|
|
FEATURES: New Leaders for Troubled Schools
By Tyler Currie
Jacquelyn Davis works with D.C.'s education bureaucracy
In recent years Frank
W. Ballou Senior High School in Washington, D.C., has suffered some
well-publicized traumas, including the on-campus murder of a 17-year-old
and a deliberate mercury contamination by students that forced the school
to close for a month. Meanwhile, barely 3 percent of students scored
“proficient” in reading, and just under 10 percent did so in
math. In comparison, the firing of Ballou’s principal in the summer
of 2005—the second sacking in as many years—seemed like a
mercifully dull event.
For Jacquelyn Davis, any mention of Ballou brings back
sharp memories. “Ballou is where I had my awakening,” says
Davis. In 1999, as a second-year law student at
Georgetown University, she taught a legal course at the high school.
“My students at Ballou were incredibly
smart but their skills were on such a low level,” she says.
“Some of them were close to being illiterate.” She realized
that the school was broken but felt powerless to fix it. “It was
painful to witness,” she says.
Today Davis, 35, wields considerable influence over
Ballou and, in fact, almost every public school in Washington, D.C. As the
executive director of the Washington office of New Leaders for New Schools
(NLNS), Davis is overseeing a rapidly expanding crop of new principals who
are promising to revitalize a long-ailing system. The nonprofit NLNS has
agreements to train principals in five other U.S. cities—Chicago, New
York, Baltimore, Memphis, and the Oakland Bay area. With only about 80,500
students in public and charter schools, Washington has one of the smallest
student populations of the NLNS program cities, and program graduates make
up a sizable share—almost 20 percent after just three years—of
the city’s principals. NLNS alumni are principals or assistant
principals in 45 of Washington’s 200 public schools (see Figure 1).
Within a few years, half of all D.C. schools could be in the hands of NLNS
alumni.
Someone Who Can Do It All
Davis grew up in Port Arthur, Texas, where her father
served as a school board member during the massive effort to desegregate
that city’s schools, and she was among the first white students to
attend a formerly segregated elementary school. “In some ways
I’ve always been thinking about these issues of race and class and
education,” she says. As an undergraduate at Brown University, she
studied school reform with Ted Sizer, and not long after moving to
Washington in 1993 to work for a congressman, she co-founded Hands on DC, a
nonprofit that uses volunteers to make repairs in the city’s
notoriously dilapidated school buildings and provide college scholarships
to low-income students.
None of this, she says, prepared her for the
dysfunction she discovered while teaching at Ballou, which was jarring
enough to sideline her career as a lawyer. Instead, she headed for public
education. She and some Georgetown classmates, also Ballou veterans,
launched Thurgood Marshall Academy, a law-related high school just blocks
away from Ballou and one of the city’s first charter high schools.
Davis became an administrator at Thurgood Marshall.
She recruited the school’s first principal and learned firsthand what
it takes to lead an effective school. That work led to an insight that
would reverberate. “You can have amazing teachers,” Davis says.
“But if you don’t have a principal holding it all together
… the school’s not going to work.” The principal she
helped hire was highly qualified, she recalls. “But even he
wasn’t perfect.” She saw close-up the staggering array of
skills requisite in a successful principal, from managing a
multimillion-dollar budget, to being an instructional leader, to working
with parents and community members. “How do you find someone who can
wear all these hats?” Davis asks.
Great Schools Have Great Principals
In 2002 Davis met up with an old friend, Jonathan
Schnur. They’d first met while working on Bill Clinton’s 1992
presidential campaign. Both passionate about education as a fundamental
right for every child, their shared interests had kept them in contact.
“For years the two of us had been having discussions about education
and about how to make schools work for all kids,” says Davis.
“We were always both focused on the students who were too often left
behind in urban schools—low-income kids, kids of color.”
Schnur, as a Clinton administration education-policy
adviser, had spent lots of time visiting schools across the country.
“And one pretty simple but powerful insight became clear,” he
says. “Great schools have great principals.” He used the
premise to write a two-page concept paper describing a program for
recruiting, training, and supporting new urban-school principals. He says
he was eager to launch the program right away. “You’ve got no
program, no funding, no team,” Schnur recalls one friend cautioning
him. “You’ve never been a principal. You need to develop this
more before you launch.”
So Schnur took his idea and enrolled in the Harvard
Graduate School of Education in 1999 where he joined forces with some
students from the Harvard Business School.
Together they refined Schnur’s concept and entered it in
Harvard’s annual business-plan contest. New Leaders for New Schools,
as Schnur dubbed the program, was the first nonprofit to be named a
semifinalist in the competition. This helped secure start-up funding,
including $1.15 million in grants from the NewSchools Venture Fund, a
California-based venture philanthropy firm.
|
|
“We needed someone who chould bring people together and get things done.”
|
By late 2002, NLNS was up and running in New York,
Chicago, and the Oakland Bay area, with three cities submitting bids to be
the next expansion site. Schnur, now CEO of the nonprofit, selected
Washington and asked Davis to launch the new program office. The hiring of
principals, says Schnur, is entwined with community politics. Davis, just
over 30, was already intimate with the politics and players of the D.C.
education landscape. Schnur states her qualifications more bluntly:
“We needed someone who could bring people together and get things
done.”
Finding the Best Woman (or Man) for the Job
Jacquelyn Davis’s desk is awash in papers.
It’s an early December morning, 2005, and applications for next
year’s “cohort” of New Leaders are rolling in. Last year,
260 people applied to the program, and 18 were accepted. Selection involves
several rounds of written responses,
interviews, case studies, and problem-solving exercises, where applicants
are judged on 10 criteria, from “belief in the potential of all
children to excel academically” to “project management”
to “self-awareness.”
“I personally interviewed around 150 people last
year,” says Davis. “At an hour and a half per interview,
that’s where I spend a lot of my time.” The final round
involves an eight-hour simulation of a day in the life of a principal.
Irate parents? Teacher observations? A ruptured boiler? NLNS didn’t
want to reveal specifically what problems are thrown at applicants during
the simulation, except to say that anything a principal might encounter is
fair game.
NLNS recruits all have teaching expertise, but are
drawn from a range of sectors—private industry, education,
nonprofits, law, the military—and are put through a yearlong boot
camp, which includes weekly classes and a hands-on, medical
residency–style apprenticeship with a mentor principal. The training
is followed by two years of on-the-job support. New Leaders in D.C., Davis
says, have on average six years in the classroom and adult leadership
experience. Average age is 35 Two-thirds of the New Leaders are women (see
Figure 2).
NLNS doesn’t push a particular curricular model
or reform package. Rather, says Schnur, the yearlong training program
emphasizes three core principles: All children can excel academically and
behaviorally; principals are instructional leaders; classroom decisions
should be driven by data. “We think that these principles are
incredibly important,” says Schnur. “Research shows that these
are the kinds of things that happen in highly effective schools, and if you
don’t do them you’re not likely to have an effective
school.”
Central Office Shuffle
Last December Davis was facing another urgent task:
hammering out a formal agreement with the D.C. Public Schools (DCPS). For
the previous several years, NLNS had been operating essentially with no
contract from D.C. Public Schools. The only written commitment she had from
the school system was a four-line letter from then new superintendent,
Clifford B. Janey, dated March 2005, saying that D.C. Public Schools will
“cover the Residency year salaries … for up to 20 New Leaders
who will train in DCPS during the 2005–2006 school year.”
Contrast that with the 22-page Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) that then D.C. superintendent Paul Vance inked with NLNS in 2003 This document defined the
nitty-gritty, who-does-what of the partnership. NLNS pledged, for example,
“to identify classroom spaces for the courses” that the New
Leaders would take during their yearlong training, while the school system
promised to “identify outstanding practitioners from the D.C. Public
Schools who could serve as faculty or guest lecturers in these
courses.”
Vance and his chief of staff, Steven Seleznow, were
among the driving forces in bringing NLNS to Washington. “It was
pretty clear that we needed them,” says Seleznow. “One of the
levers of change is to have really strong leaders in the schools, and we
didn’t have the in-house capacity to recruit and train the best
principals. With New Leaders we saw an opportunity to build an almost
immediate capacity.” He acknowledges that there was concern that
graduates of the program, with relatively little experience, would not be
up to the task of running schools. “But we did our due diligence, and
given the quality of the training, the quality of the people New Leaders
had been able to recruit in other cities, the mentors they would have, we
felt we were minimizing the risk” of their inexperience. Besides,
says Seleznow, a former principal in Montgomery County, Maryland,
“There’s no experience that can totally prepare you for your
first principalship.”
For the most part, the 2003 Memorandum of
Understanding mirrored agreements that NLNS had with other school systems.
At the core lay a financial arrangement, with D.C. Public Schools paying
the New Leaders’ salaries during training and NLNS covering the
program costs, leaving Davis to raise a $1.5 million annual operating
budget.
|
|
For Davis, breaking through has meant leading workshops for job-seeking New Leaders.
|
But in at least one regard the D.C. agreement broke
new ground. Superintendent Vance agreed to grant NLNS graduates who
excelled during their residency year—and were subsequently hired as
principals—increased decision-making authority and autonomy. The New
Leaders were promised greater control over budgets, staffing, curriculum,
and professional development.
“New Leaders felt strongly that their principals
had to have autonomy,” says Seleznow. “They wanted to immunize
their principals from a lot of the problems that came along with being a
captive to the bureaucracy.” He says there were plans eventually to
offer the autonomy to all qualifying principals because their union worried
about the New Leaders becoming a “favored group of principals with
tools that other principals did not have.”
At the time, it appeared that NLNS, having just
arrived in Washington, was destined to be a lot more than a supplier of
principals. It was helping to shape policy, placing principalship at the
center of the reform agenda.
“I tell you all of this for naught,” says
Davis, after describing the autonomies in the 2003 MOU. Seleznow retired a
few weeks after helping to work out the agreement. And soon Vance did, too.
“To be very candid with you, I just don’t
want to be bothered with it all,” Vance told reporters, describing
his frustrations with running D.C. Public Schools.
With the loss of these key partners, says Davis, NLNS
had to gain new champions in the central office, and the program had to
find new supporters. The promises in the MOU quickly fell into limbo, and
it was clear that the autonomies for NLNS principals would not take root.
“We had a ‘gentlemen’s agreement’ about how these
autonomies would be worked out, but the specifics were not in writing. I
didn’t anticipate such a quick transition in the top-level
leadership,” Davis recalls. “People who remain constant in the
system are often not the most senior staff people, and it’s through
relationships with those people that we get a lot done. They are the
foundation of the system.”
Despite the setback, Davis did not veer from the plan
to recruit and train a cohort of would-be principals. She became a constant
presence in the central office building, reminding workers there who she
was and what NLNS was trying to do. “I know everyone’s
secretary really well,” Davis says. “And that matters because
every single assistant superintendent position has turned over at least
once, and some of them have turned over three times since I’ve been
here. And the secretaries have remained. So when I call and say to the
secretary, ‘I’m calling from New Leaders,’ the secretary
says ‘Of course. How are you?’ and my call gets returned”
by the assistant superintendent.
Breaking Through
Getting a phone call returned is one thing. Getting a
New Leader hired is another. D.C. Public Schools was never obligated to
hire any of the New Leaders. “Our people have to compete in the
hiring process just like other candidates,” says Davis. In other
cities, early graduates of the program had difficulty being hired as
principals and were often brought on as assistant principals or other
administrators. (See “The Waiting Game,” features, Summer 2004). Many of the
New Leaders were perceived as outsiders.
Yet Bernard Lucas, president of the Council of School
Officers, the union representing D.C. principals and assistant principals,
worries that New Leaders are leapfrogging over other job applicants.
“The concern is that people who have worked very diligently, who have
had excellent evaluations over the years, who have the skills, that they
are being pushed to the side and overlooked when positions become
available,” says Lucas. He adds that he supports the NLNS concept. “If the people who come out of the New
Leaders program go through the selection and interview process on top, then
so be it. But just because these other individuals did not go through the
program does not mean they don’t have the vision or are incapable of
leading the schools.”
Davis says that in some ways being an NLNS graduate
can be an obstacle, for the simple fact that New Leaders don’t look like other D.C.
principals. “If they have it in their minds that the principal should
be a man who’s sixty… this is a very different thing than
selecting an instructional leader who’s 35, who’s female, who
might have dreadlocks. Changing what a community thinks a principal is and
what a principal should do has been a lot of work.”
For Davis, breaking through has meant leading
workshops for job-seeking New Leaders. “We tell them, know the school
that you’re going to interview for. Know the data, know the
community, know the players. We had one New Leader who went out and walked
the neighborhood before her interview. And then in the interview she talked
about the people she’d met in the neighborhood. That was a kind of
liftoff moment for her.”
So far the strategy has worked. Of the 47 New Leaders
Davis has shepherded through the hiring gauntlet, only one, Melissa Kim,
was not immediately hired by a D.C. public school. She spent a year as an
assistant principal in nearby Arlington County. “I think part of it
is that she seemed young,” says Davis about Kim, who was 28 years old
when she graduated from NLNS. In the summer of 2005 Kim was hired to run
Deal Junior High School in D.C.
Back to Ballou
|
|
“We tell them, know the data, know the community, know the players.”
|
It’s too early to say whether or not the New
Leaders are making a significant impact on student achievement, although
RAND has been enlisted to study the program. Schnur says the results are
due in 2008.
One milestone brings Davis particular delight. In July
2005, D.C. Superintendent Clifford B. Janey appointed Karen Smith, a recent
NLNS graduate, to be the new principal of Ballou. Smith brought in two NLNS
graduates to serve as assistant principals—creating a team of
like-minded educators working together to turn the school around.
Last year, even before the firing at Ballou, Davis
says that she began discussions with the school system about which New
Leaders “could take on challenging high schools.” In
particular, she touted Smith, then a 33-year-old former high-school English
teacher and program director for Teach For America. Smith had spent her
training year as an assistant principal at McKinley Technology High School
in Washington, where she helped craft the budget, manage the facility, and
deal with parents.
When the Ballou job opened up, Davis encouraged Smith
to consider it. “I didn’t know if I was ready for that,”
says Smith. “But I felt up for the challenge.”
Superintendent Janey evidently agreed. He directly
appointed Smith to the Ballou principalship, skirting the normal process
involving community panels. “I was ecstatic,” recalls Davis,
who says that Ballou, under Smith’s direction, is on the path to
reform.
“I was told by a lot of people that I needed to
be a man. I was told that Ballou’s principal needed to be a
man,” Smith says. She recalls her response to the critics: “I
can’t deny that I’m younger than most principals. I can’t
deny that I don’t have as much experience, but here’s what
I’m going to do.”
In September 2006, on the first day of school at Frank
W. Ballou Senior High School, Davis returned to the school that had so
profoundly affected her years earlier. In the year since Smith assumed the
principalship, reading scores had improved. The halls were calm; students
were in their classrooms. One student told her, “Ms. Smith does not
play, but she loves us and we know it.”
“The building is already significantly different
than the one I knew,” says Davis. “There’s more
structure, more order. The culture has shifted enough now for Smith to
focus on instruction and student learning—the stuff that matters
most.” She couldn’t help but feel a sense of satisfaction:
“On a personal level I’ve had my eye on that school for a long
time.”
Tyler Currie is a contributing writer for the Washington Post Magazine.
|
QUICK LINKS:
FREE ISSUE
EMAIL ALERT
PDF
CONTACT US
TOOLS:




|