What is a Comprehensive Planning?
The Comprehensive Plan (a.k.a. strategic plan) is a document that provides an assessment of the current district programs across 5-6 different areas: professional education plan, teacher induction plan, student services plan, special education plan, gifted plan, and the prekindergarten program implementation plan where applicable. It describes plans, provides a needs assessment, and in certain areas, sets forth action plans including goals and strategies to achieve them. Under Chapter 4 regulations, our district is required to submit certain components every three years, while others are required to be updated every six years.
Strategic Planning is designed to provide the framework and guidance for a school district to fulfill their mission efficiently and with the greatest impact. This process is meant to facilitate communication and collaboration, promote shared practices and resources, and ensure that every stakeholder is working toward common goals. Effective strategic planning provides structure for decision making that builds upon the common vision and values held by the community. For most districts this process is critical. When done correctly, through consistent monitoring of strategically agreed-upon values and goals, continued training and implementation of curriculum, and reinforced accountability, the document can help guide improved student achievement and district performance.
According to the PA Department of Education, comprehensive planning is a continuous process used to ensure that all students are achieving at high levels. All LEAs (Local Education Agencies) can create better environments so that more students are successful. Continuous planning of the district is essential to providing increased student performance and quality results. Innovative, exemplary, and research-based programs, coupled with staff development, focused and aligned resources, and public participation in planning, are critical factors in districts that demonstrate continuous growth.
The Process
The process of a strategic planning is to provide a values-based approach to re-assess community values and planning for the future of the school district. A district should be setting goals, deciding on actions to achieve those goals, mobilizing the resources needed to take those actions, and evaluating the success of those actions. The planning process should involve documenting the current state and the desired future position of the school district through authentic stakeholder engagement. The Board of Education, administration, faculty, staff, parents, students, and community leaders are the cohesive groups that endeavor to create a vision for their desired future through their feedback, opinions, and ideas.
CASD started this process in September 2018 under the leadership of Rita Perez. Only four community members initially applied to be appointed by the board to be part of this committee out of a total of six available spots. These four individuals were accepted by the board on 10/23/18, and a fifth appointee was approved 11/13/18. The sixth board appointment was never made, as no applicant came forward. In addition to the appointed members of the committee, administrators, teachers, and parent organization representatives were invited to attend and participate in the meetings.
Planning meetings began at the end of November 2018 with all participants being assigned to mixed groups consisting of a variety of administrators, teachers, and community members. At each meeting, a topic was presented for discussion. Table groups answered specific questions given on the topics and brainstormed solutions. Ideas were shared with the larger group. An administrator at each table took notes for the tables and responses were shared out with the larger group. The notes were collected and turned in, but these notes were never shared with the group at large.
The first meeting was used to review and discuss the district's mission, vision, and goals as a way to better understand the pillars by which we viewed these key areas of focus. The topics for the subsequent meetings were related to professional development, new teacher induction, and safe and supportive schools. Although the gifted plan was slated for review, none of the discussion topics included gifted education.
Topics related to the discussion areas, but did not include a review of the prior plan, a broad-based discussion of all aspects of the topic, or provide an opportunity to iterate on how ideas were being incorporated into the plan. As an example, at one of the meetings focused on safe and supportive schools, the only topic discussed was how to reduce students cutting class or school. Many thoughts and ideas came out of the discussion, from home visits, to reverse suspension, to identifying root cause with students potentially not feeling like they are equipped for success in the classroom.
Unfortunately, the draft of the plan emailed for review did not include any evidence of using information or input from the meetings, the ideas generated were never shared back with the group, and the group never saw the plan itself during the process or until the day before the public review period started.
Because the plan was presented to the public at the same time the committee members saw it, the feedback of committee members was only considered as part of the public review process. The committee members, appointed or invited, were not asked to participate in presentation of the strategic plan to the board of directors.
Conclusion
Ultimately, this was a huge missed opportunity. We had a dynamic and engaged group of community members, teachers, and administrators meet five times over a series of several months. However, the controlled nature of the meetings, the structured topic adherence, and the lack of accountability or follow up meant that most of the ideas shared broadly by committee members failed to make it into the plan.
When we contrast this process with those described by other schools, the difference is significant. A district with similar challenges, Norristown, described its process quite differently including weekly meetings and committees that rotated and worked collaboratively on the different aspects of the plan. Topics were shared in advance and members were encouraged to seek input from others in between meetings. When the plan was completed, it was presented to the board ahead of public review, and there was significant community engagement - notification calls and emails that the plan was available, as well as a town hall to seek feedback from the community.
From my review and discussion with those on the planning committee, the "final" plan lacked specificity as to action plans including goals and strategies to achieve them so what's the point of the effort? The plan is incomplete. In the end, the district now has, at best, a plan that reflects a singular (Administrative) vision that does not include or discuss public participation.
ReplyDelete