Planning: Translating the Vision into Action

Developing a school reform plan can be time consuming and difficult, yet the time and effort put into planning are invaluable. A good plan makes it possible for a school to translate its vision into action and provides clear direction for everyone involved in the reform effort. Shirley Hord observes, "Many times we'll look at a school improvement plan and it is very difficult to figure out how one can get from the vision of the school through the steps that have been identified." Hord adds that the plan is not so much a blueprint as an evolutionary plan. She explains that as a staff becomes engaged in the reform process, modifications to the plan may be necessary and desirable—a change of course may be needed to reach the school's vision.

Hord also stresses the importance of including all who will be involved in the reform program in developing the plan. "I don't think it's too unfair to say that frequently an administrator at a school may close the door and develop the plan," she says. "And that doesn't really work too well for everybody else in the school. Everybody who is going to be involved needs to be involved in talking about this plan." Hord notes that brainstorming with the entire staff, results in "really rich ideas about how to reach the vision."

Allocating Resources: Money, Personnel and Time

A large part of the planning process will include allocating necessary resources to support the CSR program. Administrators may face difficult decisions as they plan, but Dennis Sparks maintains they should keep in mind that "a plan for school improvement will be no stronger than the allocation of resources that are attached to the plan."

Creating and maintaining a focus on improvements in teaching and learning will likely require major evaluations and shifts in how monetary resources are used, how personnel are distributed, and which programs are supported. The school district can play an important role in making certain schools have the resources and flexibility needed to implement the reform process. SEDL program associate Ed Tobia, who has worked with many schools undergoing reform, says it is imperative that the central office has personnel who are familiar with the reform model that is being adopted by a school, and who understand the model's requirements and its role in the school's overall reform program.

Money. Superintendents can help principals coordinate the funds they already receive, such as Goals 2000 money, Title I allocations, Title VII funding and state staff development funding. Superintendents and principals must often seize resource opportunities quickly and be aware of all the options available to them by thinking "outside of the box." Even so, they must remain keenly focused on the school's vision.

Personnel. To support the new instructional focus that is being undertaken, a reform program may require a school to reallocate resources that have supported aides, paraprofessionals and other specialists. This is often difficult to do because it could result in giving up staff members who are well-liked and whose roles have been valued, to make room for new positions needed by a reform program, such as on-site facilitators or coordinators, or to acquire funds to implement a reform model. Also, many of the national models rely on inclusion of all students in a regular classroom, doing away with many of the "special" positions such as Title 1 reading or math teacher.

Time. Time is often the resource scarcest to schools and the resource most difficult to obtain. Says Hord, "One problem schools face is they do not have time to do the kind of work needed to implement reform. We expect that they'll be flying the plane, and designing and building it at the same time. Finding time for planning and implementing change is a real barrier, a real problem."

Compounding the problem is that time needed for reform may conflict with district rules and regulations, parent and educator expectations, and collective bargaining agreements. It is a necessity, however, to provide teachers with time for adequate professional development training, time to reflect upon the changes required for comprehensive school reform, and time to engage in collegial relationships. Katzenmeyer and Moller write, "If the time spent in meetings on school change is productive and fulfilling for teachers, they will contribute toward school reform." They point out that productive meetings aren't accidental, but "are the result of someone taking time to plan carefully for expected outcomes."

Schools involved in comprehensive school reform across the country have found they must be creative to meet the challenges of finding time for school reform. Some secondary schools have added as much as an hour and a half a day to their schedules to effectively increase instructional time by about 30 days a year. Other schools report extending their school hours 15-30 minutes a day in order to have a regularly scheduled early release day to spend time as a staff planning and discussing changes and to allow time for professional development training. A word of warning, however: when districts and schools challenge well-established structures such as the hours of school operation, they are advised to involve all stakeholders in making the decisions.

Another option is for schools to make room in their budgets to hire substitutes for teacher release time or rely on a combination of substitutes and parent volunteers to provide teacher release time. The Clover Park School District in Washington state reallocated resources so that teachers could be paid $20 an hour during the summer to attend professional development sessions, thereby eliminating some of the need to take time during the school year for reform efforts.

Many schools rely on teachers volunteering their own time to dedicate to reform efforts. While this may work for a while, teachers can end up feeling resentful and burned out. Even at a school considered a "model" school in school reform literature—Hollibrook Elementary in Spring Branch, Texas—teachers remarked that they were often burned out despite their many successes.

Planning and Providing Resources: How Did Sierra Vista and Sunrise Measure Up?

Looking back at Sunrise Elementary, we see that the district office was often working against the school. Because of turnover in district office staff, the school lost its advocate for the reform project. There were no provisions made to provide time for teachers to spend on reform. At Sierra Vista Elementary, we see that although resource allocation was rocky at first because teachers did not have the time needed for reform, Ms. Martinez was able to overcome obstacles of time and money and successfully marshal the resources she needed for CSR.