It takes a district: No Child Left Behind has deepened the need to communicate effectively. This district's NCLB implementation plan includes a project chart that designates action items, the people who are responsible and key deadlines

Leadership, Sept-Oct, 2003 by Karolee Rosen

An old adage says that it takes a village to raise a child, but with the enactment of No Child Left Behind it takes an entire district effort to implement legislation. Systemic educational reforms require each division and department in the district to contribute to institutional change that will ensure organizational success. NCLB has necessitated intensified collaboration and cooperation and has deepened the need for open, direct communication across the district.

Fortunately for Fontana Unified, a curriculum audit conducted several years ago initiated a new era, with a commitment from district and school leaders and teachers to increase the academic achievement of all students and to promote professional development opportunities for all educators. With proven results on a variety of indicators, the district has confirmed that it is a model of effective restructuring and consistent educational progress.

Implementation plan in chart form

To assist with the information flow essential to achieve the intent of this legislation and expand on a concept originated in a neighboring district, the associate superintendent for Educational Services requested an NCLB implementation plan. The process to complete this complex task began with reading of each Title and with the identification of required district and school-level actions. The resultant 78-page project chart addresses eight of the 10 Titles in NCLB (Titles VII and VIII are not applicable in the district at this time).

Each section of the project chart begins with the purpose of that particular Title so that everyone has the same understanding of its intent. The associate superintendent shared the final draft version of the project chart with Educational Services directors and with Educational Services directors and with members of the superintendent's cabinet, and received input from both groups about the projects chart's contents and format. The final draft of the chart's was then presented to the Board of Educational during the first of series of presentations on NCLB.

The project charts describe an action plan for each Title, and list major subtopics/subparts within each Title (such as Title I, Part A, District Accountability Report Card; or Title IX, Part E, Choice Option for Unsafe Schools). The subtopics are split into three columns that designate action items, assign the person/people responsible for each item, and note the status for relevant dates/times/completion.

Some of the action items are statements that give complete details in a single line item. Other statements will lead to the development of additional departmental project charts and tasks to be accomplished by individual departments. One member of the Educational Services staff has the responsibility to lead this implementation plan to fruition and to work with each department on the tasks and requirements of the project chart.

To further illustrate the project chart function, the following examples from Title I and Title X provide details.

Example No. 1: Choice and SES

Two elementary schools in the district failed to meet Adequate Yearly Progress as required in Title I, Part A, and are now in Year 1 and Year 2 of Program Improvement. This status necessitated that several actions be taken by the district, the site and the parents of the children in those schools. At both schools, parents received notification about the school's status and invitations to attend site meeting to hear about the plans and progress that each school had made in recent months. While parents had the choice to transfer to another non-Program Improvement school in the district, all of them chose to keep their children enrolled at their home schools.

The Year 2 School not only offered parents the choice option, but also had to offer Supplemental Educational Services (SES) to families at the site. Again, notifications were sent and meetings were held to inform parents of the opportunity for after-school tutoring provided by a state-approved service provider. The district had received approval to provide an SES program. This became one of the options for parents to choose from for tutoring services, along with outside providers.

Parents of nearly 100 children returned the intent form for SES. About 80 percent chose the district's program and the other 20 percent selected two tutoring services that provided one-to-one, in-home tutoring.

The district program met three days each week for one-and-a-half hours and lasted 10 weeks. Students demonstrated progress as indicated on the end-of-year Multiple Measures Matrix and both classroom teachers and parents noted their children's growth with reading skills.

Each step along the way to provide choice and SES options to parents/children at Program Improvement schools was detailed in the project chart. From initiating contact and negotiating contracts with outside providers to translating parent notification to designing curricular and instructional goals and objectives, the project chart guided the process and identified the individual who provided leadership in seeing the line item through to completion.