EDUCATIONAL SERVICE DELIVERY
This chapter discusses DISD's educational service delivery function in nine sections.
- A. Student Performance and Instructional Program Delivery
- B. Special Education
- C. Gifted and Talented Education
- D. Career and Technology Education
- E. Bilingual Education/English as a Second Language
- F. Title I/State Compensatory Education
- G. Health Services
- H. Counseling
- I. Staff Development
I. STAFF DEVELOPMENT (PART 1)
Staff training forms the foundation for district attempts to enhance the quality of instructional delivery, supports mastery of teaching and classroom skills, encourages individual professional development, initiates program changes across multiple schools or job classes, and reinforces district values, cultural and management commitments. When staff training is administered effectively:
- the individuals for whom the classes are created are made aware of training opportunities with sufficient planning time and with a clear understanding of the prerequisites, mandates and options available.
- class time is used effectively.
- locations and facilities are selected to best meet the needs of the participants and the course content.
- funding is used effectively across many units of the organization.
- teaching and funding partnerships are nourished to generate resources that can be shared by many groups.
- class registration is simple and participation is tracked, creating individual employee training records.
- courses are developed with sufficient lead time to ensure that critical points can be implemented into the work setting or class content, and in response to deficiencies uncovered through performance or program evaluations.
- redundant, outdated and inappropriate course content is readily identified and modified or eliminated.
Model professional training programs identified by the U.S. Department of Education:
...have gone far beyond ensuring good professional development workshops. They have made professional development a critical contributor to school performance and, thus, inextricably linked and aligned the two...have clarified school educational goals, increased teacher accountability for linking classroom activity to student results, and significantly improved the process for selecting the professional development that teachers need to get results. (Emily Hassel, Professional Development: Learning from the Best, NCREL/North Central Regional Education Laboratory, 1999)The Texas Education Code, Section 21.451, addresses training requirements for school districts. It states that:
- staff development must be conducted in accordance with minimum standards developed by the state's education commissioner for program planning, preparation, and improvement;
- staff development must include technology training and training in conflict resolution and discipline;
- training must be predominately school-based, related to objectives developed and approved by the school site-based decision-making committee (SBDM); and,
- school districts may use districtwide training that is developed and approved by the district-level planning and SBDM committee as described in Section 11.251 of the code.
TEC also states that school staff training may include activities that enable the school staff to enhance their existing skills, share effective strategies, discuss curricular and instructional issues, analyze student achievement results, consider ways to increase student achievement, study and conduct relevant research, practice new teaching methods, identify students' strengths and needs, and implement site-based decision-making. These efforts may be conducted using study teams, individual research, peer coaching, workshops, seminars, conferences or other methods with the potential to improve student achievement.
The U.S. Department of Education has outlined principles for high-quality professional development (Exhibit 2-80).
Exhibit 2-80 Source: Emily Hassel, Professional Development: Learning from the Best, NCREL/North Central Regional Education Laboratory, 1999.
U.S. Department of Education Principles for
High-Quality Professional Development
Professional Development Principles Focuses on teachers as central to student learning, yet includes all other members of the school community. Focuses on individual, collegial, and organizational improvement. Respects and nurtures the intellectual and leadership capacity of teachers, principals, and others in the school community. Reflects the best available research and practice in teaching, learning, and leadership. Enables teachers to develop further expertise in subject content, teaching strategies, uses of technologies, and other essential elements in teaching to high standards. Promotes continuous inquiry and improvement embedded in the daily life of schools. Is planned collaboratively by those who will participate in and facilitate that development. Requires substantial time and other resources. Is driven by a coherent long-term plan. Is evaluated ultimately on the basis of its impact on teacher effectiveness and student learning, and this assessment guides subsequent professional development efforts. FINDING
DISD's management of staff training is widely dispersed and lacks strong central coordination for strategic and resource planning, resulting in no clear evidence of goal alignment across district, school, team and individual staff development levels.
In 1992, TSPR's review of the staff development function commended DISD's central division for staff development. At that time, the department had been newly reorganized as the Division of Training and Development Services, separate from the Division of Personnel Services; it reported directly to the superintendent and was held responsibility for coordinating all staff training and development. At the same time, TSPR also recognized the "academy" structure under which training was offered in DISD. The five academies were:
- the Administrator Academy, which planned and directed all professional training.
- the Teacher Academy, which planned and directed all teacher training.
- the Classified/Support Academy, which coordinated staff training in other divisions.
- the Parent Academy, which worked with various divisions to provide parent training and increase parent involvement in the schools.
- the Office of Alternative Certification, which was responsible for alternative certification programs in areas of critical teacher shortage; an induction program for beginning teachers, advanced study opportunities and the coordination of student-teacher programs through a district teacher education center.
The academy structure in place in 1992 defined course audience and content and provided a clear way to address the needs of each training audience.
Organizational changes since then have dramatically altered the structure and focus of the training function. Today, of the five original academies, only the Office of Alternative Certification survives. Since 1992, the Office of Alternative Certification has been assigned at times to Teaching and Learning and at other times to the Human Resource Services Department. In January 2001, it was reassigned to the Campus Leadership and Teacher Development Unit of Teaching and Learning, and an assistant superintendent was selected to lead it. This reorganization creates an opportunity to revive the Administrator or Leadership Academy.
In 2001, formal teaching and administrative training programs throughout the district are assigned to multiple departments and divisions. Four training units make up the central training function and report to a deputy superintendent, who in turn reports to the general superintendent. The Teaching and Learning Department oversees most curriculum-based training and program development. Special programs for the Dallas Reading Program, Special Student Services and Urban Systemic Program Math and Science Education (supported by a federal grant) have been established as separate units to meet specific training initiatives outlined in the district's Vision 2003 plan.
Exhibit 2-81 illustrates DISD's dispersed responsibility for teaching and staff training.
Exhibit 2-81 Source: DISD, January 2001.
DISD Staff Development Organization ChartChanges in department leadership have contributed to fragmented training strategies. A previous assistant superintendent is on administrative leave. An interim assistant superintendent was appointed during summer 2000, and a different interim assistant superintendent was placed in September 2000. The deputy superintendent no longer oversees only staff development, but also a wide variety of special education, student support services and special programs.
The frequent changes in district superintendents have contributed to inconsistent long-range plans and goals; each superintendent has had different approaches to curriculum development and the complementary training needed to support his or her initiatives. The lack of solid short- and long-term strategies and initiatives has created many of the problems addressed in this review.
As of the 1992 TSPR report, DISD's staff training functions involved about 20 staff positions and a budget of $1,609,796. In 2000-01, the staffing budget for staff training in the four main departments involved (Teaching and Learning, Dallas Reading Plan, Student Support and Special Services, and Math and Science Education) is $14,489,613, and supports more than 305 staff positions, including curriculum developers, instructors, administrators, program managers, media technicians and support staff. One of the assistant superintendents of Teaching and Learning explained that the growth in staffing and budget allocated to staff training is due to expanded program offerings and the addition of media technicians, support personnel and program managers. Most district units no longer provide training directly. The responsibility for staff training, however, is shared across departmental units: some curriculum and content development and training occurs for varying audiences in each unit, and each is dependent upon support staff in other units. The number of staff has risen by 1,600 percent and the staffing budget has grown by 900 percent in the past nine years.
A review of position titles suggests that DISD's staff training function is top-heavy, with several management levels within the department, contrary to the general trend of flattening hierarchies within organizations. District training staff told TSPR that the broad range of responsibilities within the department accounts for the existence of these hierarchies, and that they do not indicate an inappropriate distribution of management levels and salaries. This is confirmed in Exhibit 2-82, which summarizes management position titles and salaries.
Exhibit 2-82 Source: TSPR team, compiled from DISD Teaching & Learning Department salary data, April 2001.
Staff Development Staffing and Salaries, Summary
(excludes instructional staffs assigned to areas, technology instruction, and special education services)
Position Number of Positions Total payroll (as of January 11, 2001) Department Administration Not directly involved in the delivery of professional development/staff training. Department Superintendent 1 $165,000 Associate Superintendent 2 $256,000 Assistant Superintendent 3 $350,000 Nonmanagement Staff 0 $0 Total unit 6 $771,000 Future Teacher Development Involved in the Alternative Certification Program; instructional specialists perform technical assistance and minimal staff training. Executive Director 1 $80,568 Director 1 $72,138 Nonmanagement Staff 20 $880,755 Total unit 22 $1,033,461 Program Development Not involved in staff training with the exception of the Career and Technology staff, who write curriculum, provide technical assistance, and conduct staff training sessions. Coordinator 1 $52,551 Director 1 $63,525 Executive Director 5 $381,832 Nonmanagement Staff 82 $3,006,287 Total unit 89 $3,504,195 Teaching & Learning Includes administrative and support staff not involved in staff training. Content directors and specialists are responsible for curriculum development, program operation, technical assistance to teachers, and some staff training. Assistant Supervisor 1 $45,957 Coordinator 3 $193,426 Director 10 $693,928 Executive Director 4 $325,494 Project Director 1 $56,405 Supervisor 5 $186,292 Nonmanagement Staff 79 $3,037,680 Total unit 103 $4,539,182 Dallas Reading Plan Involved in technical assistance and staff training. Coordinator 1 $63,155 Director 1 $72,654 Nonmanagement Staff 76 $2,122,448 Total unit 78 $2,258,257 Professional Development Directly involved in staff training for the district. Executive Director 1 $78,076 Nonmanagement Staff 6 $288,023 Total unit 7 $366,099 Department Summary Assistant Superintendent 3 $350,000 Assistant Supervisor 1 $45,957 Associate, Superintendent 2 $256,000 Coordinator 5 $309,132 Department Superintendent 1 $165,000 Director 13 $902,245 Executive Director 11 $865,970 Project Director 1 $56,405 Supervisor 5 $186,292
TOTAL Number of Positions Percent of all Department Positions Total payroll (11Jan2001) Percent of all Department Payroll (11Jan2001) Management staff 42 13.8% $3,137,001 25.2% Nonmanagement staff 263 86.2% $9,335,192 74.8% Total, all positions 305 100.0% $12,472,193 100.0%
