“Can Turnaround Be Successful at Our School?”

This set of questions is the school building-level corollary to the “12 Tough Questions” self-audit for states analyzing their approach to school turnaround. It can serve as a short set of indicators for use by policymakers and turnaround advocates: Are the operation conditions and supports in place that would allow principals and leadership teams to successfully turn around a failing school? It could (and should) also be used by principals being asked to undertake school turnaround: Do I have what I need – and what any turnaround manager would need – to be successful? If not…

1. Have you and key members of your staff had a leadership role in shaping your school turnaround plan? Has the planning team benefited significantly from knowledgeable outside support? Has the process moved swiftly in order to meet an external deadline, and has it been driven in part by clear guidelines and criteria set by the state?

2. Is your work supported by a lead turnaround partner that, in your judgment, will help put your school in the best possible position to meet your student achievement goals? Does your district or state provide you with a choice of support services tailored to high-poverty settings and to your school’s priorities?

3. Do you as principal and turnaround leader have the authority to shape your school staff to so that you are best positioned to implement the plan? In the following HR areas, can you use these practices drawn from research in high-performance, high-poverty schools?

• Recruiting: hiring and placement; freedom from seniority rules, bumping and force-placing; ability to adjust positions to suit student needs
• Removal: discretion to excess teachers who are not performing or are unwilling to participate fully in the turnaround plan for the school
• Compensation: ability to differentiate compensation, providing bonus incentives to attract high quality teachers and/or performance- or responsibility-related pay

4. Do you, your partner, and your leadership team have the authority (and resources) to adjust your school’s schedule to suit the needs of your students and instructional approach?

5. Do you and your turnaround leadership team have discretion over budget allocation to support your mission? Is your turnaround plan sufficiently supported by extra funding and outside resources? Are those resources sufficient to provide for substantial planning, collaboration, and training time for staff?

6. Do you have the authority to adjust curriculum and programming to suit your school’s priorities and support the turnaround plan, within a larger framework of program-related decisions made by your district or cluster/network? Are you free to make choices and respond to crises with a minimum of compliance-driven oversight?

7. Do you have the authority to shape the way your school works by creating teacher leadership positions and differentiating responsibilities? Will you and your leadership team be provided, as part of the turnaround plan, with professional development to increase your expertise in turnaround management?

8. Do you currently have the technology, systems, and analysis expertise necessary to implement the frequent formative assessment and feedback that is central to increasing performance in high-risk populations?

9. Will you be provided, as part of your turnaround status, with the support of a network of schools involved in similar turnaround initiatives, along with higher-performing schools that can serve as colleagues and models?

10. Do you feel that you have been provided with unambiguous expectations and clear measures of accountability to help you bring urgency to the work of turning around student performance at your school?