Introduction

Download Complete Report

In August 1999, The Austin Independent School District (AISD) named Dr. Pat Forgione as its new Superintendent. Dr. Forgione was the seventh Superintendent named within 10 years. At the time that Dr. Forgione assumed leadership of the district, AISD was facing significant obstacles to success. Among these obstacles were a lack of a common curriculum, a decentralized culture, a lack of agreement on how to help struggling learners, haphazard professional development for teachers and administration, and significant distrust in district leadership. During the first two years of Dr. Forgione's tenure, he addressed these obstacles in multiple ways, including the implementation of a district-wide strategy for reform and the launching of coherent and comprehensive effort-based and standards-based reform initiatives.

These initiatives brought an increase in student achievement, but the public demanded a more urgent and aggressive attention to poor performance and the persistent achievement gaps in consistently underperforming schools. The broad, district-wide strategies that had been implemented to date had not been adequate to bring about significant change in schools that were characterized by persistent under-performance. Chronically underperforming schools required a more aggressive and focused intervention education plan. In the spring of 2002, after researching several alternatives for reform (including contracting with the Edison Project or with KIPP), seeking the advice of Austin's best educators, and visiting Edison Schools in Dallas ISD, the Superintendent was directed by Austin's school board to develop a comprehensive intervention plan for addressing the chronic academic needs in Austin's underperforming schools.

The Blueprint Schools Initiative was the result of the development of this plan. With the help of Claudia Tousek (who became the Master Principal for the Blueprint Schools) many other Austin educators, the Superintendent formulated, ten elements or components to this intervention. The ten components of the Blueprint Initiative are:

1. Guaranteed improved student achievement to meet rigorous state standards.
2. More time for Reading, Writing, Grammar, and Math every day for every child.
3. Required, rigorous, and proven curricula in Mathematics, Reading and Writing.
4. Every new teacher with at least two years' experience. All teachers certified in the subjects they are teaching.
5. Required, targeted training - including 10 additional days - and on-going support for teachers.
6. Strong, experienced principals under the direction of a Master Principal.
7. Frequent assessment of students and immediate interventions.
8. Enhanced technology to monitor and improve student achievement.
9. Partnerships with parents and community to assure student success.
10. Signed compacts with principals, teachers, parents, and students.

After these elements were developed, the Superintendent, working with his cabinet, identified the four elementary schools and the two middle schools where the needs were greatest. The schools were selected based on:

• Current status in the state accountability system
• Current student performance based on campus results on the 2001 Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) test, including the percentage failing Reading, Math, and/or Writing, the number of 2001 TAAS performance data cells that were below 70% passing, and the percentage of third-grade students failing TAAS Reading
• Performance over time, based on degree of improvement in TAAS Reading, Math, and Writing and on the school's history of accountability ratings

The two middle schools selected based on these criteria were the J. Frank Dobie and James E. Pearce Middle Schools. These schools were named "Austin Schools for Excellence" and became part of the Blueprint Schools Initiative, which was launched in the fall of the 2002 school year. The demographics of Dobie and Pearce in Fall 2002 are listed in the table below.

Dobie Middle School had a state rating of Low Performing based on Spring 2001 TAAS results. It had been a low-performing school for five of the preceding seven years. Among all AISD middle schools, Dobie had the highest percentage of students failing one or more subjects on the TAAS, the highest percentage of students failing Reading and Math on the TAAS, and of 25 TAAS cells, 20 were below 70% passing and 9 were below 60% passing. Over the five years preceding the implementation of the Blueprint, the school's performance had been flat in Reading, with White students (who comprised 7% of the student body) having significantly higher performance. TAAS Math scores had increased approximately 10 points since 1995 for all students, but performance for African-American students was low. Writing scores had declined for all groups over the five years preceding the introduction of the Blueprint.

Pearce Middle School had an Acceptable rating in Spring 2001, but had been low performing for three of the seven years prior to the implementation of Blueprint. Among all AISD middle schools, Pearce had the second highest percentage of students failing one or more subjects on the TAAS, the second highest percentage of students failing TAAS Reading and Math, and of 25 TAAS cells, 18 were below 70% passing and 5 were below 60% passing. Over the five years before Blueprint was implemented, Pearce students had shown relatively flat performance in Reading, steady increased in Math, and mixed performance (increases and decreases) in Writing.

Funding Resources for the first year only, including funding for both Blueprint Middle Schools and Blueprint Elementary Schools, totaled $2,024,575. All Blueprint Schools received local budget and Title I funding according to local and federal funding guidelines. Moreover, the Superintendent provided the following additional resources funded by Title I and II to the Blueprint Schools in the first year:

• Math Coach - 1 per school.
• Reading Intervention Teacher - 1 per school.
• Cadre of Permanent Subs for Training - 1 per school - to allow additional time for training and planning during the school day.
• Lead Teacher Stipends - $3000 each - 2 teachers per elementary school; Harris received 3 due to size.
• Replacement books and equipment and Special Education materials.
• Staff Training - stipend of $150 per day for 10 days in summer 2002; 2 days of training during school year.

For the two subsequent years, no additional funding was provided for training and curriculum materials. However, funding was provided for Math Coaches and Permanent Subs. Title III funds provided a $3000 per year stipend for all bilingual teachers for the first three years of the Blueprint.

The initial time frame established for this first phase of the Blueprint Schools Initiative was three years. The 2004-2005 school year marks the end of this period. Therefore, this summary report seeks to review the changes that have occurred over the past three years at Dobie and Pearce Middle Schools. The implementation of each of the ten components of the Blueprint and gains made related to each will be described.