School Restructuring

NCLB’s Path to Restructuring

For schools that did not post proficient student achievement for 2 years, NCLB required local educational agencies to assist them with analyzing test data, communicating with students’ families, offering quality professional development to school staff, and providing financial guidance. Additionally, low-performing schools [Page 702]had to engage in school improvements and corrective actions, two tiers of mandated school reforms. Together, school improvements and corrective actions focused on improving the quality of teaching and curriculum taught and the amount of instruction given to students while ensuring at least 10% of a school’s budget was spent on professional development for teachers and administrators. If schools did not post proficient student achievement after implementing these reforms for 4 years, they were required to restructure.

Two sources informed NCLB’s school restructuring strategies. First, educational policymakers adopted business techniques used to turn around failing businesses, such as replacing corporate leaders, releasing underperforming employees, and reorganizing structural governance. Second, NCLB considered the experiences school districts from across the nation had with attempting to turn around low-performing schools from the 1970s through the 1990s. From these two sources, NCLB supported five restructuring models that included the following:

• Chartering: Closing a traditional public school and reopening it as a conversion charter school.
• Turnaround: Releasing teachers, administrators, and support staff who were viewed as ineffective and hiring their replacements thought to be more effective.
• Contracting: Hiring an educational management organization (e.g., a local university) to operate the school.
• State takeover: If allowed by state law, the local school district turns the day-to-day operations of the school over to the state department of education.
• Other: Implement an alternative school restructuring strategy with the potential to significantly increase student achievement.

Of the five restructuring strategies, the majority of schools chose the Other option. In doing so, they hired turnaround specialists, used instructional coaches, and designed new curriculum, all as part of their restructuring. Because state proficiency standards on standardized tests typically increased annually to meet the 2014 goal for student achievement and because NCLB required 2 years of proficient test scores to be released from mandated restructuring, few schools posted the necessary student achievement to be released from restructuring. As a result, the number of schools NCLB required to restructure increased significantly.

...