Turnaround orchestrators pleased but say more work is needed

By Paul Takahashi

Saturday, July 7, 2012 | 2 a.m.

This is another in a yearlong series of stories tracking Clark County School District's efforts to turn around five failing schools.

Last month, the Clark County School District wrapped up the first year of a three-year “turnaround” at three of Las Vegas’ worst-performing high schools.

Chaparral, Mojave and Western underwent dramatic changes over the course of a year, funded by the first chunk of an $8.7 million federal School Improvement Grant.

Principals and more than half of the staff were replaced. Outside professionals were brought in from across the country to help guide the new staff toward improvements.

A renewed focus on discipline and order prevailed on these campuses, which saw a top-to-bottom cleaning. The school day was lengthened; schedules and classrooms were overhauled. Schools implemented more rigorous curricula and launched new teaching focuses in science, health and robotics.

These changes were unprecedented, the potential for success or failure great.

Officials say the turnaround is starting to pay off, translating to higher test scores and graduation rates at all three high schools. Those results are still being compiled and are expected to be made public in August.

The Sun sat down with Clark County Schools Superintendent Dwight Jones and Deputy Superintendent Pedro Martinez to talk about how year one of the turnaround went, the lessons learned and the next steps for this grand experiment in public education.

The following interview has been edited for clarity.

What changes have you seen at these three turnaround high schools?

Martinez: There was a change in culture around the expectation for kids and how we deal with behaviors. The reality is we had kids who were late to class and (had) problems with expulsions and fights. Now there is an expectation you get to class on time and you are going to behave. If there is any type of fighting or issues, those are going to be dealt with immediately. That wasn't the feeling in previous years. For us, it reinforces the importance of the culture of the buildings, the importance of tracking these children, looking at their data.

Jones: You’ve got to get the culture right before learning can take place. Change the discipline, the expectation for students and staff. They set the bar pretty high. We’re still waiting on all the indicators, but I'm pleasantly optimistic that those schools are on the right path. But I think we would not be doing our due diligence if we felt like they were out of the woods. It's good improvement, but there's still a lot to be done.

There were many “quick wins” this year — cleaner campuses, fewer fights, better test scores — but how do you plan to sustain this turnaround into the future?

Martinez: I think what's going to make this stick is these schools made structural changes in how they're connecting with kids that makes me confident these things are going to last. Really, the hard work for them now is around the academics. Right now it's about getting kids on track to graduate. That's the next-level work. The components that are going to take more time are getting more kids into advanced placement courses and getting kids through the health and science programs. The reality is these children are behind when they get to their senior year, and it's so hard to catch them up. These are very low-performing schools. So they're not going to become the Coronado High Schools, the Green Valley High Schools, overnight.

Jones: I think principals and staff (have their) eyes wide open now about how difficult the work is. We're working on building systemic changes so that when they get to high school, they're in a better position. But when you start at the high school level, it's really a difficult task. Consistency really matters when you get this model. Folks had to buy into what that work was going to be. We're going to spend some time talking with staff, certainly continue to listen to our principals, but really getting a feel for what worked, what didn't work.

With more than $4.6 billion infused into thousands of turnaround schools across the country, the School Improvement Grant program is one of the largest investments in public education in the nation’s history. However, there is less money coming down from the feds, and now there have been talks in Congress of defunding the program entirely. How do you feel about the fate of the SIG program?

Martinez: We feel that rather than us being dependent on the state and feds, we want to put in strong reforms districtwide by creating a turnaround zone ourselves and funding it ourselves with our own Title I dollars. It’s a better use of federal dollars since we can target them to schools that really need them. And instead of working on the state's or fed's timeline, we create our own timeline. We could be smarter about it.

Jones: I think the resources have had an impact and have mattered. What we'd hate to do is turn around a school and then pull away the resource that was the very thing that helped them turn around. But I'm not one to just say throw money at problems. What we've tried to do with the turnaround model is to be very targeted to how those resources were used and to monitor how that worked, what resources yielded the best results. It can't just be about more money because at some point, you can't just always have more money. At some point, you have to become very intentional about the money you have and how you're spending it and what kind of results you're getting from that expenditure.

The School District has an application with the state requesting that Canyon Springs High School — located just two miles from Mojave — receive SIG funding next year. However, instead of replacing the principal and half the staff, Canyon Springs will only replace the principal, who may bring iup to 10 new staffers into the building. Why isn’t the district pursuing the turnaround model for Canyon Springs?

Martinez: Doing a turnaround is hard in a district our size. It’s disruptive, the timeline for SIG applications are very tight, and you have to go out and hire 50 to 100 new staff. Whenever you do it, we also have to understand the ramifications to the rest of our schools because those staff have to go somewhere. Some of them are strong, some of them are not. But we’re worried: Are we creating a next set of turnaround schools ourselves as an unintended consequence? We’re not sure if turnaround, in our district, is sustainable. I think if we bring in a small team of new staff, it could be almost as effective as a turnaround that replaces all the staff. Nothing beats being able to hire your own staff. All of us would want that, but the challenge is: How do you do that at scale in a district our size?

Jones: Not many districts are taking on large, comprehensive high schools. A lot of them are doing elementary schools, some middle schools, and I think there are a few high schools. The turnaround is a big effort. I think there’s a benefit to that turnaround model, that you still have got to maintain some of the current, but you’ve got to bring in a significant amount of new. But what is the right mix? Is it 50 percent of staff reconstituted or could it be 10 or 15 percent? I’m not sure. However, you can’t have disruption for the sake of disruption. You have to ask: What puts us in the best position to get the very best results?

Was the turnaround worth it?

Martinez: Every single school showed improvement over last year. Some of the schools literally had double-digit gains. Western a year ago only had 60 percent of their kids on track to graduate. Now, they're at 80 percent. These are really good indicators. I think the community generally will be happy about the progress we've made.

Jones: How could you say it wasn't? I think you could ask anyone and they would say those buildings are all better. Now, a person's definition of better could be interpreted a lot of different ways, but I think just in general, those buildings are better. If you don't believe that 5 percent or 6 percent increase, if you don't believe that 100 more kids graduating at Chaparral is worth the investment, then go spend time in that school and talk to the parents and talk to the kids. Those schools are on the right path. We still have a long way to go, but all of those schools are better than where we started. Are they where we want them to be? No. But they're better than where we started, kudos to the principals and teachers, and that's worth the investment.