District+Improvement+Plan+Comparison

Although formats are different, both District Improvement Plans contain similar elements. State requirements dictate that each school district in Texas develops a plan for continuous improvement. This plan must incorporate elements at the district, campus, and individual employee levels. It must include long range, ongoing, and annual actions. Both plans outline models and programs for continuous improvement.

Austin’s plan is entitled ACCESS and encompasses all the above attributes. They describe it as their “comprehensive system for continuous improvement.” Huffman developed the ASPIRE initiative to achieve the similar goals. Both have specifically outlines goals and Austin included methods to perhaps recognize success, but not a whole lot of direction as to measuring what success looks like. Huffman listed numerous testing categories and specific measureable desired outcomes. We have a copy of Austin’s plan in our course. Huffman’s can be found on the following link: [].

Both districts do a great job of involving a cross-section of stakeholders from a community-wide perspective. Austin went so far as to include attendance records from their development meetings. Huffman chose not to. Additionally, the vast disparity in size between the two districts lent itself to some obvious differences so far as programming and funding allocation was concerned.

It looks as though both districts address NCLB. Additionally, Both are cognizant of achievement in at-risk populations. Austin ISD even has an appendix that speaks to pregnancy services (indicating a need area). Huffman, though certainly susceptible, only referenced it. Therefore the area is not specifically addressed other than the mention of continuation of services in the goal/strategy section.

As mentioned above, due to size, Austin appears to use its resources on numerous programs- one of interest to me is the YSM or youth service mapping. I believe that both districts have used their specific goals to drive funding through the budget process. I was able to recognize a great deal of information on funding sources. There was much mention of allocation of Title money in section A of the Austin plan (page 21). Huffman’s was set up to be listed within their goals section as referenced in pages 20-28.

Although the state sets some specific parameters for development of these plans, it is obvious that local control is the predominant factor in both the structure and content of the plans. Although I know little about the struggles within Austin ISD, it is obvious that much time and consideration was put into a plan tailor-made to fit the needs of their individual district. As far as Huffman is concerned, our need areas are definitely addressed. I believe both plans will serve in the best interest of students.

From Jeff:

While comparing Austin ISD’s Improvement Plan with our district’s plan I noticed a lot of differences between the two. The Austin I.S.D Improvement Plan had a large amount of introductory information including the attendance and notes from the District Advisory meetings. The Austin DIP also has much more focus on the budget in their plan in detailed sections than ours, Appendix A. Our district plan does not really address budget issues in a separated, detailed section. Our plan has nothing even similar to Appendix A in the Austin plan. Our plan is very basic and consists of a table of goals and looks very similar to Appendix B in the Austin plan. Our goals are very specific and it shows our focus for needed improvement. In regards to the funding sources and how they support various goals, I did not see much evidence of that at all in our plan. There are a few places where it states where the funding is coming from, but not in most places. The Austin ISD plan was much more budget-oriented, but it also did not clearly spell out where all of the money was going to specifically. Appendix A shows where the larger amounts are going, but it did not break it down by each category. Overall, the Austin ISD District Improvement Plan is more detailed and has a more clear focus with the budget, but I still like our plan more because it focuses on specific goals and areas of concern. I wish our plan was more detailed with budget issues. I think a combination of the two documents would be a great plan. When we finalize our campus plan in a few weeks, I hope to incorporate some of this information into the plan to make our budget more goal-driven.