Elements of a charter school strategic plan

The elements of a charter school strategic plan are the same as for any good strategic plan. Those elements are:

1. A Vision Statement
2. A Mission Statement
3. A set of core values
4. An situational analysis (often called a SWOT analysis after Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats)
5. A set of goals and objectives
6. A set of strategies and tactics to meet those objectives

Often other elements are added. For example, often organizations include a responsibility map so that everyone knows who is responsible for each strategy or tactic. In addition, some organizations define a feedback loop so that the organization will know when it is going off track.

Remember that the purpose of a strategic plan is usually for internal use. People often ask me how long each section needs to be or if they can eliminate a section. I probably take a bit of a different stance from some others. I think that the strategic plan has to be useful. If a section is not useful, then don't write it. However, you had better be really careful if you do. Make sure that it really isn't necessary. I usually counsel people to write each section, even if a section is very brief. It may be that the discussion of external threats is minimal. Perhaps it's only a paragraph. Even then, it may be that the paragraph provides important information to those who read and use the strategic plan. That's the key. It has to be used or its not a good strategic plan because it is then not part of the strategic management process.

Students First survey results: Americans don't like seniority policies for teachers

Studentsfirst.org reports that in a recent survey 74% of Americans reject the idea that teachers should be laid off based on how young/new they are. Americans favor merit based layoffs. The survey also asked about teacher evaluations.

More can be found here. With such a super majority, senior teachers must be glad this isn't up for a constitutional amendment.

Texas cap on charter schools limits Houston expansion

It looks like just over 10% of charter school applications will be approved this year in Houston. It's not necessarily because the applications are not good or the schools might not be great. It's because of artificial limits set on schools. Charter schools are supposed to provide real alternatives for all children, but in this case they can't because the laws in Texas don't allow them to.

Caps need to go. Let the quality of the applications and the need for the school be the determining factors.

Charter school strategic planning: why it makes sense

A charter school is about education. It makes sense for a charter school to have an education plan. Why should a charter school take the time to develop a strategic plan?

Let's face it. One of the reasons that few charter schools develop complete strategic plans is that they take time. Time is one thing that charter school leaders do not have an abundance of. However, a strategic plan can benefit all constituents of a charter school.

The strategic plan integrates that education plan with the financial plan, facilities plan, marketing plan and human resources plan. In other words, it gives direction to the school so that it both knows where it is going and can measure its success. It can also be used to raise warning signs along the way.

Because the strategic plan lays out measurable objectives in all aspects of the school, the school's leaders can tell when they are off track. If test scores are high and meeting goals, but the school is not developing staff the way they would like or not putting away adequate reserves for a rainy day, then the school may be in danger, even though things are going well today.

A strategic plan doesn't have to be perfect and doesn't have to involve only the work of the school leader. Others at the school, such as a business manager or lead teachers, should be involved.

It's more important for a charter school to have a strategic plan that even for a large school district. A large school district can often survive without a strategic plan because it doesn't have to compete for students or convince anyone to use its services. Planning is, in some ways, easier than for a charter school. A charter school needs to know if it is meeting the needs of the community in ways that go beyond test scores or other measures of success. It has to create its own survival. The strategic plan is one tool that schools can use to direct the course of the school toward meeting those community needs.

For help in creating a strategic plan, contact me.  

Coming next: What's in a school's strategic plan?

Management Companies

It's interesting. I live in Colorado, a state in which charter school management companies have been the subject of discussion and potential additional legislation for about the past six months. Hearings began in October 2010. Interesting because I wrote "buyer beware" about a year ago based on something I read by Dr. Brian Carpenter. The reasons were not all related, but I'm glad that my state is examining the issues surrounding management companies.

I don't have a bone to pick with management companies, unless they have something to hide. I do believe that they are not necessarily the best option in many situations and that local boards should consider carefully before choosing a management company. It will be interesting to see how the Colorado legislation turns out and whether or not it addresses the issues that really matter. In the mean time, local boards need to consider all of the advantages and disadvantages of management companies prior to choosing one.

Great teachers need more than a teaching certification

I don't have much to comment on, so I'm just posting a link to Julia Steiny's article about great teachers being great learners. While the article doesn't specifically address teacher education or licensing, it does note that much of what makes a great teacher is ongoing. It isn't difficult to conclude that the typical typical check boxes that districts rely on aren't the indicators that we really need. Perhaps this shows that evaluating a great or even a good teacher should include a list of items that does not necessarily include an education degree or a state license.

Will Detroit's strategy for turnaround work?

In what could be another big test for charter schools, Detroit has turned over 41 schools for charter school operation.

I am not a big believer in charter for charter's sake, so I am a little skeptical about this strategy. On the other hand, it's obvious that the traditional system has not worked for these schools. Here is hoping that the Detroit leaders develop charter schools with proven strategies.

With Los Angeles and Detroit making this move and other district taking on similar strategies. For the kids, let's hope that the charter schools can find ways to improve education in these schools.

How to measure Performance Bonuses

Joanne Jacobs does a good job of looking at some of the problems with the criticisms of New York's performance bonus system.

The system was a bit "ambiguous" according to one commenter. When a system is unclear and the bonuses are given to all teachers at a school rather than to those who actually deserve them, it won't work.

To steal and rewrite a famous quote from Chesterton, "A good performance pay system has not so much been tried and been found wanting, but has been found difficult and never tried."

To Union or not to Union, that is the question

In an interesting short piece, Michael Petrilli notes that non-union teachers make more money, on average, than union teachers. Of course, this is a very simple analysis, but it does beg many questions, especially at this time when there is a claimed backlash against teacher unions and the fears that teachers will be abused if they do not have collecting bargaining power.

Perhaps unions' value is really to union leaders?

2011-12 will be an exciting year for charter schools

As the news about state education budget cuts continues around the nation, charter schools try to figure out how to balance budgets (as do their district counterparts). Layoffs, salary reductions, program cuts, class size increases are all on the table. There are few ideas that are not being considered. Some schools are fortunate enough to be growing or have strategically added classes to get more students.

This adds to the normal excitement of running a charter school. For some schools, it means a more crowded building. For alternative schools that I know, it means the potential of more discipline problems because supervision of already troubled kids is more difficult. It also means that administrative staff will likely have more to do. For small schools, it may mean closure as there may be few ways to accommodate cuts. It will mean more combining of grade levels in small schools.

Those are the traditional ways of dealing with budget cuts. Could there be more creative ways?

Here are a couple of ideas that probably won't make it on most people's tables, either because they are too radical or current education laws won't allow them to happen.

1. Increase hybrid programs and share buildings. This would allow schools to reduce one of their largest expenses while serving the same number of students. The downside is that parents or students may not be able to deal with a hybrid schedule.
2. Move to classes that are based on student performance levels rather than age. This could reduce the overall number of classes.

In addition, while the current environment makes it difficult, schools need to remained focused on both their mission as well as their life cycle stage as they make cuts. Many schools with relatively small class sizes may have to increase class size to make cuts, but they should still maintain their strategic goals in teaching method and curriculum if possible. They should also remember where they are in maturity, so that if they need a renewal strategy, they budget at least some amount for refreshing their culture.

Cuts in personnel should also be strategic. Is a given position one that might be permanently eliminated? If so, then that position ought to be eliminated first. Is there a good person who might be able to perform another job function? This is more difficult because it might involve terminating a less competent person. However, no option should be automatically taken off the table. Doing more with less is an absolute necessity in the current environment.

I know that most people in education are trying to restore the dollars that either have been or will soon be cut for 2011-12, but like the rest of our economy, I believe that these cuts may well be necessary. States don't have money. There are few ways of getting extra money, and tax increases in most states will be very difficult to swallow. Educators need to think creatively about what is really necessary.

In any event, the next 18 months will be exciting for charter schools. I hope that leaders make good decisions about their cuts, and that they don't just provide for survival, but that charter schools cut in ways that allow them to thrive.

Budget cuts and what they could mean for education

I spent some time at both the Colorado and California charter schools conferences over the past few weeks talking with school leaders and other education advocates about what budget cuts mean.

It was interesting. The answers fell into a couple of general categories.

1. We'll just have to lay off teachers and staff and increase class sizes.
2. We have a big enough reserve that the cuts won't hurt us too badly.
3. This is a real opportunity to rethink the way we do education.

The first response is a relatively non-thinking traditional response. It implies that the school won't change their method or thinking very much, but they'll just try harder with fewer resources. This could work, for a while.

The second response is interesting because it implies that the school has been financially responsible in the past and saved for this rainy day. The problem is what happens if the rainy day turns into a rainy week. What is the plan next year or the year after? Many believe that these funding cuts will provide a new baselines for education spending and that states won't or won't be able to restore cuts once they've been made.

The third response, while requiring the most immediate strategic thinking, seems to be the most appropriate response. If schools will have to get better with less money over time, are there strategies that work better for students with a limited budget? Could those be online programs or hybird programs? Could those be concurrent enrollment programs with high school and college? Could it be eliminating distinctions for some students between 9-16th grades?

These strategies are not new. I didn't think of them all by myself. They have been batted around by others. However, none of them has gained great popularity. With budgets at a level that deeply concerns all of the school leaders with whom I spoke, isn't it time for more of us to be discussing these options and coming up with yet others?

Strategic Planning at the Arizona Charter School Business Conference

I'll be running a strategic planning session at the Arizona Charter School Business Conference on May 5th. We'll run through the planning process, use examples of strong strategic plans, then we'll work with individual schools as they work on their strategic plans.

This should be a great session and I'm looking forward to it.

Hope to see all of you Arizonans there.

Charter Schools aren't perfect

Charter schools can be a great means of reaching kids who are otherwise unreached. They can be a great way to provide an alternate method of education or additional content that might not be supplied in neighborhood schools.

I was talking with a couple of educators today who work in a local traditional public school. They were reflecting on a couple of the charter schools near their school. The criticisms were interesting. They weren't terrible, but they were not necessarily positive.

One school, they believe, has the image that it's a place where anyone who wants to succeed can succeed. These educators have found that a fair number of students have attended this school and returned to the traditional school system no better off than when they started. It's not that the kids didn't try, but that the educational method did not work for them.

The other school, while it tries hard, also has kids that return to the public school system. Unfortunately, in this case, most of the kids that have left the charter school did so to either get away from the high standards or are severe discipline problems from severely dysfunctional families. Some of these families are so dysfunctional that it's difficult to tell what would help the student succeed. In fact, some of these students are suspended or expelled shortly after re-entering the traditional public schools.

While some of these "problems" with the charter schools may not be huge issues, the "problem" that I see is that charter schools some times promise too much or give the impression that they are something that they are not.

This also begs a question. Must any given charter school be "for everyone?" It seems to me that a charter school can be more like a magnet school and target students with certain learning styles or preferences. However, in that case, the school should make sure that entering students and families understand what they school is and what it can and can't do for the student.

In these days of budget cuts, it's tempting for schools to enroll anyone who is interested. It is also difficult to know in advance if a student is right for a particular charter school. Sometimes parents lie about their child's background, abilities, or preferences in order to get into charter schools that have waiting lists. Charter schools aren't perfect. We in the charter school world need to admit that, and tell people what our schools are good at, but also be honest about what we aren't.

California Charter School Conference and Poster Sessions

I'll be doing my first ever poster session on Wednesday, March 9th at the California Charter School Conference. The subject will be Financial Strategies for various stages of the Charter School lifecycle.

If you haven't seen a poster session, it's pretty basic. The presenter creates a "poster" on a bulletin board that participants can examine, then the presenter answers questions or discusses issues with the participants. People come and go. It's a bit like a museum exhibit.

I'm looking forward to the session. I've presented this topic in a more traditional manner in Arizona, Florida and Colorado. So, this will be a bit different for me. It's going to be great being able to talk in more depth with those who are interested in this topic.

To see more about the charter school lifecycle, you can look at other blogs that we've written.

Obama - Bush partnership: A bad thing?

Over at The Answer Sheet, Valerie Strauss claims that Obama is misguided in his efforts at forming a bipartisan education reform platform. I suppose that holds if you believe that teacher's ought to be supported no matter what. The President has taken a relatively moderate stance. While Jeb Bush is anti-union, the President has repeatedly said that unions must cooperate in doing what is right for kids. The President supports educational efforts that do not allow poor teachers to remain teaching or that support complacency among average teachers.

Ms. Strauss uses the Wisconsin teachers' complaints as an example of why the President should be supporting unions. Many of us believe quite the opposite. The Wisconsin situation may be just the type of situation that the country needs to help people, especially the average parent who doesn't follow these issues daily, to see what teachers' unions are up to.

The fact is that states don't have money and unions have not cooperated with most of the budget balancing efforts. Whereas most of us, and even most public employees, have dealt with furlough days, lay-offs, and salary reductions/freezes. Teachers have been less affected than others because of the union's efforts, and school districts submitting to union demands.

The budget balancing going on in many states is difficult. It requires some huge cuts. K-12 education makes up almost half of many states' budgets. At some point, and that seems to be now, K-12 can't be protected. Because the majority of K-12 education expenses are payroll expenses, teachers have to be affected. Where tenure and salary scales and other union demands have impeded the states' ability to effectively trim education expenses, unions have to cooperate or they have to be opposed. I always hate to use the war analogy, but when there is no cooperation in such dire financial circumstances, then states have to use tougher methods. They have little choice.

It may be that in the Wisconsin situation the state is going too far, but the status quo is not an option. Unions need to realize that many things about the current educational landscape have to change. The Obama-Bush partnership, while perhaps difficult, may be a good thing as it may lead to a less extreme position on teachers' unions from both sides. It may cause union supporters to open their eyes to the reality that life is changing. It also may cause union opposition to soften its anti-union position if unions become more realistic and cooperative in their dealings with districts and states. Only time will tell, but I'm not pessimistic.