

21stcentury

curriculum initiative

Francisca

Sanchez



5/05/2008


Objective

Measure

Base-

Line

2008-

2009

Target

/

Actual

2009-

2010

Target

/

Actual

2010-

2011

Target

/

Actual

2011-

2012

Initiative

Budget

Statu

s

Owner

3.1) Provide direction

and strategic leadership

Establish an accountability

system for all stakeholders

that aligns all policies,

practices, and

programs/staff evaluations

to SFUSD’sstrategic goals

and objectives so that the

promise to educate every

student well is honored

�Completion of milestones for

development and implementation of

a district wide perform

ance

management system based upon

the goals, objectives, and m

easures

of BSC 2 and subsequent

scorecards (starting with senior

leadership)

�Date of quarterly status report of

BSC1 to include student

achievement, operations, human

resources, professional

development, and community

engagement

�Date of annual review and

percentage of BSC 1 targets m

et as

the foundation for the school board’s

evaluation

�Date of annual review and

percentage of BSC 2 targets m

et as

the foundation for the

superintendent’s evaluation

�Percentage of board agenda items

and time spent directly related to

BSC 1

Perform

ance

management

initiative

Myong

Leigh

Goal #3: Accountability

Keep our promises to students and families

5/05/2008

10

SFUSD Stakeholder Scorecard

Objective

Measure

Base-

Line

2008-

2009

Target

/

Actual

2009-

2010

Target

/

Actual

2010-

2011

Target

/

Actual

2011-

2012

Initiative

Budget

Statu

s

Owner

3.2) Create the culture of

service and support

�Percentage of students rating

teachers, principals, and schools as

effective and supportive of their

academic and social advancement

�Percentage of principals rating

central office as responsive and

supportive

�Percentage of principals who report

that leadership development

enhanced their ability to improve

classroom instruction

�Percentage of teachers who report

that professional development

enhanced their ability to improve

student achievement

�Percentage of teachers rating

principals as responsive and

supportive

�Number and percent of parents

rating the culture of schools and

district as supportive and service

oriented

�Percentage of parents signing a

parent compact and attending at

least one parent conference

Perform

ance

management

initiative

Myong

Leigh



5/05/2008

11


Objective

Measure

Base-

Line

2008-

2009

Target

/

Actual

2009-

2010

Target

/

Actual

2010-

2011

Target

/

Actual

2011-

2012

Initiative

Budget

Statu

s

Owner

3.2) Create the culture of

service and support

�Percentage of community based

organization programs rated as

highly effective in supporting

SFUSD’sstrategic goals and

objectives by principals, school staff,

students, and families

�Percentage of programs that have

been evaluated on a three-year

cycle for their impact on student

achievement

Perform

ance

management

initiative

Myong

Leigh



5/05/2008

12


Appen

dix

B

1

Baseline and Target Measures for District Scorecard

These are the measures currently being assessed and baseline data is available.

Goal 2 (Student Achievement) Only

Measure

Definition

Baseline data

Per

centa

ge

of

10

th g

rade

studen

ts w

ho p

ass

the

CA

HS

EE

.

Source:

CD

E c

om

bin

ed r

esult

s fo

r gra

de

10.

CD

E n

um

ber

s use

d in A

YP

. L

ooks

at S

pri

ng

test

off

erin

gs

for

10

th g

rade.

Dif

fere

nt th

an

Ach

ievem

ent A

sses

smen

t re

port

whic

h looks

at 1

0th g

rader

s but m

ay h

ave

resu

lts

for

the

pre

vio

us

yea

r.

Feb

/Mar

/May 2

007: E

LA

: 75%

M

ath: 81%

Feb

/Mar

/May 2

006: E

LA

: 74%

M

ath: 76%

Feb

/Mar

/May 2

005: E

LA

: 76%

M

ath: 80%

Per

centa

ge

of

studen

ts w

ho lea

ve

SFU

SD

bet

wee

n g

rades

6-1

2 a

nd a

re c

oded

as

dro

pouts

.

Source:

RP

A S

um

mar

y R

eport

for

Sch

ool

Dro

pouts

.

Note:

Lea

ve

codes

hav

e gone

thro

ugh a

tran

siti

on f

rom

dis

tric

t to

sta

te d

efin

itio

ns.

2007-0

8 s

hould

be

use

d a

s a

bas

elin

e.

2007-0

8: 2

.5%

(t

hro

ugh 4

/15/0

8)

2006-0

7: 1

.7%

2005-0

6: 1

.7%

2004-0

5: 1

.7%

Per

centa

ge

of

studen

ts w

ho m

ove

one

level

close

r to

rea

chin

g p

rofi

cien

t st

atus

or

mai

nta

in p

rofi

cien

cy s

tatu

s on the

CS

T E

LA

.

Source:

Ach

ievem

ent A

sses

smen

ts O

ffic

e.

Gra

des

3-1

1.

Note:

Incl

udes

stu

den

ts w

ho m

ove

one OR

MORE

lev

els

close

r or

mai

nta

in p

rofi

cien

cy.

2006-0

7: 60.7

%

2005-0

6: 59.2

%

2004-0

5: 58.4

%

Per

centa

ge

of

studen

ts w

ho m

ove

one

level

close

r to

rea

chin

g p

rofi

cien

t st

atus

or

mai

nta

in p

rofi

cien

cy s

tatu

s on the

CS

T M

ath.

Source:

Ach

ievem

ent A

sses

smen

ts O

ffic

e.

Mat

h incl

udes

all

subje

cts

whic

h c

an v

ary o

n

the

com

par

ison. G

rades

3-1

1.

Note:

Incl

udes

stu

den

ts w

ho m

ove

one OR

MORE

lev

els

close

r or

mai

nta

in p

rofi

cien

cy.

2006-0

7: 56.8

%

2005-0

6: 57.5

%

2004-0

5: 56.7

%

Per

centa

ge

of

EL

L b

y lan

guag

e pro

fici

ency

level

, w

ho o

n a

yea

rly b

asis

move

one

level

close

r to

rea

chin

g C

EL

DT

Engli

sh p

rofi

cien

t

stat

us.

Source:

Ach

ievem

ent A

sses

smen

ts O

ffic

e.

CE

LD

T m

atch

ed s

tuden

t A

MO

#1 d

ata

char

t.

Note:

Movin

g o

ne OR MORE

lev

els

close

r

OR

mai

nta

inin

g C

EL

DT

Engli

sh p

rofi

cien

cy.

Fal

l 2006: 5

9%

Dif

fere

nt ver

sion o

f C

EL

DT

in p

rior

yea

rs.

Appen

dix

B

2

Measure

Definition

Baseline data

Per

centa

ge

of

studen

ts w

ho q

ual

ify f

or

GA

TE

stat

us.

Source:

GA

TE

off

ice.

GA

TE

Num

ber

(gra

des

4-1

2)

div

ided

by

SFU

SD

CB

ED

S (

gra

des

4-1

2)

count.

2007-0

8: 9

848 / 3

8824 =

2

5.4

%

2006-0

7: 8

702 / 3

9402 =

2

2.1

%

2005-0

6: 7

968 / 3

9959 =

1

9.9

%

Num

ber

of

Sta

r sc

hools

wit

h a

posi

tive

ben

chm

ark a

s m

easu

red b

y the

Dis

tric

t

Mat

rix.

Dis

tric

t M

atri

x –

ES

C.

Num

ber

of

Dre

am s

chools

wit

h a

posi

tive

ben

chm

ark a

s m

easu

red b

y the

Dis

tric

t

Mat

rix.

Dis

tric

t M

atri

x –

ES

C.

Num

ber

and p

erce

nta

ge

of

schools

exit

ing

Pro

gra

m I

mpro

vem

ent or

stat

e m

onit

ore

d

stat

us.

Source:

Sta

te a

nd F

eder

al P

rogra

ms

Dep

t

Note:

Num

ber

s fo

r P

rogra

m I

mpro

vem

ent

Only

(no S

AIT

). C

om

par

ed to n

um

ber

of

schools

in P

I th

e pre

vio

us

yea

r.

2007-0

8: 2 / 2

6 =

7.8

%

2006-0

7: 2 / 2

7 =

7.4

%

2005-0

6: 7 / 3

3 =

21.2

%

Num

ber

and p

erce

nta

ge

of

schools

that

hav

e

froze

n thei

r P

rogra

m I

mpro

vem

ent or

stat

e

monit

ore

d s

tatu

s.

Source:

Sta

te a

nd F

eder

al P

rogra

ms

Dep

t

Note:

Num

ber

s fo

r P

rogra

m I

mpro

vem

ent

Only

(no S

AIT

). C

om

par

ed to n

um

ber

of

schools

in P

I th

e pre

vio

us

yea

r.

2007-0

8: 10 / 2

6 =

38.5

%

2006-0

7: 6 / 2

7 =

22.2

%

2005-0

6: 7 / 3

3 =

21.2

%

Num

ber

and p

erce

nta

ge

of

schools

ente

ring

Pro

gra

m I

mpro

vem

ent or

stat

e m

onit

ore

d

stat

us.

Source:

Sta

te a

nd F

eder

al P

rogra

ms

Dep

t

Note:

Num

ber

s fo

r P

rogra

m I

mpro

vem

ent

Only

(no S

AIT

). C

om

par

ed to n

um

ber

of

schools

in P

I th

e pre

vio

us

yea

r.

2007-0

8: 3 / 2

6 =

11.5

%

2006-0

7: 3 / 2

7 =

11.1

%

2005-0

6: 3 / 3

3 =

9.1

%

Num

ber

and p

erce

nta

ge

of

studen

ts w

ho h

ave

taken

the

SA

T a

nd s

core

d a

t or

above

500 o

n

the

mat

h a

nd v

erbal

subte

sts

duri

ng thei

r hig

h

school ca

reer

.

Source:

SA

T d

ata

dis

k.

Note: O

nly

lookin

g a

t a

single

yea

r’s

resu

lts.

Com

par

ed to a

ll s

tuden

ts tak

ing the

SA

T.

2007: 9

50 / 2

801 =

33.9

%

2006: 1

080 / 2

907 =

37.2

%

Appen

dix

B

3

Measure

Definition

Baseline data

Num

ber

and p

erce

nta

ge

of

studen

ts w

ho h

ave

taken

the

PS

AT

by the

end o

f 10

th g

rade.

Source:

PS

AT

dat

a dis

k.

Num

ber

and p

erce

nta

ge

of

studen

ts in 9

th a

nd

10

th g

rade

takin

g the

PS

AT

. C

om

par

e w

ith

9th/1

0th g

rade

enro

llm

ent C

BE

DS

.

2007-0

8: 1394 / 10752 =

13%

Dat

a dis

c not av

aila

ble

for

pre

vio

us

yea

rs.

Num

ber

and p

erce

nta

ge

of

studen

ts w

ho

gra

duat

e hav

ing m

et A

-G c

ours

e

requir

emen

ts.

Source: C

DE

gra

duat

e re

port

.

Note

: P

roce

ss h

as b

een r

efin

ed the

pas

t fe

w

yea

rs. 2

006-0

7 s

hould

be

use

d a

s a

bas

elin

e.

2006-0

7: not yet

avai

lable

fro

m C

DE

.

2005-0

6: 2

192 / 3

887 =

56.4

%

2004-0

5: 2

065 / 3

789 =

54.5

%

2003-0

4: 2

119 / 3

747 =

56.6

%

Num

ber

and p

erce

nta

ge

of

studen

ts tak

ing a

t

leas

t one

AP

cours

e duri

ng thei

r hig

h s

chool

care

er.

Source:

RP

A.

Note:

AP

cours

e m

easu

re h

ad to b

e se

par

ated

from

AP

Exam

mea

sure

. O

nly

lookin

g a

t a

single

sem

este

r’s

enro

llm

ent. C

om

par

ed to

CB

ED

S g

rade

9-1

2 e

nro

llm

ent. S

tuden

ts

counte

d o

nly

once

.

Fal

l 2007: 3

070 / 1

9041 =

16.1

%

Fal

l 2006: 3

034 / 1

9356 =

15.7

%

Fal

l 2005: 2

984 / 1

9268 =

15.5

%

Num

ber

and p

erce

nta

ge

of

studen

ts w

ho h

ave

taken

an A

P E

xam

and s

core

d 3

or

bet

ter

duri

ng thei

r hig

h s

chool ca

reer

.

Source:

AP

Exam

dis

k.

Note:

AP

cours

e m

easu

re h

ad to b

e se

par

ated

from

AP

Exam

mea

sure

. O

nly

lookin

g a

t a

single

yea

r’s

test

res

ult

s. C

om

par

ed to

CB

ED

S g

rade

9-1

2 e

nro

llm

ent. S

tuden

ts

counte

d o

nly

once

.

2006-0

7: 2

187 / 1

9356 =

11.3

%

2005-0

6: 2

111 / 1

9268 =

11.0

%

2004-0

5: 2

099 / 1

9406 =

10.8

%

Appendix C

Strategic P

lan: Short-term

Actio

n Steps

May – August 2

008

WHAT

WHEN

WHO

Create stru

ctures, p

rocesses, an

d tim

elines to

support im

plem

entatio

n of, an

d

clear communicatio

n ab

out, th

e strategic p

lan (in

cludes h

ow we o

rganize to

support sch

ools, d

evelo

p cro

ss-departm

ent team

s, and m

anage cen

tral office

work)

April –

August

2008

Superin

tendent, D

eputy

Supts, &

Asso

ciate

Supts

Create co

mmon tem

plates fo

r Initiativ

e Team

s to organize an

d begin work on th

e

three p

rimary

initiativ

es

May 2008

Deputy Supts

Publish

working draft o

f Strateg

ic Plan

May 8, 2008

Superin

tendent an

d

Deputy Supts

Publish

working draft o

f BSC 2 an

d glossary

May 8, 2008

Directo

r of R

esearch &

Asso

ciate Supt. A

PD

Host o

ne-to

-ones w

ith Board

mem

bers an

d Union lead

ership (p

review

implicatio

ns fo

r barg

aining) ab

out S

trategic P

lan an

d M

atrix

May 8

th – M

ay 27th, 2

008

Superin

tendent an

d

Deputy Supts

Host k

ey “A

llies” (City

, CBO, C

ommunity

groups) to

review

and discu

ss the

Strateg

ic Plan

draft

Week

of M

ay 19th

Superin

tendent an

d

Deputy Supts

Use feed

back

from th

e SFUSD Board

and other k

ey stak

eholders to

prep

are final

Strateg

ic Plan

for B

oard

Adoptio

n

May 27, 2008

Superin

tendent an

d

Deputy Supts

Adopt an

equity

-centered

Strateg

ic Plan

to provide d

irection an

d strateg

ic

leadersh

ip

May 27, 2008

Board

Presid

ent/fu

ll

Board

Finalize S

chool Q

uality

, Equity

, and Access M

atrix

May 27, 2008

Directo

r of R

esearch &

Deputy Supt.

Create targ

eted pd on creatin

g a S

chool S

ite Scorecard

tied to

BSC 1 fo

r school

site leaders th

at models an

authentic learn

ing an

d creatin

g process (p

rincip

al,

teacher lead

ers, union build

ing rep

s, family

reps, stu

dent)

May – Ju

ne 2

008

Deputy Supts

Share strateg

ic plan

with

media th

rough sm

all one o

n ones, ro

und tab

le

discu

ssions

May-Ju

ne 2

008

Public O

utreach

and

Communicatio

ns

Begin Central O

ffice pd usin

g th

e Matrix

and BSC 2 to

guide d

epartm

ental an

d

cross-d

epartm

ental w

ork

May-Ju

ne 2

008

Deputy Supts

Estab

lish departm

ental co

mmon valu

es and beliefs th

at support th

e

implem

entatio

n of B

SC an

d eq

uity

-based

educatio

n fo

r all.

May-Ju

ne 2

008

Departm

ent M

anagers

Appendix C

2008 – 2012 SFUSD Strategic P

lan

Board of Education Milesto

nes fo

r Years O

ne, T

hree

and Five

YEAR ONE

� Adopt an equity-cen

tered Strateg

ic Plan to provide directio

n and strateg

ic leadersh

ip

� Provide clear an

d unified

messag

e to full district an

d community that th

e BSC is th

e foundation for all S

FUSD work

� Begin using the BSC as a d

ecision making and agenda creatio

n tool; planning sessio

ns to create sh

ared meaning and processes fo

r BSC

� Align policies an

d practices to

strategic goals

� Create a set o

f guiding agreem

ents fo

r the Board that en

sures a safe, affirm

ing, and enriched environment for each

Board member

� Induct new Board members u

sing the BSC

� Board Retreat to

review and refin

e implementatio

n

� Evaluate th

e Superintendent using the BSC

� Direct th

e superintendent to base staff ev

aluations on the BSC

� End of the year ev

aluation based

on percen

tage of Board agenda item

s and tim

e spent directly

related to BSC 1

YEAR THREE

� Annual rev

iew and percen

tage of BSC 1 targ

ets met are th

e foundation for Board Retreat

� Board creates y

earlong course o

f action, rev

iew, and study based

on the BSC

YEAR FIVE

� Board effectiv

eness an

d lead

ership assessed

locally

and nationally based

on pursuit of BSC goals, o

bjectiv

es, and measu

res

Appendix C


lan

Central Office

Milesto

nes fo

r Years O

ne, Three a

nd Five

YEAR ONE

� Publish working draft o

f Strateg

ic Plan & working draft o

f BSC 2 and glossary

� Finalize S

chool Quality

, Equity, and Access M

atrix

� Host one-to-ones w

ith BOE members an

d Union lead

ership (preview implicatio

ns for bargaining) about Strateg

ic Plan and Matrix

� Host key “Allies” (C

ity, CBO, Community groups) to

review and discu

ss the Strateg

ic Plan draft

� Use feed

back from the BOE and other key stak

eholders to

prepare fin

al Strateg

ic Plan for Board Adoption

� Work with departm

ental an

d cross-d

epartm

ental team

s to identify challen

ges an

d opportunities in

collectiv

e bargaining agreem

ents

� Create targ

eted pd on creatin

g a School Site S

corecard

tied to BSC 1 for sch

ool site lead

ers that m

odels an

authentic learn

ing

and creatin

g process (p

rincipal, teach

er leaders, u

nion building reps, fam

ily reps, stu

dent)

� Produce &

publish employee an

d community information about the M

atrix and the strateg

ic plan (website, p

rint, etc.)

� Translate b

oard approved strateg

ic plan documents

� Develop the tech

nology platfo

rm required to support th

e new data an

d communicatio

n stan

dard describ

ed in the BSC

� Develop the stu

dent and staff in

formation system

to analyze im

pact o

f BSC on students an

d sch

ools, allo

w for correlatio

ns

between student ach

ievement and staff actio

n

� Develop pd for cen

tral office staff th

at develops the sk

ills, dispositio

ns, an

d knowledge req

uired to use th

e Matrix

� Develop Interest-B

ased bargaining P.D. for cen

tral office staff

� Convene co

re site leadersh

ip group to desig

n differen

tiated pd for Administrato

rs and sites fo

r ’08 –’09 sch

ool year

� Begin Central O

ffice pd using the M

atrix and BSC 2 to guide departm

ental an

d cross-d

epartm

ental w

ork

� Administrato

rs PD: Leadersh

ip for Equity, Creatin

g School Site S

corecard

s

� Seek Foundation support to

strengthen and support th

e SFUSD strateg

ic plan

� Create a p

artnersh

ip review matrix

and MOU process b

ased on the BSC

� Draft S

chool Site S

corecard

tuning and support m

eetings

� Desig

n and implement staff ev

aluation protocols alig

ned to BSC

� Develop employee in

duction to orient them to the BSC and to provide su

pport during their first tw

o years as em

ployees

� Initiate a p

rocess fo

r aligning all ex

isting and new master p

lans to the BSC

Appendix C


lan

Central Office

Milesto

nes fo

r Years O

ne, Three a

nd Five (co

nt.)

YEAR THREE

� Fully cascad

ed Balan

ced Scorecard

s are availab

le, accessible, an

d well-u

ndersto

od by SFUSD and SF community

� School site S

corecard

s demonstrate sig

nifican

t increases o

verall an

d dramatic acceleratio

n of sub-groups in acad

emic perfo

rmance

� The SFUSD School Quality

, Equity, and Access M

atrix shows a sig

nifican

t positiv

e trend in positiv

e school effect

� BSC and district m

atrix embedded in SFUSD communicatio

ns (reg

ular u

pdates o

n the web, in publicatio

ns, etc.)

� EPC is d

esigned to balan

ce choice w

ith the M

atrix and BSC fram

ework for stu

dent assig

nment (a p

redictab

le system

with high quality

choices fo

r everyone)

� Integrate th

e information and assessm

ent system

(technology and research

) into decisio

n making at all lev

els of the organizatio

n

� The District M

atrix is u

sed internally and externally to determ

ine progress an

d to organize site-b

ased needs & support

� Central o

ffice is desig

ned using staff an

d community feed

back to best serv

e students, fam

ilies, and sch

ools

� SFUSD curricu

lum has a n

ew fram

ework and a tw

o year p

lan for total co

nversio

n

� All district p

artners o

perate w

ith clear ag

reements an

d perfo

rmance m

etrics connected

directly

to the BSC

� Align reso

urces (m

oney, people, an

d materials) to

support th

e work describ

ed in the BSC

� Create d

emonstratio

n sites, P

D sites an

d shared

materials th

rough use o

f the M

atrix – stan

dards for use o

f successfu

l sites/classrooms

� SFUSD has a n

etwork of high functioning, well-in

tegrated

community sch

ools th

at are considered

community assets an

d anchors of

positiv

e civic development

YEAR FIVE

� SFUSD is reco

gnized

as a leading district in

closing the ach

ievement gap and preparin

g students fo

r success in

the 21st cen

tury

� Five year ev

aluation of the Perfo

rmance M

anagement, Equity Centered

Professio

nal L

earning, and the 21st Century Curricu

lum

Initiativ

es

� Prepare u

pdates an

d expansions of BSC 1 for School Board review (complete fiv

e year rev

iew and planning for the next fiv

e years)

� Adopt fiv

e year strateg

ic plan

� The San Francisco

community feels th

at SFUSD is tran

sparen

t and acco

untable

Appendix C


lan

School Site M

ilestones fo

r Years O

ne, T

hree and Five

YEAR ONE

� Review outline of a p

lan to create a S

chool Site S

corecard

& convene sch

ool groups to draft site p

lan to create S

corecard

� School wide PD and discu

ssion on creatin

g a School Site S

corecard

.

� Create, d

evelop and review draft o

f School Site S

corecard

, then a co

mplete S

corecard

� Develop sch

ool-wide assessm

ent tool to measu

re progress b

ased on measu

res identified

in the School Site S

corecard

.

� School wide assessm

ent of progress b

ased on measu

res named in the School Site S

corecard

� Sites d

evelop final draft o

f School Site S

corecard

tuning and support.

YEAR THREE

� School Site S

corecard

s are the primary tool for new staff in

duction, lead

ership team

work, professio

nal development, sch

ool site

council, an

d student lead

ership groups

� Data at ev

ery site is rep

orted in measu

res that are w

idely known and deeply understo

od in each

school community

YEAR FIVE

� All sch

ool sites k

now and are ab

le to share p

ractices that are g

etting positiv

e results

� Matrix

perfo

rmance tren

ds are p

osted

, discu

ssed, and used to guide growth plans at each

school site

Appendix C


lan

City and Community Milesto

nes fo

r Years O

ne, T

hree a

nd Five

YEAR ONE

� Community Organizatio

ns working with SFUSD use th

e BSC to review planned work and assess d

egree o

f shared

purpose an

d work

� Paren

ts, Families, co

mmunity groups, describ

e the su

pport th

ey need to particip

ate in “Beyond the Talk”

� Individuals an

d community groups name sp

ecific areas of concern

and actio

n

� School site p

articipation and work is o

rganized

and guided by the creatio

n of a S

chool Site S

corecard

� Community meetin

gs focused on sch

ools as co

mmunity assets

� Meetin

g the M

ayor and dept. heads re: B

SC and Matrix

� Review Citywide effo

rts to serv

e youth and fam

ilies using the BSC as a filter

� Public co

nversatio

n about the next fiv

e years b

eing focused on educatio

n. “It T

akes a C

ity”

� Drop out prevention is a sh

ared resp

onsibility

YEAR THREE

� Full serv

ice community sch

ools are n

eighborhood and community anchors fo

r positiv

e civic en

gagement

YEAR FIVE

� Community based

organizatio

ns use a B

alanced Scorecard

approach to assess th

eir effectiveness

Appendix C

Strategic P

lan: Short-term

Actio

n Steps

May – August 2

008

WHAT

WHEN

WHO

Develo

p a P

D tim

eline fo

r CO staff th

at identifies th

e skill req

uired

to use th

e

Matrix

to su

ccessfully

implem

ent y

ear one o

f the B

SC.

May-O

ctober 2

008

Directo

r of R

esearch

Convene C

ore site lead

ership group to

desig

n differen

tiated PD acro

ss all

divisio

ns as w

ell as divisio

n site lead

ership groups to

desig

n divisio

n lev

el PD.

May-O

ctober 2

008

Asso

ciate Supts

Seek

Foundatio

n su

pport to

strengthen an

d su

pport th

e SFUSD strateg

ic plan

May – Decem

ber 2

008

Superin

tendent,

Central O

ffice Support

Team

Community

Organizatio

ns w

orking with

SFUSD use th

e BSC to

review

plan

ned

work an

d assess d

egree o

f shared

purpose an

d work

May – Decem

ber 2

008

Community

Seek

Foundatio

n su

pport to

strengthen an

d su

pport th

e SFUSD strateg

ic plan

May – Decem

ber 2

008

Superin

tendent,

Central O

ffice Support

Team

Develo

p pd fo

r central o

ffice staff that d

evelo

ps th

e skills, d

ispositio

ns, an

d

knowled

ge req

uired

to use th

e Matrix

and su

ccessfully

implem

ent y

ear one o

f

the B

SC

May – August 2

008

(phase 1

)

Initiativ

e Team

Develo

p th

e technology platfo

rm req

uired

to su

pport th

e new

data an

d

communicatio

n stan

dard

describ

ed in

the B

SC (in

cluding develo

ping new

Tech

nology M

aster Plan

)

May 2008 – Ju

ne 2

009

Chief o

f Inform

ation

Initiativ

e Team

s describ

e the sco

pe an

d in

tended im

pact o

f initiativ

es (Each

team

crafts an in

dependent, th

ough in

terdependent tim

eline, th

is inclu

des

incorporatin

g so

me ex

isting work an

d detailin

g new

work)

June, 2

008

Initiativ

e Team

s

Tran

slate board

approved strateg

ic plan

documents

June, 2

008

Office o

f Tran

slation

Meetin

g th

e Mayor an

d dept. h

eads re: B

SC an

d M

atrix

June, 2

008

Superin

tendent an

d

Deputy Superin

tendent

Review

outlin

e of a p

lan to

create a School S

ite Scorecard

June, 2

008

SOIS Asso

ciate/Asst

Supts

Develo

p an

d Review

Outlin

e of a p

lan to

create a School S

ite Scorecard

June-Ju

ly 2008

SOIS Asso

ciate/Asst

Supts

Appendix C

Strategic P

lan: Short-term

Actio

n Steps

May – August 2

008

WHAT

WHEN

WHO

Identify

departm

ent w

ide an

d divisio

n wide in

itiatives alig

ned with

the B

SC an

d

develo

p a tim

eline fo

r action item

s.

June-A

ugust 2

008

Asso

ciate Supts

Convene sm

all site-based

working groups to

draft site p

lan to

create a School

Site S

corecard

June –

August 2

008

SOIS Asso

ciate/Asst

Supts

Convene sm

all site based

working groups to

develo

p th

e site plan

to create

School S

ite Scorecard

.

June-A

ugust 2

008

SOIS Asso

ciate/Asst

Supts

Create a p

artnersh

ip rev

iew m

atrix an

d M

OU process b

ased on th

e BSC

June –

Septem

ber 2

008

Directo

r of

Develo

pment &

Local

Govern

ment R

elations

Provide clear an

d unified

messag

e to fu

ll district an

d co

mmunity

that th

e BSC is

the fo

undatio

n fo

r all SFUSD work (d

irect staff to use B

SC in

creating lab

or

agreem

ents)

June –

Septem

ber 2

008 &

Ongoing

Full B

oard

School w

ide P

D an

d discu

ssion on creatin

g a S

chool S

ite Scorecard

. June-O

ctober 2

008

Prin

cipals/A

ssistant

Superin

tendents

Begin usin

g th

e BSC as a d

ecision m

aking an

d ag

enda creatio

n to

ol; m

eeting in

plan

ning sessio

ns to

create shared

mean

ing an

d processes to

use B

SC

July, 2008

Board

Presid

ent/fu

ll

Board

Desig

n an

d Administrato

rs’ PD: L

eadersh

ip fo

r Equity

: Creatin

g eq

uity

-

centered

PLCs, U

nderstan

ding of C

RP, netw

orks an

d co

mmunities o

f practice

with

in an

d acro

ss schools b

y creatin

g School S

ite Scorecard

s.

July-A

ugust 2

008

Superin

tendent, C

O

Support T

eam

Create a set o

f guiding ag

reements fo

r the B

oard

that en

sures a safe, affirm

ing,

and en

riched en

viro

nment fo

r particip

atory an

d in

clusiv

e learning fo

r each Board

mem

ber

July –Novem

ber 2

008

Full B

oard

Alig

n policies an

d practices to

strategic g

oals

July – Decem

ber 2

008

Full B

oard

Administrato

rs PD: L

eadersh

ip fo

r Equity

: Creatin

g eq

uity

centered

professio

nal

learning co

mmunities, n

etworks, an

d co

mmunities o

f practice w

ithin an

d acro

ss

schools b

y creatin

g School S

ite Scorecard

s

August, 2

008

SOIS Asso

ciate/Asst

Supts

School w

ide in

troductio

n an

d discu

ssion of creatin

g a S

chool S

ite Scorecard

August –

Septem

ber 2

008

SOIS Asso

ciate/Asst

Supts

Presentation to SFUSD Cabinet

Presentation to SFUSD Cabinet • • District Scorecard

District Scorecard2/25/08

Glossary of Terms

Glossary of Terms

A-G Course Requirem

entsA-G Course Requirem

ents

Advanced Placement

Advanced Placement

AVIDAVID

Balanced Score CardBalanced Score Card

Baseline DataBaseline Data

Baseline TechnologyBaseline TechnologyStandardsStandards

BasicBasic

Below

BasicBelow

Basic

Benchmark

Benchmark

California English LanguageCalifornia English LanguageDevelopm

ent TestDevelopm

ent Test

California High School Exit

California High School Exit

ExamExam

California Standards TestsCalifornia Standards Tests

Career Pathw

aysCareer Pathw

ays

Caring and SupportiveCaring and SupportiveRelationshipsRelationships

Cognitive/Em

otionalCognitive/Em

otionalEngagem

entEngagem

ent

Comm

unities of PracticeCom

munities of Practice

Com

munity-Based

Comm

unity-BasedOrganizationOrganization

Com

munity Service

Comm

unity Service

M

easureM

easure

Observation ProtocolObservation Protocol

Parent ConferenceParent Conference

Parent Engagem

entParent Engagem

ent

Participatory & Inclusive

Participatory & Inclusive

LearningLearning

Perform

ance Assessments

Performance Assessm

ents

Performance M

anagement

Performance M

anagement

SystemSystem

Personal EfficacyPersonal Efficacy

Post-Secondary Education andPost-Secondary Education andTrainingTraining

Predictive Pow

erPredictive Pow

er

Preliminary SAT

Preliminary SAT

Print ResourcesPrint Resources

Professional Developm

entProfessional Developm

ent

Professional EfficacyProfessional Efficacy

PL School Netw

orksPL School Netw

orks

ProficientProficient

Program

Improvem

entProgram

Improvem

ent

ProtocolsProtocols

Racial, Ethnic, andRacial, Ethnic, andSocioeconom

ic IntegrationSocioeconom

ic Integration

Results-Oriented Cycles ofResults-Oriented Cycles ofInquiryInquiry

Safe, Affirm

ing & Enriched

Safe, Affirming &

EnrichedEnvironm

entEnvironm

ent

Safe, Secure &

AttractiveSafe, Secure &

AttractiveSchoolsSchools

SAT Reasoning TestSAT Reasoning Test

School Im

provement Plans

School Improvem

ent Plans

Self EfficacySelf Efficacy

Senior LeadershipSenior Leadership

Standard OperatingStandard OperatingProceduresProcedures

STAR SchoolsSTAR Schools

State-M

onitored StatusState-M

onitored Status

Student Governm

entStudent Governm

ent

SubgroupSubgroup

Support Program

s andSupport Program

s andPartnershipsPartnerships

Technological ResourcesTechnological Resources

Visual ResourcesVisual Resources

21st Century Curriculum21st Century Curriculum

21st Century Schools21st Century Schools

Core CurriculumCore Curriculum

Culturally &

LinguisticallyCulturally &

LinguisticallyResponsive IntegratedResponsive IntegratedCurriculumCurriculum

Digital DivideDigital Divide

Digital ResourcesDigital Resources

District M

atrixDistrict M

atrix

DREAM Schools

DREAM Schools

DropoutDropout

Effort Optim

ismEffort Optim

ism

Engagem

entEngagem

ent

English LearnersEnglish Learners

Equity-Centered ProfessionalEquity-Centered ProfessionalLearning Com

munities

Learning Comm

unities

Gifted and Talented EducationGifted and Talented Education

Grade Level StandardsGrade Level Standards

Graphic ResourcesGraphic Resources

H

igh and Equitable StudentH

igh and Equitable StudentAchievem

entAchievem

ent

Identity Investm

entIdentity Investm

ent

Leadership Developm

entLeadership Developm

ent

LevelLevel

Lived ExperiencesLived Experiences

16

BEYOND THE TALK: TAKING ACTION to EDUCATE EVERY …Without a district of highly engaged and joyful...

Documents

Transcript of BEYOND THE TALK: TAKING ACTION to EDUCATE EVERY …Without a district of highly engaged and joyful...