DISTRICT ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
This chapter discusses the organization and management of the Dallas Independent School District (DISD) in seven sections:
- A. Governance
- B. Planning
- C. Policies and Procedures
- D. District Management
- E. School Management and Site-Based Decision-Making
- F. Legal Services
- G. Desegregation Order
E. SCHOOL MANAGEMENT AND SITE-BASED DECISION MAKING
Effective schools meet the needs of the communities they serve. Population diversity, the economic and ethnic backgrounds of the students, special service requirements, adequacy of facilities, staffing resources and instructional priorities of the community all contribute to shaping the unique organization of each school.
State law requires a site-based model for decision making in Texas school districts. The Texas Education Code specifies many requirements for site-based decision making (SBDM), including the following:
- The district must develop, annually review and revise a district-improvement plan and campus-improvement plans.
- District and campus performance objectives that, at minimum, support state goals and objectives must be approved annually.
- Administrative procedures or policies must clearly define the respective roles and responsibilities of the superintendent, central office staff, principals, teachers and district-level committee members in the areas of planning, budgeting, curriculum, staffing patterns, staff development and school organization.
- District and school-based decision-making committees must be actively involved in establishing administrative procedures.
- The district must put into place systematic communication measures to obtain broad-based community, parental and staff input and to provide information to those persons regarding the recommendations of the district-level committee.
- Administrators must regularly consult with the district-level committee on the planning, operations, supervision and evaluation of the district's educational program.
SBDM provides a mechanism for teachers, parents and community members to assist central and campus administrators improve student performance. Additionally, schools must have adequate resources and flexibility to develop programs that are tailored to meet the unique needs of the students they serve.
DISD's SBDM model, School-Centered Education (SCE), includes the District-Level Committee, which serves as the District Education Improvement Council and advises the board or superintendent in establishing and reviewing the district's educational goals, objectives and major districtwide classroom instructional programs and School-Community Councils (SCC). SCCs serve as the primary decentralized campus-level planning and decision-making committees for DISD schools and include teachers, parents and community members as required by the Education Code. The superintendent's executive team, in cooperation with the District-Level Committee, is responsible for developing DISD's District Improvement Plan (DIP), while each SCC is responsible for developing individual campus improvement plans (CIP). Vision 2003 serves as DISD's DIP, and the plan is in its third year of implementation.
SCE's purpose is to enhance the sense of community on each campus within DISD, where all concerned stakeholders come together to understand, plan and implement educational programs that best meet the academic and social development needs of their students. The guiding philosophy of SCE is to create and sustain learning and caring communities in which all adults feel respected and all children feel valued and motivated to learn and achieve.
SCCs are the focal point of DISD's SCE model, and each is intimately involved in developing unique mission statements for each campus consistent with the district's mission and in designing and implementing programs and activities to meet school and community needs. The SCCs also advise principals on planning, needs assessment, goal setting, budgeting, curriculum, staffing patterns, staff and parent development and school organization and management. Moreover, the SCCs consult and advise principals on CIPs, approve staff development plans and develop the CIP with the DIP, superintendent's initiatives, acceptable quality standards and best practices.
Each school's executive team is responsible for implementing SCE. The executive team consists of a principal, assistant principal(s) and deans of instruction.
FINDING
The overwhelming majority of principals are not supportive of the way the central office supports the schools. Over 90 percent of the principals participating in the focus groups complained that the central office was not responsive to their needs in the areas of Human Resources, Purchasing and Payroll. Their complaints ranged from the inability to get their phone calls returned to rude treatment by Human Resources personnel.
Budget analysts within the central office are currently assigned responsibility for each area, and nine employment administrators and accompanying project liaisons are assigned to the area offices, but all are located in the central office.
According to the results of TSPR's principal and assistant principal survey, respondents are evenly split on the support received from the central office. When presented with the statement: "Central administration supports the educational process," 43 percent of the respondents either disagreed or strongly disagreed, while 44 percent either agreed or strongly agreed. When presented with the statement: "Central administration is efficient," only 25 percent of the respondents agreed or strongly agreed, while 62 percent of the respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed, confirming the frustrations with central office support that principals expressed in the focus groups.
Principals meet with members of the central office administrative team three to four times each school year. The purpose of these meetings is to allow principals to share their concerns about the support that they receive from the various administrative departments in central office. These departments include Human Resources, Purchasing, Budget, Maintenance, Custodial and other departments. Principals said these meetings are always rushed and are not effective. Although department managers summarize concerns raised by principals in the meeting and send written responses to area offices and schools, principals report that there is no follow-up from department managers, problems cited during the meetings often go unresolved and support from the departments rarely improves. As a result, principals continue to experience frustration with the support provided to their schools and resort to phone calls and letter writing to get the support they need.
Principals also report that the instability of DISD's leadership has contributed to the lack of support at the school level. They perceive that administrators in the central office do not have clearly defined roles and responsibilities and that there is no consistency or accountability within the central office with respect to supporting the schools. For example, there has been no executive director for the Limited English Proficiency program since October 2000, which has resulted in a lack of districtwide direction for a program that affects many schools.
Recommendation 15:
Reassign budget analysts, employment administrators and project liaisons to area offices.
Providing accountability for central office support services is essential to SBDM. Accordingly, re-assigning budget analysts, employment administrators and project liaisons to the area offices will enable the central office to provide better "site-specific" support to the schools in each area.
Each area office should be assigned one budget analyst, one employment administrator and one project liaison, each of whom will be held accountable for ensuring that the central office provides the necessary service and support to the schools in a timely manner.
Additionally, the district should establish central office accountability by measuring service quality, response times and effective communication in each area office.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES AND TIMELINE
1. The superintendent reassigns budget analysts, employment administrators and project liaisons to the nine area offices as part of the restructured organization. August 2001 2. The superintendent directs the executive leadership team to work with the area offices to develop performance measures to hold reassigned personnel accountable for critical school support. September 2000 3. The executive leadership team develops critical performance measures and presents to the superintendent for approval. September - November 2001 4. The superintendent approves and implements the performance measures. November 2001 5. The executive leadership team monitors the performance of budget analysts, employment administrators and project liaisons on an ongoing basis. December 2001 and monthly thereafter FISCAL IMPACT
This recommendation can be implemented with existing resources.
FINDING
DISD does not have a formal program for training its own principals. In the past, the district had its own leadership academy and participated in a Fast-Track program with the University of Texas at Austin to train principals beginning in 1994-95. However, the leadership academy was discontinued after 1993-94, and the Fast-Track program was discontinued in 1998-99. One area superintendent said that less than 10 percent of the assistant principals in his/her area are ready to be principals. Additionally, the majority of new principals attending principals' focus groups received no training prior to their assignment as principals for the first time. Both area superintendents and principals agree that targeted training is not in place for principals and assistant principals in budgeting, school law, scheduling, textbook administration, instructional staff development, program implementation, student activity funds, conflict resolution, student discipline/Student Code of Conduct and overall school management.
DISD also does not provide sufficient training for area superintendents. As a result, recently appointed area superintendents have a difficult time adjusting to the rigors of area management and often experience considerable frustration dealing with the central office's bureaucracy, which ultimately affects the level of service and support the area superintendents provide to their schools through the area offices.
Fort Bend Independent School District (FBISD) operates a model leadership training program to develop principals and administrators. The superintendent uses a variety of private-sector leadership training and management techniques to develop principals and administrators to manage FBISD. These techniques are used to implement and manage processes that contribute to the overall quality and efficiency of the district.
Examples include techniques originated by Stephen Covey, W. Edwards Deming and Peter Drucker. FBISD's administrative leadership team, consisting of assistant principals, principals, district-level administrators and the superintendent's cabinet, receives annual training through "Architecture of Leadership Sessions" (ALS) that focus on leadership, executive stewardship, planning and scheduling, decision making, process improvement, quality management, motivation, performance appraisal and conflict resolution. ALS training increases leadership capacity throughout the organization and is based on the following principles:
- Leadership is key to organizational improvement.
- Organizational improvement means people improvement. Leaders improve their organization by developing their people.
- Leadership can be learned.
- Effective leaders share a common set of traits and behaviors.
- Administrators must exhibit both management and leadership capabilities. One must know how and when to manage or lead appropriately.
- Leaders motivate all stakeholders towards a common vision for the future. These visions are translated into goals for their organizations and expectations for people.
- Quality systems involve training, focusing on and monitoring achievement, establishing alignment and measuring processes.
FBISD also has a Future Principals Academy for assistant principals that uses identical leadership training techniques to develop principals from within the organization. This academy leverages the managerial and leadership skills of FBISD central and school administrators to provide innovative training to assistant principals. The district finds that assistant principals who complete the training offered by the Future Principals Academy are often more qualified than sitting principals in other districts to become principals within FBISD.
DISD administrators proposed a Campus Leadership Academy be implemented in 2001-02, after TSPR's fieldwork was conducted from November 2000 through January 2001. The proposal is in draft form and is designed to build the base of potential building-level administrators including principals and assistant principals. Three programs are proposed: Program One for professional employees who already possess appropriate certification; Program Two for teachers who have interest and capability to pursue a program leading to certification for campus leadership; and Program Three for campus leaders who need professional development to renew the certificates they have. Program One is the only program that will be operational in 2001-02. Programs Two and Three will be planned and developed in 2001-02.
Recommendation 16:
Reestablish the principals' leadership academy to train assistant principals from within DISD to be principals and develop an in-house leadership training program for principals and area superintendents.
In conjunction with the Campus Leadership Academy, DISD should reestablish the principals' leadership academy to use proven leadership training techniques to develop principals and area superintendents from within its organization. The district should use private-sector leadership training and management techniques to develop its principals and area superintendents. The program should start with assistant principals.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES AND TIMELINE
1. The superintendent directs the assistant superintendent for Human Resource Services and the associate superintendent for School Instructional Leadership and Operations to develop a plan for reestablishing the principals' leadership academy. August 2001 2. The assistant superintendent for Human Resource Services and the associate superintendent for School Instructional Leadership and Operations develop a detailed plan for reestablishing the principals' leadership academy, complete with implementation initiatives and costs. September - October 2001 3. The superintendent reviews and approves the plan. November 2001 4. The superintendent submits the plan to the board and the board approves the plan. December 2001 5. The superintendent includes the costs for reestablishing the principals' leadership academy in the 2002-03 budget. February 2002 6. The superintendent formally reestablishes the principals' leadership academy. September 2002 FISCAL IMPACT
This recommendation can be implemented with existing resources.
TSPR contacted Fort Bend ISD to determine the cost per participant in its Future Principals Academy. The interim superintendent was responsible for the Future Principals Academy and told TSPR that qualified district administrators lead their academy at minimal cost. The district only incurs costs for refreshments and printing training materials, which is minimal.
FINDING
DISD does not have an objective process for promoting or assigning the best candidates for open principal positions. Some area superintendents said their recommendations were considered and upheld, while others said their recommendations were not. One area superintendent said the principals assigned to his area that he has the most challenges with are those that were "given" to him in the assignment process. The majority of area superintendents said that once poor-performing principals are assigned to them, it is difficult to move them because sometimes they are "protected" by internal and external sources, including board members.
The majority of principals said they were unaware of a formal process for assigning principals. The principals who were aware of a formal process said that candidates from outside DISD provide resumes and letters of interest, and then they are interviewed. If an aspiring principal is within the DISD system, they typically receive a phone call telling them to come and interview for the job. Most felt that the existing process is very political, and that principals can be moved from school to school without notice other than a telephone call to come to the area or central office. The overwhelming majority of principals participating in the focus groups told TSPR that the current process does not yield the best principals. Because of the absence of a formal training program or leadership academy for new principals, the skill level of newly assigned principals depends on the level and quality of the "mentoring" principal that an assistant principal worked for during his/her career.
When TSPR conducted its fieldwork from November 2000 through January 2001, there was no formal process that set forth minimum criteria for education qualifications, preferred experience, specific competencies and references. The recruitment, application, interviewing, appointment and transfer process is not formally documented and communicated to area superintendents, principals and assistant principals throughout the system. However, since TSPR left the district in January 2001, the Human Resources Department began to develop a formal process for announcing vacancies for principals, assistant principals and deans of instruction and began formally outlining application requirements in those announcements. Additionally, administrators presented TSPR with a table outlining a selection process, but the process has not been formally adopted as a part of the district's administrative procedures manual.
Area superintendents and central office administrators are not required to provide documented evidence in the form of applications, interview summaries and exit summaries for any principal assignment or transfer.
Recommendation 17:
Develop a formal process for assigning and transferring principals and formally communicate this process to principals and assistant principals throughout the district.
A formal process for applying for new principal positions and transferring to open principal positions within the district is essential for DISD to identify and appoint the best possible candidates. The district should develop a formal process that sets forth minimum criteria for education qualifications, preferred experience, specific competencies and references. The recruitment, application, interviewing, appointment and transfer processes should be formally documented and communicated to area superintendents, principals and assistant principals throughout the system.
Area superintendents and central office administrators should be required to provide documented evidence in the form of applications, interview summaries and exit summaries for any principal assignment or transfer to maintain the integrity of the process.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES AND TIMELINE
1. The assistant superintendent for Human Resource Services directs the executive director of Staffing to work with the area superintendents and the associate superintendent for School Instructional Leadership and Operations to develop a formal process for assigning and transferring principals. August 2001 2. The executive director of Staffing obtains input from the area superintendents and the associate superintendent for School Instructional Leadership and Operations to develop and document a step-by-step process for assigning and transferring principals. August - September 2001 3. The assistant superintendent for Human Resource Services reviews the process with both the superintendent and the associate superintendent for School Instructional Leadership and Operations. September 2001 4. The deputy superintendent uses input from the superintendent and associate superintendent for School Instructional Leadership and Operations to develop an Administrative Regulation to formally document the process. September - October 2001 5. The superintendent approves the Administrative Regulation. November 2001 6. The superintendent formally implements the new principal assignment and transfer process and communicates the process to principals, assistant principals and administrators throughout the district. December 2001 FISCAL IMPACT
This recommendation can be implemented with existing resources.
FINDING
Principals are assigned assistant principals and deans of instruction without their input. Typically, assistant principals are assigned to principals by the central office, and principals do not have the opportunity to review their backgrounds or resumes before they report to the school. The majority of principals participating in the focus groups said they would like to have the opportunity to "build their own teams." To build their own teams, they feel they should have input into the assignment process for assistant principals and deans of instruction that are assigned to them because the principals are held accountable for student performance at their schools. Some principals were assigned assistant principals that were poor-performing and who had been demoted; yet the principals were held accountable for improving student performance.
Recommendation 18:
Develop a formal process to allow principals to participate in the screening, interviewing and selection of assistant principals and deans of instruction before assignments are made.
Assistant principals and deans of instruction are key members of a principal's school management team. As a result, each principal should have the opportunity to screen and interview potential candidates for the positions rather than have them assigned by area superintendents without their input. This screening and interviewing process is essential for principals to be sure they are being assigned individuals with the appropriate skills to implement the instructional and operational plan for their schools.
DISD should develop a formal screening and interviewing process that includes principals.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES AND TIMELINE
1. The assistant superintendent for Human Resource Services develops a policy and related Administrative Regulation requiring principals to participate in the screening, interviewing and selection of assistant principals. August - September 2001 2. The superintendent reviews and approves the policy and related Administrative Regulation and presents to the board. September 2001 3. The board approves the policy. November 2001 4. The superintendent implements the policy and related process documented in the Administrative Regulations. December 2001 FISCAL IMPACT
This recommendation can be implemented with existing resources.
FINDING
The district's local board policy does not outline, and board members, principals, teachers, central office administrators and campus-improvement committees do not fully understand, their respective roles and responsibilities in site-based decision making (SBDM) or their levels of authority. For example, principals report that SBDM is not working in some of their schools because they feel SBDM is centrally controlled and school-based decisions made by campus-improvement teams and supported by principals sometimes are not upheld. Additionally, some principals told TSPR that their site-based committees did not understand that they serve in an advisory role to the principal as outlined in the Texas Education Code. This is primarily because SBDM roles and responsibilities have not been defined for each level of decision making within the district.
Additionally, 62 percent of respondents to TSPR's principal and assistant principal survey agreed or strongly agreed that site-based budgeting is used effectively to extend the involvement of principals and teachers in the budgeting process. The majority of principals participating in focus groups said they need more targeted training in areas such as budgeting and financial management, purchasing and school management.
DISD prepared a training program in 1998 to acquaint principals, teachers, administrators, School-Community Council (SCC) members and the school community with the district's SBDM process. The district developed a training manual entitled The Guide to Shared Decision-Making to be used as a resource manual for DISD's SBDM process. The manual describes the process and describes the roles and responsibilities of participants at each level of the SBDM process and is used by schools throughout the district. SCC members receive core training in the SBDM process through districtwide sessions and distance learning. SCCs may view taped training through the district's cable communications network or borrow tapes to view the session on an individual campus. The training tapes are approximately 15 minutes long.
The Guide to Shared Decision-Making does not provide specific training for budgeting, financial management, school management and purchasing. Principals told TSPR that this training is provided by the Region 10 Education Service Center, but is not comprehensive enough to improve their SBDM skills.
Although principals said that SBDM training is not comprehensive enough to improve their skills, district administrators responsible for SBDM training report that several districtwide training sessions were offered during 2000-01 at individual campuses, including budget training conducted during March 2001. Additional SBDM training is scheduled for July and August 2001.
TSPR also reviewed the TASB Board Member Training Report for the period from September 1998 to October 2000 and found that none of the current board members attended SBDM training during this period. However, two board members have been assigned to a subcommittee to develop training guidelines for new board member orientation that will include SBDM training.
Administrators, teachers and SCC members also do not receive targeted training in addition to the training provided through The Guide to Shared Decision-Making.
Recommendation 19:
Provide targeted training in site-based decision making to board members, central administrators, principals, teachers and School Community Councils.
DISD should define the roles and responsibilities of each level of authority in the SBDM
process-from SCCs to the school board-and include that definition in local board policy. This will ensure that all participants in the SBDM process understand both the scope of their authority and their limitations. Further, the district should commit to annual, targeted training workshops on SBDM to reinforce the concept for SCC members, teachers, school administrators and central administrators. By providing annual training in SBDM, the district will increase stakeholders' level of awareness in the SBDM process.DISD's Human Resources Department should work with Region 10 to provide more targeted and detailed training for principals and assistant principals for budgeting, financial management, purchasing and school management and operations. These sessions should be mandatory for all principals and assistant principals and should be held twice each year until specific competencies are achieved.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES AND TIMELINE
1. The deputy superintendent works with Region 10 to identify targeted SBDM training for board members, administrators, teachers and members of the SCCs. August 2001 2. The deputy superintendent revises DISD policy to require two mandatory SBDM training sessions per year. September 2001 3. The board approves the policy requiring two mandatory SBDM training sessions per year. November 2001 4. The deputy superintendent, in cooperation with the Region 10 Education Service Center, establishes a mandatory training schedule for the two sessions. November 2001 5. The deputy superintendent directs the SBDM training staff to begin conducting training sessions. January 2002 and each January and August thereafter FISCAL IMPACT
This recommendation can be implemented with existing resources.