PSESD Strategic Design: Context Mapping

PSESD Strategic Design: Context Mapping

Defining the environment in which we find ourselves…

Board/Cabinet
(from 8/7/15 meeting) / Design Team
(from 11/5/15 meeting)
The bolded items are the top five most important in each category according to the small group that worked on that category / CommunityPerspectives[1]
TRENDS
Design Team (4/19/16)
1Change in content/delivery
2Change in employment/economic
3climate
4Early Learning
5Additional partners, providers
6Poverty & race / 1Family, community engagement needs outstripping response
2Demographic shifts
3Personalized learning
4Expectations for accountability increasing across the system
5Private sector “solutions” for education
6No new revenue (economic climate)
7Multi-/dual language education
8College or career pathways and educational trends: testing local issues
9Role of ESD in advocacy
10Early learning quality and alignment with K-3
11Standardization/Next Gen
12Bell time in schools
13Transitions with leadership (State gov)
14Equity focus (anti-racism)
15Gender identity/LGBTQ
16Social responsibility → School districts
17Community partnerships
18Career prep for students
19Changes in research/best practices
20Accountability
21Evolving technology policies
22Social media
23Systems thinking
24Collective impact
25Regional focus
26Focus on discipline
27ELL
28PD—new approaches / 1Lack of culturally responsive practices and cultural competence of current and educators and classified staff
2Lack of effective family engagement and communication by schools, including lack of language support
3The need to invest in the recruitment, hiring, and retention of educators of color
4The needs of English Language Learners and Immigrants and Refugees are not being met
POLITICAL FACTORS
Design Team (4/19/16)
1Role & power of unions
2Republican vs. Democrat conflicts
3Uncertain political leadership
4McCleary lawsuit
5District consolidation
6Anti-tax sentiment / 1Internal agency governance will create internal politics
2Officials at all gov’t levels are changing
3Policies: Head Start, Best Starts, etc.
4McCleary decision and related legislation that might affect the agency
5Demographic shifts including immigration
6Tax-local levies
7Business
8Charter schools
9Discipline reform
10Cross sector priorities
11Knowing local politics
12Labor unions
13Private philanthropy
14Partnership at community level
15Immigration
16Housing-gentrification
17Employment
ECONOMIC CLIMATE
Design Team (4/19/16)
1Anti-tax sentiment
2Increased state funding
3Race, income gaps
4Underemployment
5Resource disparity among districts / 1Sustainability is always top of mind
2Increasing higher ed costs are contrary to agency objectives
3Income disparity: widening extremes, narrowing middle
4McCleary and state funding potential for change
5New revenue is not likely
6Competition for Resources (Evidence based)
7Budget(s)
8PSESD managing/support sustainability
9ESEA funding shifts / 1Housing costs are stressing families, and there is little access to low-income housing
2Transportation barriers are stressing families
3Homelessness is increasing
4Equal access to healthy food, and the opportunity to play in a safe neighborhood is lacking
5These stressors especially impact kids birth-3
6These factors contribute to high mobility rates
TECHNOLOGY FACTORS
Design Team (4/19/16)
1How to provide a support technology for student learning
2Digital divide at school and also at home and community
3Hardware/software
4Use of technology in Teaching & Learning
5Increased access to knowledge & resources / 1Sustainable infrastructure hard to maintain
2Tech support needed for personalized learning
3Digital divide: some families and other users cannot access or use available information
4Confidentiality and security needs increase with the use of technology
5Access to real time information (lack of) / 1There is a gap between how schools communicate with majority[2] families and how those families prefer to be communicated with
CUSTOMER NEEDS
Design Team (4/19/16)
Customers include: districts; taxpayers; agencies; grantors; employers; federal government; OSPI; partners; CBOs; higher education; businesses.
1Choice/options
2Culturally proficient
3Efficient value-added support
4Partnerships
5Involvement in process
6Desire whole child approach
7Innovative/reforms
8Compliance (HeadStart)
9Varied district resources
10Outcome for $$ invested
11Direct service needs
12Support needs & levels are varied / Customers include: children and families and students; policy makers; agency staff; early learning community; institutions of higher education; community based organizations; districts; funders.
Questions to clarify:
-Who are our customers/partners?
-What do our partners need?
-How do we build authentic relationships?
-What do we do with the information about what is high quality and best practice?
1There’s a lot of diversity among the customer and constituent groups we serve
2The agency balances responsiveness, proactiveness, and required initiatives.
3Difficult to prioritize needs and decide how to promote our own initiatives, not just those of funders.
4Difficulty of developing meaningful relationships with so many entities
CUSTOMER NEEDS
Early learning community
-Professional development
-Funding
-Resources: curriculum, classroom
-Advocacy
-Assessment needs
-Leadership development
-Parent engagement
-Peer leadership
-Facilities
-Technology
-Legislative policies
-Individual child care providers (Business, communications)
Districts
-Professional learning
-State liaison
-Support, high quality training, technical assistance
-Best practice
-Advocacy-legislative, administrative
-Policy work
-Coherence
-Responsiveness
-Interpretation of initiatives/legislation
-Opportunities for communication/collaboration
-Communications
-Business office
-Help securing additional funds
-Facilities support
-Evaluation
-Reporting
-Close opportunity gaps
-Technology for personalized learning
-Culturally responsive teaching
-Personalization/individualization
-Ownership
-Direct service (Early Learning, RELife)
-Reliability
-Consistent, communication, accessible
-Equity, inclusion, racial equity
Funders
-Results
-Metrics
-Data
-Outputs
-Timelines, data, constraints
-Expectations
-Self-interest
-Accountability
-Legislative mandates
-Gov’t/State agency
-Products
-Rules
-Restrictions
-Visibility
-Ownership
-Efficiency
-Tensions around who to reach / 1There is a high need for basic care items related to infants and children
2In Pierce County, resources are more readily available in Tacoma vs the rest of the county
3There is a need to compensate and respect parent/family engagement
4Families want to help their children succeed in school and life
5Increase accountability for instructional services provided to English Language Learners
6Reduce the length of time students of color are excluded from school due to expulsions and provide support for reengagement plans
7Analyze the opportunity gap through deeper disaggregation of student demographic data
8Incorporate integrated student services and family engagement
9Strengthen student transitions
10Quality child care for kids with DSHS subsidy is lacking
UNCERTAINTIES
Design Team (4/19/16)
1What is effective teaching?
2What will future careers require?
3Who are our future teachers?
4Standards/accountability (federal, state policies and priorities)
5Funding
6NCLB
7Leadership at all government levels
8Quality teaching force that reflects the diversity of our region / 1Funding amount and sustainability; funding tends to be categorical
2Federal and State regulations are changing and may be contradictory
3Program to program relationships unclear within PSESD
4Access to specialized resources for high school and beyond
5Changing world to meet needs of students and families
6How PSESD factors into roles of families and students’ success
7Communication
8Demographic changes
9Defined roles in the work
10Pathways and support to local districts for diversifying our pool

PSESD Strategic Design Team meeting 4/19/161

[1] From: Educational Opportunity Gap Oversight and Accountability Committee Report (2016); First Five Fundamentals Advancing Racial Equity with Community Cafés Report (2014); Southeast Seattle Education Coalition Summit Handout (2016); Strategic Design Community Conversations (February-April 2016)

[2] From SESEC: Dominant families are white, English speaking, non-free or reduced lunch eligible. Majority (as in majority of respondents): People of Color, ELL, eligible for free or reduced price lunch