IBJOpinion

CHU: Strategies should be launched in schools across the state

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Dale ChuQuestion: A proposal by The Mind Trust, an Indianapolis-based education think tank, calls for shifting control of Indianapolis Public Schools to the Mayor’s Office and dramatically shrinking the central office and distributing the resources to individual schools. Should the plan be considered for other districts in the Indianapolis area or in the state?

Answer: The Mind Trust’s thoughtfully crafted plan for driving academic and structural improvement within Indianapolis Public Schools deserves due consideration by school leaders and interested stakeholders throughout the Hoosier state. Improving educational opportunities for students stranded in large, low-performing urban school districts remains one of our nation’s most intractable challenges.

Notably, the plan suggests a framework for school corporation governance that dovetails with the Indiana Department of Education’s focus on eliminating red tape and providing quality options and support for local leaders in the field. Like the Department of Education, The Mind Trust recognizes that true innovation takes place in school buildings and not state or district offices.

The plan focuses on eliminating bureaucracy and driving dollars into the classroom. Based on the latest state “Student Instructional Expenditures Report,” commonly called the “Dollars to the Classroom” report, 41 cents of every taxpayer dollar allocated to education is spent outside the classroom. We should question whether our dollars are being wisely spent to support every student in our state.

The governing model proposed by The Mind Trust provides new levels of autonomy for principals and teachers to make decisions based on the needs of their students.

For example, a principal would be able to extend the school day or year, pay great teachers more, and have greater freedom when it comes to purchasing curricular materials and technology.

Today, school corporations across Indiana enjoy greater flexibility than ever before in many of these areas.

Unfortunately, many of our larger districts have struggled to take advantage of these new opportunities. The principals and teachers working in them arguably require these flexibilities more than anyone because of the rich and diverse communities within which they work.

Ultimately, the report reflects the growing body of research that points to educator quality as the key lever for improving schools. By allocating funding more efficiently, school corporations can develop a pipeline for attracting, retaining and rewarding top-notch educators while providing them with meaningful professional development opportunities. Principals are given the freedom to provide increased financial incentives to quality educators in high-need subject areas. Teachers are empowered to inspire students so that every child receives a quality education.

Certainly, the headline-grabbing portion of the report focuses on “mayoral control” of school corporations. As provocative as this element of the plan may be, I hope we do not lose sight of the real solutions offered by The Mind Trust plan in the face of front-page-grabbing headlines. Remember that the report focuses on accountability for all stakeholders—no matter who is in charge.

Ultimately, The Mind Trust plan is a call to urgent action. It proposes new levels of autonomy for local schools, attacks calcified bureaucracies head on, and unleashes innovative ways for recruiting and retaining great teachers. It is a plan that asks all of us to re-imagine and re-conceptualize what is truly possible for students living in communities that are too often marginalized by society.

School corporations across Indiana would be wise to consider many of the sound strategies laid out within this important document.•

__________

Chu is assistant superintendent for innovation and improvement at the Indiana Department of Education. Send comments on this column to ibjedit@ibj.com.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Of what value is selling alcoholic beverages to State Fair patrons when there are many families with children attending. Is this the message we want to give children attending and participating in the Fair, another venue with alooholic consumption onsite. Is this to promote beer and wine production in the state which are great for the breweries and wineries, but where does this end up 10-15 years from now, lots more drinkers for the alcoholic contents. If these drinks are so important, why not remove the alcohol content and the flavor and drink itself similar to soft drinks would be the novelty, not the alcoholic content and its affects on the drinker. There is no social or material benefit from drinking alcoholic beverages, mostly people want to get slightly or highly drunk.

  2. I did;nt know anyone in Indiana could count- WHY did they NOT SAY just HOW this would be enforced? Because it WON;T! NOW- with that said- BIG BROTHER is ALIVE in this Article-why take any comment if it won't appease YOU PEOPLE- that's NOT American- with EVERYTHING you indicated is NOT said-I can see WHY it say's o Comments- YOU are COMMIES- BIG BROTHER and most likely- voted for Obama!

  3. In Europe there are schools for hairdressing but you don't get a license afterwards but you are required to assist in turkey and Italy its 7 years in japan it's 10 years England 2 so these people who assist know how to do hair their not just anybody and if your an owner and you hire someone with no experience then ur an idiot I've known stylist from different countries with no license but they are professional clean and safe they have no license but they have experience a license doesn't mean anything look at all the bad hairdressers in the world that have fried peoples hair okay but they have a license doesn't make them a professional at their job I think they should get rid of it because stateboard robs stylist and owners and they fine you for the dumbest f***ing things oh ur license isn't displayed 100$ oh ur wearing open toe shoes fine, oh there's ONE HAIR IN UR BRUSH that's a fine it's like really? So I think they need to go or ease up on their regulations because their too strict

  4. Exciting times in Carmel.

  5. Twenty years ago when we moved to Indy I was a stay at home mom and knew not very many people.WIBC was my family and friends for the most part. It was informative, civil, and humerous with Dave the KING. Terri, Jeff, Stever, Big Joe, Matt, Pat and Crumie. I loved them all, and they seemed to love each other. I didn't mind Greg Garrison, but I was not a Rush fan. NOW I can't stand Chicks and all their giggly opinions. Tony Katz is to abrasive that early in the morning(or really any time). I will tune in on Saturday morning for the usual fun and priceless information from Pat and Crumie, mornings it will be 90.1

ADVERTISEMENT