strategic planning powerpoint

© 2015 THE DISTRICT MANAGEMENT COUNCIL

Strategic Planning Retreat

Identifying Strategic Needs in Sioux Falls School District

O C T O B E R 1 5 T H , 2 0 1 5

2www.dmcouncil.org

Agenda

Introduction & review of strategic planning process 60 min

Key findings from quantitative needs assessment 60 min

Key themes from qualitative needs assessment 30 min

Break 15 min

Closing and next steps 15 min

3

The District Management Council’s mission is to achieve systemic improvement in public education.

DMC Mission

The District Management Council was founded in 2004 to help address the most pressing and important challenges facing K-12 leaders.

DMC believes that strengthening the management capacity of schools is essential for raising student achievement, improving operational efficiency, and allocating resources more effectively.

4

DMC practice areas relate to the key aspects of school district performance.

DMC Practice Areas

Scope of DMC’s engagement with Sioux Falls School District

5

DMC has worked with several districts to shape their strategic vision.

Selected DMC Engagements

2011 – 2014

ILLUSTRATIVE

Boston Public Schools

• Strategic re-alignment and re-organization

• Human capital strategy

Minneapolis Public Schools

• Strategic budget allocation design

Hamilton County Department of Education

• District strategic planning

Baltimore City Public Schools

• District strategic planning

Virginia Beach City Public Schools

• Special education review and implementation planning

Fayette County Public Schools

• Strategic resource allocation

6

Five members of the DMC team will be working on the strategic planning project with Sioux Falls.

DMC Team

John J-H Kim, CEO

John has led several organizations in the education sector. He is also on the faculty of Harvard Business School, and is co-chair of the Public Education Leadership Project (PELP) at Harvard.

[email protected] 617-453-0715

Kriti Parashar, Director

Kriti brings experience in financial management, social enterprise, and non-profit management to DMC.


Kristen Keen, Associate

Kristen has worked on projects involving best practice reading efforts, related services staff, and resource allocation, and brings a background in law, technology, and management.


Hosanna Jones, Senior Advisor

Hosanna brings extensive experience in the public education sector. Most recently she was the State Superintendent of Education for the District of Columbia and was previously the chief of staff to the CEO in Chicago Public Schools


Andrew Larson, Executive Assistant

Andrew has a background in administrative support and office services. Andrew supports DMC’s project teams in all areas of logistics.

[email protected]

7www.dmcouncil.org

Sioux Falls engaged DMC to assist with drafting a focused, coherent, and actionable strategic plan to guide the district in its next phase of growth.

Strategic Planning - Rationale and Objectives DRAFT

Tightening Budgets

Growing Regulation

Rising Accountability

Increasing Student Needs • Prioritizing a focused and actionable set of the most important levers for improving performance

• Aligning all district stakeholders on a clear path forward over the next few years

• Providing a guidance document to drive allocation of district’s limited resources (financial, human capital and others)

Most school districts navigate a number of challenges and competing interests:

A coherent strategic plan helps navigate the growing number of challenges by:

District Situation Strategic Planning Benefits

8

• Form implementation teams and begin planning for Phase II

• Create a list of current school system initiatives

• Perform a gap analysis to identify future initiatives

• Finalize a new set of initiatives aligned with priorities

• Develop an action plan (with detailed phasing and roles and responsibilities)

• Manage and report on the progress of implementation

We are currently in the process of wrapping up the needs assessment phase which will form the basis of the strategic plan.

Project Workplan

Form steering committee

Gather and analyze quantitative data on what is working well and areas in need of improvement

Conduct stakeholder interviews to better understand root causes of district challenges

• Share findings from needs assessment with steering committee and others to inform strategic plan

• Work with steering committee to:

o Draft a theory of actiono Develop district priorities in

line with the drafted theory of action

o Finalize measurable goals related to district priorities

• Incorporate community feedback into the drafted plan

October 2015 - January 2016

Develop Strategic PlanConduct Needs Assessment

August - September 2015

Phase I - Design

Provide Implementation Support

Phase II - Implementation

(if applicable)9-12 months

Current focus

9

The steering committee consists of staff members from different levels in the organization.

Strategic Planning Steering Committee Membership

Name Position

Dr. Brian Maher Superintendent

Doug Morrison School Board Member

Kate Parker School Board Member

Todd Vik Business Manager, Executive Team

Deb Muilenburg-Wilson Director of Special Services, Executive Team

Ann Smith Program Supervisor, ELL Services

Laura Raeder Program Supervisor, Curriculum Services

Teresa Boysen Principal, Harvey Dunn Elementary

Jamie Nold Principal, Washington High School

Pam Oberembt President, Sioux Falls Education Association

10www.dmcouncil.org

The design of the strategic plan will consist of articulation of the theory of action, priorities, and measurable goals.

Strategic Planning Framework

Priorities

Initiatives

(outlining responsibilities and timelines)

Join

t Sch

oo

l Bo

ard

and

D

istrict Resp

on

sibility

Prim

ary District

Resp

on

sibility

Action Steps

Theory of Action

DE

SIG

NIM

PL

EM

EN

TAT

ION

Measurable Goals

Theory of Action: Fundamental belief around what will lead to long term success in the district

Priorities: Broad areas of focus to support the theory of action

Measurable goals: Specific and measurable goals related to district priorities

Initiatives: Specific projects related to priorities that help to achieve the measurable goals

Action steps: An articulation of what steps need to occur, by when and by whom

Framework Definitions

11

A theory of action is a logical derivation expressing what will ultimately drive success in the district.

Theory of Action

A set of beliefs, policies, and practices connected by logic rules. In short, belief around why something will be successful

Ask yourself – Fundamental belief around what will lead to long term success in the district

If resources are in the schools:• School communities have autonomy over resources• Resources are allocated transparently according to a formula

based on student population and characteristics; and,• There is appropriate guidance, support and accountability from

the district office;Then school communities will make improved decisions based on school needs, and student achievement will increase.

If principals will:• Be responsible for being instructional leaders;• Oversee teacher effectiveness;• Convey district priorities to appropriate stakeholders; and,• Be in charge of focusing the use of school resources;Then principals will be the primary leaders of change throughout the district.

Theory of Action

Examples of a Theory of

Action

12

Priorities are areas of focus for the district and must be determined with the theory of action in mind.

Priorities

Broad thematic areas of focus

Ask yourself – How will we support the theory of action?

• The district will provide each and every student high quality instruction that fosters inquiry, creative thinking, complex problem solving, and collaboration.

• The district will implement strategies to ensure a high quality and diverse workforce.

• The district will encourage and sustain collaborations with families and the entire community to support student success.

• The district will foster personal well-being and healthy among students and staff through increased awareness and engagement on these topics.

• The district will allocate resources efficiently, equitably, and transparently to accomplish our priorities.

Priorities

Examples of Priorities

13

Measurable goals are SMART goals for each of the priority areas.

Measurable Goals

Specific and measurable targets related to district priorities

Ask yourself – are all of the goals SMART? • Specific• Measurable• Aggressive yet Achievable• Relevant• Time-bound

• By 2020, at least 85% of schools will meet or exceed state accountability expectations for ALL students groups.

• By 2020, at least 18% of the district’s staff will represent diverse populations.

• By 2020, stakeholders’ (students, staff, and community members) survey responses indicating a positive perception on items regarding availability of courses, instructional materials, and programs in their school will increase by X% until reaching Y%.

• By 2020, the percent of students suspended from school will not exceed 5% for any student group.

• By 2020, every school will have a student attendance rate of 96% or higher.

Measurable Goals

Examples of Measurable

Goals

14

Initiatives are specific actions that assign ownership and timing to the broader goals and strategies.

Initiatives (Optional)

Specific actions related to each priority that help to achieve the measurable goals

Ask yourself – what needs to happen by when and by whom?

• By implementing a targeted minority recruitment program focused on attracting and hiring highly effective employees, minority representation across all employee groups will reflect 16% of the district’s staff by December 2018. This percentage will annually increase by 2%.

• By December 2016, the district will create a new partnership model to index all current partnerships and establish a process to evaluate, monitor, and manage existing partnerships to support the district’s strategic goals.

• By July 2016, the district will reduce by 1 day the average number of days missed by employees by developing an absence management program that establishes systemic expectations and provides supervisor/employee supports which positively impact employee attendance.

• By June 2017, 100% of district schools will have developed and implemented a school wellness plan.

Initiatives

Examples of Initiatives

15www.dmcouncil.org

Agenda




Break 15 min


16www.dmcouncil.org

Both quantitative and qualitative district data was analyzed to provide a full picture of SFSD’s areas of strength and improvement.

Needs Assessment Methodology

• Performance data

o Academic

o College-readiness

o Budget

• Demographics data

• Behavior-related data

• School-level review

• Comparison of Sioux Falls to other districts

• Focus groups with:

o Central office leadership

o Principals

o Teachers

o Parents

o School board members

QualitativeQuantitative

17www.dmcouncil.org

Executive Summary

Key Quantitative Findings:

Performance:

- Academic: Poverty levels are a strong predictor of performance across all school levels

- College-Readiness: The percentage of students taking one or more Advanced Placement course has increased, however only 16% are from low income households.

- Budget: The district’s per-pupil expenditure has remained steady over the past 5 years.

Demographics:

- Nearly 33% of Sioux Falls students belong to an ethnic or racial minority, yet only 2% of Sioux Falls teachers come from similar backgrounds.

Behavior:

- Total suspensions have decreased over the past 5 years primarily driven by a decline in in-school suspensions.

1

2

3

18www.dmcouncil.org

Executive Summary


Performance:

- Academic: Poverty levels are a strong predictor of performance across all school levels


- Budget: The district’s per-pupil expenditures have remained steady over the past 5 years.

Demographics:


Behavior:


1

2

3

19www.dmcouncil.org

Academic:

Elementary Level:

- There is a wide range in reading proficiency across elementary schools, with the district average below the state average.

Middle School Level:

- Overall, the percentage of 8th graders scoring proficient or above in math is above the state’s average, however there is a wide disparity in performance across schools in both ELA and math.

High School Level:

- The percent of 11th grade students scoring proficient or above on the state assessment in math and reading in Sioux Falls is above the state average.

Performance Key Findings1

20www.dmcouncil.org

There is a wide range in performance across elementary schools in Sioux Falls with the average 3rd grade ELA proficiency at 46%.

Percent Proficient on 2015 SBAC ELA/Literacy (Grade 3)

Source: SBAC Spring 2015 results; South Dakota Department of Education

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Elementary Schools

% 3r

d G

rad

ers

Pro

ficie

nt

on

SB

AC

EL

A/L

itera

cy

District Average: 46%State Average: 48%

21www.dmcouncil.org

There is a strong inverse trend between poverty and proficiency in reading for elementary schools.

Percent Proficient on 2015 SBAC ELA/Literacy Compared to Percent FRPL Eligible (Grade 3)


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

% 3r

d G

rad

ers

Pro

ficie

nt

on

SB

AC

EL

A/L

itera

cy

% FRPL Eligible

District Average

22www.dmcouncil.org

Middle school students perform at a higher level than that of the state as seen on the the 2015 SBAC ELA assessment.



0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

State Average: 47%

Middle Schools

% 8t

h G

rad

ers

Pro

ficie

nt

on

SB

AC

EL

A/L

itera

cy

District Average: 54%

23www.dmcouncil.org

The performance for 8th graders on the 2015 SBAC math assessment is also higher compared to that of the state.

Percent Proficient on 2015 SBAC Math (Grade 8)


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

State Average: 38%


Middle Schools

% 8t

h G

rad

ers

Pro

ficie

nt

on

SB

AC

Ma

th

24www.dmcouncil.org

Middle schools with the highest levels of FRPL eligible students have the lowest proficiency levels on the SBAC ELA assessment.



20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85

% 8t

h G

rad

ers

Pro

ficie

nt

on

SB

AC

EL

A/L

itera

cy

% FRPL Eligible

District Average

25www.dmcouncil.org

Performance on the 2015 SBAC ELA assessment was fairly consistent across high schools in the district and is above the state average.



0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

State Average: 60%

% 1

1th G

rad

ers

Pro

ficie

nt

on

SB

AC

EL

A/L

itera

cy

High Schools


26www.dmcouncil.org

On average, less than half of 11th graders in Sioux Falls scored proficient or above on the 2015 SBAC math assessment.

Percent Proficient on 2015 SBAC Math (Grade 11)


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

State Average: 39%

High Schools


% 1

1th G

rad

ers

Pro

ficie

nt

on

SB

AC

Ma

th

27www.dmcouncil.org

High schools in the district remain near the overall district average for proficiency in ELA regardless of poverty rate.



30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50

% 1

1th G

rad

ers

Pro

ficie

nt

on

SB

AC

EL

A/L

itera

cy

% FRPL Eligible

District Average

28www.dmcouncil.org

College Readiness:

- In 2014, the district had an average graduation rate of 82.1%, however and approx. 66% of low income students graduated that year.

- Of the 22% of high school students taking at least one AP course, only 16% were from low income households.

Performance Key Findings1

29www.dmcouncil.org

Sioux Falls’ graduation rates vary across the district by school.

4 Year Cohort Graduation Rate by Subgroup (2014)

Source: Data provided by district

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


81.4%84.1% 79.7%Gra

duat

ion

Rat

e

93.4%

NTHS WHS LHS RHS

30www.dmcouncil.org

While Sioux Falls has high graduation rates for white and Asian students, the district only graduates 67% of its low income students in four years.

4 Year Cohort Graduation Rate by Subgroup (2014)

Source: South Dakota State Report Card 2014

38%

52%

67%69%

72%74%75%

85%87%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

83%

Gra

duat

ion

Rat

e

82%

Native American

SWDLow Income

ELLHispanicMultiple Races

BlackAsianWhite

District Average

State Average

31www.dmcouncil.org

While low income students as a group have a low graduation rate, the schools with the highest concentration of this population are above the district’s average.

Graduation Rates Compared to Percent FRPL Eligible


70

75

80

85

90

95

30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50

% FRPL Eligible

Gra

du

atio

n R

ate

District Average

32www.dmcouncil.org

For the past 5 years, the district’s high school drop out rate has increased slightly.

High School Drop Out Rate

2010 – 2014


3.1%

2.8%

3.3%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Hig

h S

choo

l Dro

p O

ut R

ate

Year

2.8%

2.2%

33www.dmcouncil.org

In 2014, 22% of high school students were enrolled in at least 1 AP course.

Percent of Sioux Falls Students Enrolled in Advanced Placement Courses

2011 – 2014


30%

20%

10%

0%

Special EducationLow IncomeOther RaceWhiteOverall Enrollment

2011

2012

2013

2014

% S

tude

nts

Enr

olle

d

34www.dmcouncil.org

Performance Key Findings

Budget:

- Sioux Falls’ per-pupil expenditures have remained steady over the past 5 years.

- Only 7 of South Dakota’s 124 school districts scored higher on the ACT composite and with less per-pupil spending than Sioux Falls.

1

35www.dmcouncil.org

District per-pupil expenditures have remained steady over the past 5 years.

Sioux Falls Per-Pupil Expenditure


2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

$7,250

$7,350

$7,400

$7,500

$7,450

$7,700

$7,650

$7,600

$7,550

$7,200

$7,150

$7,100

$7,050

$7,000

$7,300

Year

$7,284

$7,538

$7,262

$7,157

Per

-Pup

il E

xpen

ditu

re (

$)

$7,603

36www.dmcouncil.org

Across the district, school operating budgets are adjusted to meet the differing needs of their student populations.

Percentage FRPL Compared to School Per-Pupil Operating Expenditure

Source: School operating budgets provided by district; FRPL data from South Dakota Department of Education

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

$4,500

$5,500

$5,000

$2,500

$3,000

$4,000

$3,500

Per

-Pup

il O

pera

ting

Exp

endi

ture

($)

% FRPL

District Average

Key: Elementary

Middle

High

37www.dmcouncil.org

Out of South Dakota’s 124 school districts, only 7 have a lower per-pupil expenditure and a higher ACT composite score than Sioux Falls.

2014 Per-Pupil Operating Expenditure & ACT Composite Scores

Note: The size of the dot represents the enrollment in the school district; 7 school districts with lower per-pupil expenditure and higher ACT composite scores are: Warner 06-5, Spearfish 40-2, Brandon Valley 49-2, Elk Point-Jefferson 61-7, Yankton 63-3, Brookings 05-1, and Madison Central 39-2.

Source: South Dakota State Department of Education

14.50

15.00

15.50

16.00

16.50

17.00

17.50

18.00

18.50

19.00

19.50

20.00

20.50

21.00

21.50

22.00

22.50

23.00

23.50

24.00

24.50

25.00

19,000$18,00017,000$16,000$10,0009,000$8,0007,000$6,000 15,000$14,00013,000$12,00011,0005,000$4,000

Per-Pupil Operating Expenditure ($)

Sioux Falls 49-5

Rapid City Area 51-4

Yankton 63-3

Brookings 05-1

AC

T C

ompo

site

Sco

re

Brandon Valley 49-2

State Average: 22.0

38www.dmcouncil.org

Compared to large districts in neighboring states, Sioux Falls has the lowest per-pupil expenditure and the highest graduation rates.

2014 4 Year Cohort Graduation Rates Compared to Per-Pupil

Operating Expenditure

Note: The size of the dot represents the enrollment in the school district

Source: South Dakota Department of Education, Nebraska Department of Education, Minnesota Department of Education

40.00

45.00

50.00

55.00

60.00

65.00

70.00

75.00

80.00

85.00

90.00

95.00

$15,000$14,000$13,000$12,000$11,000$10,000$9,000$8,000$7,000$6,000$5,000$4,000

4 Y

ear

Coh

ort G

radu

atio

n R

ate

Per-Pupil Operating Expenditure ($)

Minneapolis Public Schools

Lincoln Public Schools

Sioux Falls 49-5

South Dakota State Average 81%

54%

82%

39www.dmcouncil.org

Executive Summary


Performance:

- Academic: Poverty levels are a strong predictor of performance across all school levels.



Demographics:


Behavior:


1

2

3

40www.dmcouncil.org

Demographics Key Findings

Overall:

- The student enrollment in Sioux Falls has grown over the past 5 years [+1.5% per year].

Student:

- The gap between the state and Sioux Falls for the percentage of students eligible for FRPL has remained steady over the past 5 years.

Teacher:

- Teacher attrition rate has more than doubled over the past 5 years.

- Sioux Falls’ teacher force is significantly less diverse in comparison to its student population

2

41www.dmcouncil.org

The district enrollment has been steadily growing over the past five years.

District Enrollment

2010 – 2014

Note: This enrollment analysis does not

Source: South Dakota Department of Education

23,034

22,602

22,342

21,999

20,000

20,500

21,000

21,500

22,000

22,500

23,000

23,500

24,000

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

# of

stu

dent

s en

rolle

d

Year

21,390

1.5% growth each year over the past 5 years

42www.dmcouncil.org

Overall, enrollment in lower grades has increased over the past five years.

Enrollment by Grade

2010 – 2014

GradeCompound annual

growth rateK 2.0%1 2.6%2 3.4%3 3.4%4 2.5%5 1.5%6 2.1%7 1.8%8 0.4%9 0.5%10 0.0%11 -1.6%12 0.3%

Grade 12

Grade 3

Grade 2

Grade 11

Compounded annual growth rate is the year on year growth rate over a specified period of time.

Source: South Dakota Department of Education

2010 2011 2012 2013 20141300

1400

1500

1600

1700

1800

1900

2000

2100

# of

stu

dent

s en

rolle

d

Year

43www.dmcouncil.org

The gap between the state and Sioux Falls for the percentage of students eligible for FRPL has remained steady.

Percentage of Students Eligible for FRPL

2011 – 2014

Source: South Dakota Department of Education; data from 2010 was not available.

0

10

20

30

40

50

42%

2013

33%

49%

2012 2014

30%

35%

48%

2011

35%

46%

Year

% o

f stu

dent

s el

igib

le fo

r F

RP

L

Dis

tric

t

Sta

te

44www.dmcouncil.org

However, compared to large school districts in neighboring states, Sioux Falls has less students who are free and reduced priced lunch eligible.

Demographics in Sioux Falls Compared to Other Districts

Source: South Dakota Department of Education, Nebraska Department of Education, Minnesota Department of Education

42

33

15

32

7

44

49

24

65

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

%

Non-WhiteELLFRPL

SF

SD

23

,96

4 s

tud

en

ts

Lin

co

ln3

9,0

66

stu

de

nts

Min

ne

ap

oli

s3

5,3

56

stu

de

nts

45www.dmcouncil.org

Sioux Falls’ teacher attrition rates have more than doubled over the past 5 years.

Sioux Falls Teacher Attrition Rates

2010 – 2014

Note: Attrition rate does not include retirements.


5.8%5.6%

4.1%

4.4%

2.0%

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

4.5%

5.0%

5.5%

6.0%

201420112010

Ave

rage

Tea

cher

Attr

ition

Rat

e

20132012

46www.dmcouncil.org

Sioux Falls’ teaching force is significantly less diverse than the student population with some groups almost not represented entirely.

Minority Representation: Student vs. Teacher Populations

2014


American Indian/AlaskanNative

5.0%

Asian

4.0%

67.0%

4.0%

Multi-Racial

Hispanic

9.0%

Black 11.0%

White

97.0%White

Student Diversity Teacher Diversity

Hispanic American Indian/Alaskan Native

47www.dmcouncil.org

Executive Summary


Performance:

- Academic: Poverty levels are a strong predictor of performance across all school levels.



Demographics:


Behavior:


3

1

2

48www.dmcouncil.org

Behavior Key Findings


3

49www.dmcouncil.org

In-school suspensions have gradually decreased over the past 5 years, and out-of-school suspensions have remained steady.

SFSD In-School & Out-of-School Suspension Rates


2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Year

Out-of-School Suspension

In-School Suspension

4.0%

4.8%

3.5%

5.3%

3.3%

6.2%

4.1%

6.8%

4.2%

7.5%

Sus

pens

ion

Rat

es

50www.dmcouncil.org

Agenda




Break 15 min


51www.dmcouncil.org

Agenda




Break 15 min


52www.dmcouncil.org

Around 50 different stakeholders participated in focus groups to provide qualitative insights on district performance.

Stakeholders Interviewed

Stakeholders Interviewed

Central Office

Teachers & Instructional

Coaches

PrincipalsSchool Board

Members

Parents

• Assessment, Technology, & Information Services

• Business Manager & Community Relations

• Curriculum, HR & Legal, Specials, ELL, and Operational Services

• Elementary Level

• Secondary Level

• Specialized Programs

• Kent Alberty, President

• Carly Reiter

• Students from all levels

• Students in specialized programs

• PTA representation

• Elementary, Middle, and High Schools

• Specialized Programs

53www.dmcouncil.org

3 key questions were asked in the focus groups to help uncover the district’s strengths and opportunities for improvement.

Focus Group Questions

• What do you believe is going well in the district?

• What do you believe are some opportunities for improvement?

• If you could name your top 3 priorities for the district in the years to come, what would they be?3

2

1

54www.dmcouncil.org

Sioux Falls has many areas of strength to build upon.

Things Going Well in the District

Dedicated & passionate staff

Opportunities for multiple pathways

High expectations for students

• Sioux Falls staff members are dedicated to their students and proud of the district and its achievements

DescriptionKey Themes

Comprehensive supports for new

teachers

• The district offers a wide variety of pathway options for students (e.g., Spanish immersion programs, Honors program, etc.) although they are not continuous through K-12

• Sioux Falls has a culture of high expectations where “good enough” is not part of their vocabulary

• The district provides numerous supports for new teachers such as instructional coaches, well documented curriculum for each subject, etc.

• Sioux Falls has invested significantly in its buildings and other facilities (e.g., technology access with 1:1 devices) although the technology infrastructure may require some upgradation (reports of connectivity issues are common)

1

High quality facilities

55www.dmcouncil.org

Opportunities for improvement focused on need for increasing supports for the student population.

Opportunities for Improvement (1 of 2)

• Elementary reading performance is lower than the state average

• There is large variation in performance across schools, e.g. graduation rates vary significantly across high schools

• Recruitment of high quality staff is becoming increasingly difficult with a continuously shrinking pool of candidates

• Teacher attrition is on the rise potentially due to lower salaries compared to adjoining states


• Number of behavior related incidents have increased significantly over the past year, especially at the elementary level

• The number of programs offering behavior supports may not be sufficient to serve growing student needs

2

Student achievement

Teacher recruitment and retention

Increasing need for social-emotional

supports

56www.dmcouncil.org

A number of district-level areas of opportunity also emerged from focus group discussions.

Opportunities for Improvement (2 of 2)

• Unclear and scattered communication approaches with families, e.g. through website, apps and no paper pamphlets

• Perception of limited transparency between the central office, schools, and community.

• Limited resources and avenues for communicating with and supporting families from differing cultural or socio-economic backgrounds

• Need for system level changes, e.g. change in boundaries and open enrollment policies, institution of leadership positions focusing on reduction in gaps in student achievement, investment in early ed. or summer learning programs, etc.


2

Unclear communication

Insufficient district readiness for changing student demographics

and needs

57www.dmcouncil.org

Stakeholders suggested increasing supports for students and teachers as key priority areas.

Priorities

• Expand access to specific programs, e.g., early childhood, behavior supports, etc.

• Tailor supports for students based on the specific needs of student groups

• Utilize expertise of instructional coaches to provide differentiated supports to students

Strengthening Supports for Struggling Students

• Strengthen teacher recruitment and retention using non-monetary incentives such as flexible schedules, professional development, etc.

• Create a system for recognition of exceptional staff members

Strengthening Supports for Teachers

Engaging the Community

• Use offline and online communication channels to promote communication and collaboration with community members

• Promote awareness among community members around key district issues

• Create systems to share information and best practices with schools around meeting student needs

3

58www.dmcouncil.org

Agenda




Break 15 min


59www.dmcouncil.org

The steering committee will now begin drafting different elements of the strategic plan.

Next Steps

• The steering committee will begin drafting the different elements of the strategic plan

• Once an initial draft of the strategic plan is complete, it will be shared with internal and external district stakeholders for input and feedback

• Information on the strategic plan progress and process will also be available on the district website

What happens next?

strategic planning powerpoint

Documents

public education sector

strategic planning project

strategic vision

strategic planning rationale

district stakeholders

district of columbia

chicago public schools

actionable strategic