House subcommittee advances plan to eliminate the Achievement School District and create a new model for struggling schools

Hillcrest High School graduation (Photo by IOTA Community Schools)

The House K-12 Subcommittee advanced a bill Tuesday morning that would do away with Tennessee’s Achievement School District (ASD) and replace it with an intervention model giving more control to local districts to improve struggling schools.

Tennessee established the ASD in 2010 to turn around priority schools, which are the bottom 5 percent of the lowest performing schools in the state. Schools identified were transferred from the jurisdiction of their local district, usually in Memphis or Nashville, and placed under the jurisdiction of the ASD until they met performance standards. More than a decade later, just six schools out of more than 30 met those standards to exit the ASD. The district currently oversees just three public charter schools in Memphis managed by IOTA Community Schools

Legislation presented by Representative Debra Moody, R-Covington, Tuesday would sunset the state ASD, replacing it with a progressive, three-tiered intervention system that would give more control to school districts. Under the proposed three-tier model, the State Department of Education (TDOE) would place schools identified as priority schools into one of the three tiers. Within each of those tiers, the local school district would be able to choose from several intervention options.

For schools placed in Tier 1, the district could choose its own evidence based intervention or contract with an independent school turnaround expert. Districts with a school in Tier 2 could choose to implement an intervention program run by a school turnaround expert, convert it to a charter school, transfer operation of the school to a public higher education institution, or voluntary reconstitution in which some or all of a school’s staff are replaced. A school would move to Tier 3 if both other tiers have been exhausted without progress. The district would then choose between mandated reconstitution with planning and oversight by the state or school closure.

Schools identified as priority schools for the first time would go directly into Tier 1 and the TDOE would review the performance of all schools in the program annually. Depending on that evaluation, schools could potentially stay in their current intervention plan, or they may be moved to a different tier, or a change of intervention plan could be recommended.

Jack Powers, TDOE Assistant Commissioner of Policy and Legislative Affairs, spoke to subcommittee members on the bill. He says it’s time to move away from the ASD and utilize new ways to turn the state’s lowest performing schools around.

“Tennessee needs a better system to support our priority schools that contains accountability, but also importantly provides LEAs (local education agency or school district) and priority schools more local flexibility in selecting interventions for those schools,” said Powers.

Representative Sam Mackenzie, D-Knoxville, pointed out the struggles schools have had meeting standards to exit the ASD. He asked how the new proposed model would be different and more successful at improving outcomes.

Robin Copp, Assistant TDOE Commissioner for School Turnaround, told lawmakers the key is local community involvement in finding what works best for each individual school.

“The more the community, that local LEA can be involved, the better the chance of success,” said Copp. “This model actually turns over the choices of what intervention is going to work best for each LEA and gives that LEA a chance to weigh in, as well as the community members.”

Copp and Powers also told lawmakers districts would not necessarily have to work with a vendor company for an evidence-based turnaround plan. They said retired school superintendents or principals who have had success in working with priority schools could potentially work with them, giving local districts more options.

Representative Yusuf Hakeem, D-Chattanooga, wanted to know what supports schools that successfully move out of intervention status receive to help them continue to improve.

Copp said most of the schools either went back to the district or to the Tennessee Public Charter School Commission and theTDOE works with those LEAs to support them. She referred to Metro Nashville Public Schools’ Schools of Innovation program as an example, pointing out those schools have individual coaches who come and work directly with educators.

“Those schools are supported by the Department of School Turnaround through direct intervention through the LEA. The support they have is different because their needs are different,” she told the committee.

Hakeem also wanted to know what would happen to students and their families if a school is forced to close for failing to meet turnaround goals. Powers explained that the closure of a school doesn’t necessarily mean the building itself is closed. Rather, that could mean a shift in leadership at the school, or it could be reformed. He also said a number of districts in the state have open enrollment and charter schools, which also provide more options for students.

“I want to be very clear that in none of these circumstances are we creating a scenario that would disadvantage families or students,” said Powers.

Representative McKenzie expressed his support for the bill and praised the amount of local control that will remain with the school district and the community in all three tiers of intervention.

“It was time for a bill like this. It’s been 15 years, and it has not been a success. There are other things we can do,” said McKenzie. “Having the state run individual systems like this is very problematic.”

The bill passed the subcommittee vote unanimously and now heads to the full House Education Committee.