Creating Lines Of Communication

Practice:

Set the stage for purposeful evaluation

Key Action:

Create communication pathways between key staff and evaluators

VIGNETTE: Creating Lines of Communication

Purpose:

Consider how this magnet program manager’s experiences might help you shape your district’s communications with an evaluator. Evaluation is likely to be more efficient and effective when districts think through how they will create and maintain lines of communication with an evaluator.

Source:

Interview with Kim Morrison, Magnet Schools Program Manager, Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Schools, NC, July 24, 2008.

Questions for Reflection 1. What information did district staff communicate at each stage in the evaluation? Do you anticipate having similar needs? 2. What forms of communication were used? What specific forms of communication might be most appropriate for specific purposes in your district? 3. Did the evaluator communicate with only one person, different people, or a team of people? Which people in your district would be most likely to communicate with the evaluator and for what purpose? 4. What were the advantages of setting up lines of communication early in the evaluation process?

1

Practice:

Set the stage for purposeful evaluation

Key Action:

Create communication pathways between key staff and evaluators

Creating Lines of Communication Background: Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Schools staff received Magnet Schools Assistance Program (MSAP) grants in both the 2004 and 2007 funding cycles. In 2004, four magnet schools were established, with three new schools added in 2007. Winston-Salem is one of the few districts doing MSAP rigorous evaluation for both the 2004 and 2007 grants. Communication with their evaluators has been key to their success. In the following interview excerpt, magnet director Kim Morrison describes how district staff established and tracked its communications with evaluators. * * * I think what we learned about lines of communication was the importance of just constantly talking to the evaluator through that whole process. Initially we had them fly in and really learn about the district. You’ve got everything laid out; you’ve got the choice policy and you say here is what we do, and put it in black and white. And then over the phone, we continuously provide more information. They will ask, “Now what happens in this situation and what about this one?” Our choice plan is very complicated and so that one-on-one personal interaction was really important at first and then they kept calling back and clarifying just to make sure they understood it. When they wrote the evaluation proposal it was exactly right. We worked together on a four-year action plan. It involves the data piece and whole program implementation. Here’s what we do in year 1, here’s what we do in year 2, here’s what we do in year 3. If this doesn’t happen in year 1, here’s how we carry it into year 2. Our evaluator says that was really easy to work with because it related all the goals, the objectives, our evaluation questions, and what implementation would look like each year. We had a frame to look at the marketing, recruiting, to look at whether the program was actually making a difference. We could look at the growth of students in the program over time. We could also outline what documentation we would collect to reflect what was in the plan. Our evaluator, American Education Solutions was able to say, “Okay, then, we are going to have the documentation due at this date, this date and this date because that’s aligned with your plan.” Because we had lines of communication in place, the evaluator was familiar with our approach and we could partner. We see a site visitor two or three times a year but we dialogued with the evaluator approximately every two weeks. Our evaluators set up a conference call and they sent out things beforehand with some of the questions that they would ask. And then after that, there was another follow-up call, to say okay, now that we know this, then we need to look at this instead because that data would be difficult to get. There were also conference calls with the rigorous evaluator or the outside evaluation people and they say, “Here is what we need. Can you get the data into this form?”

2

Practice:

Set the stage for purposeful evaluation

Key Action:

Create communication pathways between key staff and evaluators

We didn’t just communicate by phone. We took advantage of all kinds of opportunities. When we are at Magnet Schools of America conferences or some other meetings, you sit and talk with someone in the hotel about what just happened and what you need. That’s where you get a lot of your information. You can also get a lot done through email. A lot of it is email! And then, the reports come. We always share with our schools first. We have a real working session where we sit down and figure out what worked and what didn’t. And then we’ve got to communicate it to our teachers; this is our year 2, here’s what is working, we are looking pretty good in this area, we are not looking good there. We do an executive summary that we often share with our superintendent, senior staff and the board. We’re still in communication with the evaluator at this point to be sure that our communication with the teachers and the executive summary are accurate and appropriate and also to make sure we’re ready for the next round of data collection.

3