A recent report released by Public Impact, in collaboration with the University of Virginia’s Partnership for Leaders in Education, studied the potential impact on school turnarounds of importing leadership talent from non-education industries. The authors explore lessons about when and how organizations in other sectors import leadership, including what it takes to lure people away from their current firms. They then consider the likely challenges and critical next steps for applying those lessons from the private sector to the public school setting, particularly to turnarounds of chronically failing schools.
The motivation for this report is the alterations that have been made by Congress and the federal Department of Education to the options available for receiving funds under the School Improvement Grant program and Race to the Top grant program. Three of the four options available require districts to replace top leadership in persistently low-achieving schools. A large number of state accountability systems also require new leadership in failing schools. This trend mirrors approaches used outside the education industry, where research indicates that as many as 70 percent of successful turnarounds in companies begin with a change in top leadership.
The authors argue that there are “potentially thousands of leaders who are capable of leading successful turnarounds in public schools [who] work outside the education setting,” including leaders in healthcare, nonprofit organizations, former military leaders, and leaders from large firms. From studying cross-data from the non-education sector, the authors came up with a list of recommendations for applying the business “importing model” to public schools:
1. Leaders should be selected for their demonstrated competencies as a turnaround leader, flexibility and ability to adapt, prior success in challenging situations with limited resources, success working with a team similar to those available in the school, and prior successful interactions with similar community populations.
2. Leaders should be trained in the competencies of a turnaround leader where they may have shown some weakness during the selection process, as well as in successful elements of highly effective high-poverty schools.
3. Leaders should have the autonomy to change school routines, introduce new tools, and bring key staff into schools; should be provided with links to quickly build personal connections with the school community (including parents); and be supported by changes in the central office to meet school needs.
4. Finally, districts need to clarify the expected student (and other) outcomes and the expected speed of change, and reward early and later successes with financial and other rewards.
To read the full report, please visit http://www.darden.virginia.edu/web/uploadedFiles/Darden/Darden_Curry_PLE/UVA_School_Turnaround/Importing_Leaders_for_School_Turnarounds.PDF
