Suzanne Keely

ASQ Market Manager, Education

www.asq.org

2004 High School Regional Summits

Systematic Improvement and Accountability

Don’t Be Data-rich and Information-poor

Archived Information

Which of These Aren’t Important to You?

• Leadership• Strategic Planning• Student, Stakeholder, and Market Focus• Measurement, Analysis, and Knowledge

Management• Faculty and Staff Focus• Process Management• School Performance Results

Do You Think These Core Values “Fit” in Education? • Visionary Leadership• Learning-Centered Education• School and Personal Learning• Valuing Faculty, Staff, and Partners• Agility• Focus on the Future• Managing for Innovation• Management by Fact• Social Responsibility• Focus on Results and Creating Value• Systems Perspective

Do You Believe…

• Students have dynamic needs and expectations

• Student needs are satisfied through purposeful activities or systems

• All systems exhibit variation• Knowledge comes from repetition of the

Plan-Do-Study-Act Cycle• Continuous improvement of systems occurs

through planned change• People drive change

How Do You Assess These Values and Concepts?

• By doing a self-assessment

• Identifying strengths and opportunities for improvement

• Taking action to “close the gaps” where you have opportunities for improvement

• By using feedback from your customers and stakeholders

“Assessment” … As in Self-assessment

• Conduct an Organizational Profile–What is the state system or district about?

• Assess the seven criteria with your customers and stakeholders

• Identify Your Strengths• Identify Your Opportunities for

Improvement• Close the Gaps Using Data

–The PDSA cycle: FOCUS on and measure the results of the desired improvement

Baldrige…the “B-word”…

What usually comes to mind when you hear the “B-word”?

–It’s an award–It’s a “business model”–Business has it’s own problems, why

do they think this will work in education?

–It’s perceived to be complicated and complex

It Works — in Education for Education

• Community Consolidated School District #15 Palatine,IL

• Chugach School District, Alaska• Pearl River School District, NY• University of Wisconsin-Stout• Cherokee High School—NE Tennessee• SQS New Mexico• BiE IN States

What Does This Have to Do With Accountability?

• You’re required to:–Meet NCLB requirements–Have schools meet Adequate Yearly

Progress

• You also want to ensure improvement, not just meeting the requirements

• Baldrige aligns with NCLB• Using Baldrige and the PDSA will help

ensure improvements

Look at the Problem Systematically

METHODMETHOD

• Quality Tools• Plan-Do-Study-Act• Continuous Improvement

DIRECTIONDIRECTION

•Goals•Vision/ Goals•Mission•Strategic Plan •Curriculum•Site•Improvement PlanINTEGRATED SYSTEMINTEGRATED SYSTEM

•Leadership•Strategic Planning•Customer/ Market•Information Analysis•Process Management•Human Resources•Performance Results

PERFORMANCE

EXCELLENCE

METHODMETHOD

• Quality Tools• Plan-Do-Study-Act• Continuous Improvement

DIRECTIONDIRECTION

•Goals•Vision/ Goals•Mission•Strategic Plan •Curriculum•Site•Improvement PlanINTEGRATED SYSTEMINTEGRATED SYSTEM

•Leadership•Strategic Planning•Customer/ Market•Information Analysis•Process Management•Human Resources•Performance Results

PERFORMANCE

EXCELLENCE

For Example:

• If your state’s data shows that high school drop-out rates have increased this year and for the past three years…

• The improvement opportunity is obvious

• Is the cause of that problem as obvious?

Now What?

Collect data on the current system

You Say YOU HAVE DATA

• Data has been collected to determine progress:

–State Test Scores–Other locally determined indicators

• Data has been disaggregated to show student achievement in subgroups

• You have good data and a system to analyze it

Good News!

But Do You Know…

• If the students dropped out because of–A specific event at home or school–Below average achievement and they’re

afraid to take the “high stakes” test–Classes are too big and they’re “lost in

the system”–They’re bored with school and what it

offers

Ask the People Closest to the Problem…

• At-risk students…before they get to high school and at the high school

• Students who’ve dropped out already

• The staff that work with them today and in years past

• Parents

Involve Them in the Plan-Do-Study-Act Cycle

PLAN

DO

STUDY

ACT

PLAN

DO

STUDY

ACT

PLAN

DO

STUDY

ACT

Define the System

Assess Current Situation

PLAN

Analyze Causes

Study The

Results

Standardize Improvements

Plan for Continuous

Improvement

ACT

DO

STUDY

Continuous Improvement Cycle for the School Improvement Process Designed by: Carol Ann Rush

Background: Prior to developing the on-line SIP process, school improvement was dependent on face-to-face support and training. As a result, rapid and simultaneous adjustments to goals/plans across the schools in the district were compromised.

Gap Analysis/Current Data: Currently, school improvement effectiveness is accelerated by utilization of the on-line process. Rapid adjustments to goals/plans by all schools is possible with all theory, processes, forms, tools, and data available 24/7. Face-to-face focus is now on accountability for goal achievement versus support and training.

Performance Target Gaps (based on 90%)

All ELL IEP GRADE 3 5 8 3 5 8 3 5 8

Reading % -7 -9 -7 * -63 -69 -42 -40 -44 Math % 2 -3 -14 * -48 -72 -15 -27 -61 Writing % -10 -2 -8 * -31 -36 -37 -25 -46

Outcome Statement/Improvement Theory: If we hold ourselves accountable for accomplishing the on-time priorities as shown on the SIP calendar, then we will reduce the number of students not meeting/exceeding academic goals set.

Process Improvement Gap:

Decision: § Standardize process § Improve process § Abandon process

Process Action Plan - Try Out the Improvement Strategy Who What When

Alignment of Dates to Priorities Carol Ann Rush Evaluate and

improve calendar October 2002

EDW application to specific school goals Carol Ann Rush Individual

demonstrations Oct. – Nov. 2002

Accountability to Calendar/Priorities Cabinet Scorecard on

Performance Targets Nov. – May 2003

Root Cause Analysis:

Bench-marking not

effective 2/1

Process improvement

– Not at classroom

2/3

Data are not seen as

individual students

2/2 EDW not utilized

effectively 3/1

In-process data are not

used 2/0

Calendar not

followed 0/4

Define the

System

Assess Current Situation

PLAN

Study the Results

Plan for Continuous

Improvement

ACT

DO

STUDY

Background: Students disruptive behavior on the bus was carrying over into the classroom. Principals identified student bus conduct as a major barrier to achieving our mission, to produce world-class learners. We also wanted to reduce the time between alleged incidences and problem resolution.

Gap Analysis/Current Data: Baseline data, year 2000-01: 1385 total incidences.

Root Cause Analysis: Within the department, we analyzed and separated data by school and incident. We determined opportunities existed for improvement in the following areas:

1. Constant observance 2. Consistent reinforcement and

immediate consequences

Goal/Improvement Theory: The Transportation Department believes if we videotape student behavior on the bus, then students will become more accountable for their actions and less time will be spent on problem resolution. Bus drivers will be able to focus more on driving safety than student behavior.

Process Action Plan - Try Out the Improvement Strategy Who What When

Install videotape equipment

Transportation Dept. mechanics

“All” small size busses

Fall 2004

Workshop on student behavior

Counselor from District 211

Improve bus driver awareness

August 2000

Improve bus conduct report form process

Director of Transportation

Electronic reporting

Spring 2004

Process Improvement Gap: 2001-02/2002-03 Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Total JA 0/0 5/5 12/7 14/7 10/5 8/2 10/6 22/4 6/4 9/3 0/1 96/44 CR 0/0 8/7 3/2 2/4 2/8 1/1 1/3 6/1 2/4 10/4 0/0 35/34 KH 0/0 0/4 2/1 1/2 1/1 0/4 0/7 5/2 0/8 0/0 0/0 9/29 HR 1/0 2/0 7/16 16/0 8/1 2/6 2/0 13/1 2/1 7/4 1/0 61/29 TJ 0/0 2/6 4/2 1/0 2/1 1/5 3/4 2/5 0/2 1/0 0/0 16/25 MJ 0/1 2/7 8/0 1/8 5/4 10/2 11/5 8/3 2/1 0/5 2/2 49/38

LL 1/0 6/5 19/7 14/3 7/0 0/2 1/7 11/11 2/1 6/6 4/1 71/43 TLA 0/0 0/4 7/5 14/3 15/11 26/13 12/12 22/9 17/26 19/

25 2/2 134/110

LS 0/0 14/2 1/4 4/3 6/0 5/0 2/8 10/2 7/6 5/12 0/1 54/38 SRP 0/5 7/2 13/0 3/1 5/2 6/1 3/4 1/0 3/1 6/2 0/0 47/18 PH 0/0 9/10 22/4 0/0 1/1 1/2 4/3 5/0 3/1 3/3 0/2 48/26 GMS 3/0 8/0 8/8 12/7 7/8 4/14 12/15 14/26 7/36 24/

22 4/2 103/138

VL 0/0 17/6 1016 1310 2/11 6/6 29/10 11/3 5/6 6/4 4/0 103/72 FCW 0/0 4/3 3/3 1/1 1/0 1/0 2/2 4/2 1/4 1/0 0/0 18/15 WB 0/1 5/4 2131 9/1 10/7 8/2 6/5 8/4 5/4 19/

17 1/8 92/84

PG 2/0 1215 17/4 9/10 11/13 9/4 10/12 17/3 13/15 21/3 5/3 126/82 CS 0/0 4/5 8/10 3/12 2/0 5/7 0/2 4/3 6/11 5/9 0/0 37/59 WRS 0/0 7/8 18/2 1/2 1/3 3/6 4/4 0/3 8/1 5/1 0/0 47/30 WC 3/1 7/11 19/9 8/12 7/7 4/10 19/11 19/6 12/7 7/17 1/3 106/94 NC 0/0 7/3 0/0 1/2 1/0 3/2 4/0 1/1 9/1 5/0 0/1 31/0

10 8

126 107

202 131

127 88

104 83

103 89

135 120

183 89

110 140

159 137

24 26

1283 1018

Decision: The Transportation Department has decided to standardize the process by putting videotaping equipment on all busses; to consistently track student behavior by schools and incidents; and to work closely with the schools to improve student behavior.

Designed and Developed By: Bill Willetts

Continuous Improvement Cycle for Bus Conduct Report

Standardize Improve- ments

Phil Crosby Once Said…• “Problems breed problems, and the lack of a

disciplined method of openly attacking them breeds more problems.”

• Deming’s PDSA improvement cycle is a disciplined method of “attacking” problems

• Educators learn to make data-driven decisions

• Learn to respect the facts shown through data

W. Edwards Deming’s Theory of Management states

When there is a problem,

85% of the time it is with the system

15% of the time it will be with the workers

I challenge you to study your systems