DISSERTATION FINDINGS:
As I share lessons I learned as a school builder, I’d first like to acknowledge the findings my dissertation: Which School- and Community-Level Characteristics Lead to Charter School Success? I completed this research in partnership with Sarah Ranney (pictured left as we were building the Middle School Expansion of Lafayette Preparatory Academy).
Click HERE to read the full study.
Phase One of the Study
We began with a comprehensive literature review, from which we determined the characteristics of both successful and failed charter schools, as defined by current research. Identified characteristics were tied to the school’s overall success, not the founding years, which was our focus. The characteristics of success were: effective school leadership; strong mission/vision; hiring, supporting, and retaining teachers; school culture/parent involvement; and business management. The characteristics of failure were: financial, mismanagement, academics, and facilities. None of these were especially groundbreaking, so we wanted to dig in to the founding years of a charter school to determine that “magic” that makes some schools great options for kids while others are not.
Criteria for Success
We conducted a three phase study. In the first phase, we conducted a review of existing data, during which we identified the Local Education Agencies (LEAs) in Missouri that met our criteria for either successful or not in the first five years. Success was defined as:
Getting the first renewal: making it to the 6th year;
Academic data: exceeding the resident district’s state assessment data proficiency rates by at least 5% during the relevant years;
Enrollment: maintaining or growing enrollment during the relevant years;
Finances: Maintaining a 10%+ financial surplus during the relevant years; and
Attendance: Maintaining an attendance rate equal to or greater than the resident district’s.
In addition to these criteria, it was determined that successful LEAs also had lower discipline incidence rates, lower student mobility, and more diverse populations.
Not Meeting the Criteria for Success
LEAs that did not meet the criteria for success were those not meeting at least one of the success metrics. This group was divided into three different types of LEAs: those on the cusp of success (only missed one criteria); those that were open but met fewer than 4 of the criteria, and those that closed.
Phase Two of the Study
In the second phase of the study, we surveyed leaders from the first five years of the LEA’s operations to determine their priorities, areas needing more priority, successes, and struggles. In this portion of the study, we looked for trends in successful LEAs and those that did not meet the criteria for success.
Survey Results:
* Left = Successful LEAs; Right = LEAs that did not meet criteria for success
Survey Results: Areas Needing More Priority
* Left = Successful LEAs; Right = LEAs that did not meet criteria for success
Survey Results: Successes
* Left = Successful LEAs; Right = LEAs that did not meet criteria for success
Survey Results: Struggles
* Left = Successful LEAs; Right = LEAs that did not meet criteria for success
Phase Three of the Study
Finally, we conducted the third phase of the study: interviews with school leaders from the founding years of the LEA.
Priorities and Successes of Successful LEAs
This phase of the study revealed that, for successful LEAs, their top priorities and successes were:
Establishing a school culture with a strong sense of community and high/consistent expectations;
Hiring, supporting, and retaining teachers; and
Ensuring the mission and vision are the anchors that tie everything together.
Areas Needing More Priorities and Challenges of Successful LEAs
Successful LEAs identified the following as needing more priority and a struggle:
Managing the district-level details and operations (business management);
High turnover and burnout within the teaching staff.
Priorities and Successes of LEAs that did not meet the criteria for success
The top priorities and successes for LEAs that did not meet the criteria for success varied across the different categories of failed schools. With the exception of the closed LEAs, they shared school culture and hiring competent teaching staff as priorities and successes.
Areas Needing More Priorities and Challenges of LEAs that did not meet the criteria for success
The areas needing more priority and identified as a struggle for LEAs that did not meet the criteria for success showed some common ground across the different categories of LEAs not meeting the criteria for success:
Academic achievement;
Business management;
Curriculum;
School culture; and
Teacher burnout.
Additional Conclusions from Interviews
In these interviews, we were able to make further conclusions related to successful LEAs:
Intentions led to outcomes;
The teams were reflective and maintained a growth mindset;
They sought solutions;
They held high expectations; and
They prioritized people.
Schools that did not meet the criteria for success:
Demonstrated less correlation between priorities and successes;
Often blamed outside factors for their failings (EMO, sponsor, student-population, etc.); and
Struggled to manage the business.
Recommendations
Based on this three-phase study, we made the following recommendations for start-up charter schools
Above all else, have a clear,compelling mission in which the full community is invested and engaged.
This will lead everything else: school culture, teaching staff, and the business. If you have people who really believe in what you’re doing, they will stay and fight through the incredibly difficult work it is. This will offer stability in teaching staff, families, community support, etc. providing a more stable foundation off of which to build year over year.
Be strategic and take it slow.
Begin with a strategic plan that clearly identifies the mission and outcomes toward which the LEA strives: begin with the end in mid. Planning backwards, identify the priorities, structures, and actions necessary to achieve the goals. Too often, LEAs that Did Not Meet Criteria for Success did not see the connection between their priorities and outcomes: they did not have a plan.
Prioritize people above all else.
Successful LEAs prioritized characteristics connected to the human side of the charter school: building community, student and staff culture, and teaching staff. More initial priority was given to student culture, and there was benefit in that, but staff culture, turnover, and burnout were the biggest challenges. Because it is difficult to attract highly competent staff to a new school, one must take care of and hold on to the staff they have (assuming they are working toward the mission).
Stack your people deck.
Bring in people you know and trust! Capitalize on established relationships and transfer them to the new school, saving the time and energy of starting over with new people and ensuring a higher level of competence at the starting point.
Be prepared to build a school district, not a school.
A successful new founding leader is encouraged to do two things. First, pour through the websites of the state and federal education departments. Read all the rules and regulations and determine who on your team understands them all, has a plan to meet all requirements, and is being held accountable for making it happen. Second, visit the central office of a large district near you and ask what each person there manages. Interview each person, and ask yourself, does someone on my team know how to do all of these things and have a plan in place to do so? In addition to the person who will manage all of these things, does the Superintendent of the new charter school also know how to do these things well enough to evaluate the effectiveness of the person in charge of each area? If not, the new school has the potential for big problems ahead.
Own it.
First, for each of the many complex components of starting a new charter LEA, someone has to “own” them. Of course, collaboration and support is essential, but it is important that everybody does not have to do everything.
Secondly, “own it” means you are the one responsible for what happens; no one else is. Successful LEAs owned their success because they took charge of the solutions to address their problems.
Never be satisfied.
Successful LEA leaders in this study built great schools, far exceeding the criteria for success, but they still intended to do more. They have not set the mark so low as to simply do better than a resident district that is underperforming; they set the mark of outperforming the best districts in the state and the country.
Next Round of Recommendations
With my experience as a school founder, I acknowledge the truth of the challenges and recommendations found through my dissertation. Before the study, I don’t know if these would have been my recommendations, if I based them solely on my experience. Because some of them are just who I am as a leader (never be satisfied), I don’t pull them out as unique or different from other leaders. But because we are all so different as leaders, it is important to look around us to see what is natural in us and what must be cultivated for the greater efforts of our mission.
As an extension of this study, I offer more detailed recommendations (or at least heads ups) to help new founding leaders have a greater chance at success. Many of them will tie to the recommendations from the study, but some may not. Some will highlight the tension between some of the recommendations. And others emerge from my current work as a charter school sponsor with an inside look at charter schools and the after-effects of both good and bad decisions made in the early years.
Comments