Search

Purpose – Despite the popularity of school "turnaround" and "portfolio district" management as solutions to low performance, there has been limited research on these strategies. The purpose of this paper is to address this gap by exploring the strategic case of Los Angeles Unified School District's Public School Choice Initiative (PSCI) which combined both of these reforms. It examines how core mechanisms of change played out in schools and communities during the first two years of implementation. Design/methodology/approach – The paper draws on a mixed methods study, combining data from surveys, case studies, leader interviews, observations, and document review. It is guided by a conceptual framework grounded in research on school turnaround and portfolio districts, along with the district's implicit theory of change. Findings – The paper finds early success in attracting diverse stakeholder participation, supporting plan development, and ensuring transparency. However, data also indicate difficulty establishing understanding and buy-in, engaging parents and community, attracting sufficient supply of applicants, maintaining neutrality and the perception of fairness, and avoiding unintended consequences of competition – all of which weakened key mechanisms of change. Research limitations/implications – Data from parent focus groups and school sites may not be representative of the entire population of parents and schools, and data come from a short period of time. Practical implications – The paper finds that developing processes and procedures to support complex reform takes time and identifies roadblocks others may face when implementing school turnaround and portfolio management. The research suggests districts invest in ways to ensure neutrality and create a level playing field. It also indicates that leaders should anticipate challenges to engaging parents and community members, such as language and literacy barriers, and invest in the development of unbiased, high-quality information and opportunities that include sufficient time and support to ensure understanding. Originality/value – This paper begins to fill a gap in research on popular reform strategies for improving low-performing schools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The LAUSD is the largest school district in the State and is charged with the responsibility of educating over one-fifth of the children in California. Taken individually, each of the LAUSD's eleven local districts would rank in the top twenty in the State in terms of student population. The District is LA County's second largest employer, and with an annual operating and capital budget of over nine billion dollars, it brings together a diverse range of active and dynamic stakeholders. In 2000 the LAUSD found itself at a crossroads. In response to growing criticism and the threat of a State-mandated break-up due to the poor performance of their schools, the District created eleven mini-districts to improve accountability and take instructional programs closer to the people who use them. This paper provides background on the LAUSD's decentralization effort and power sharing aspects of the District's self-imposed break-up, and recommendations for addressing these issues are postulated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]