Webinar - 2026 Legislative Prep Session: Evolving High Schools to Engage Today’s Students

Thank you. Hello everyone and welcome to the second webinar in this year's legislative prep series. Before we dive in, I want to take a moment to thank the Education Commission of the States, the National Association of State Boards of Education, and the National Conference of State Legislator for partnering with us. Also, a shout out to the team at LPI for all their efforts to organize and coordinate this. You all are the best. A few notes about the series. Uh we created this series because state policy makers and education leaders across the country are facing many of the same challenges. Uh rather than tackling them alone, we we recognize that it it helps for states to to come together to learn from research from one another and to share it with all of you. Each session has its own focus, a lens into practical forward-looking approaches to strengthening our education systems and making sure that they serve each and every learner. We start with the research because we believe and know that policy should be grounded in strong evidence. It's the core of LPI's work and like our partners at ECS and NASBY and NCSL, we know how valuable it is for state leaders to hear how other states are addressing similar issues. Our sessions highlight leaders from both Democratic and Republican le states so we can underscore strategies that work across political lines. Last month in our first session, we looked at community schools with speakers from California and Kentucky sharing how they're improving student outcomes in ways that reflect local needs. Later this week on on Thursday, we'll dig into school funding with legislators from Montana and New Mexico. But today, we turn to high school redesign and we're joined by leaders from Indiana and Washington who will share how their states are shaping a new vision for secondary learning and success. High school redesign is a particular area of interest and commitment for LPI. Um it's also for me personally. I've spent a lot of years examining the possibilities of our our system and our secondary schools. It's so closely tied to equitable outcomes in education in work and civic life to economic mobility to the broader redesign of our public education system. Last year, we launched LPI's Center for School and System Redesign to help practitioners, policymakers, families, and communities apply the science of learning and development to the design of schools. The center works with letter leaders, excuse me, of all levels. It lifts up successes. It studies impact, documents redesign efforts across the country. So, let's get started. I'm pleased to introduce the cent's director, Cheryl Jones Walker, to kick off today's session. Cheryl, >> thanks so much, Elena. I'm very excited to be here with all of you today to talk about the work of transforming schools broadly and high schools more specifically following Alena's powerful framing of this legislative series and the work of this center. I'll share a brief overview of research on high school transformation. I'll then pass things off to my colleague Ryan Saunders who will introduce our expert panel. After a moderated discussion, we'll move to your questions and then I'll return for a few closing remarks. Today I'm going to share research on why we need to evolve high schools to meet the needs of students. We'll talk a little bit about what we mean by a redesign school and how we support educators to shift policies, practices, and instruction as well as how we build the infrastructure needed to sustain this work. So why redesign? Well, we know the current model of schooling that was designed in the 1900s is not meeting the needs of today's learners. Large traditional schools were designed to be efficient and to focus on wrote memorization. Often large numbers of students are instructed by isolated teachers in discrete content areas. Tracking was seen as a way to meet students needs and prepare them for appropriate pathways. Unfortunately, too often these were determined for young people with a fixed ability mindset and students were selected and sorted. often it was informed by their identities whether that was race, class, gender, nationality, language or ability. We know that school and school district goals should be shaped by the interest in the needs of the learners and their voices should inform policies, curriculum and instructional practice. A recent survey by populist found that about 70% of students say that their school is not caring or supportive. If we can go back one slide, that would be great. So in part because of the structures of school and the pressure to cover a broad curriculum, most students don't feel well known by adults. The curriculum often feels irrelevant to students lives and about 75% of adolescents report feeling stressed, tired, or bored by school. As Alena mentioned, we are really looking to think about the implementation of science of learning and development because it has deepened considerably in recent years and high schools have not aligned with sold and they do not they don't facilitate deep relationships which we know are essential to creating the safety and support young people need to meet success. So what is a redesign school? In a redesign school, educators attend to the whole person by focusing on the conditions of the learning environment and the processes to support both learning and development. This means that the classroom and schools are personalized rather than being large and bureaucratic. The goal is for curriculum and instruction to be authentic and relevant. So often it means it is presented in applied modalities whether that's inquiry or projectbased performance tasks with assessments thinking about internships and communities um in and outside of the larger educational ecosystem. In a redesign school the learner is centered. Therefore they are co-creating expectations norms and they're participating in restorative practices when problems arise. So last year in March of 2024, LPI published a report called redesigning high schools 10 features for success. This presents the evidence base for secondary school transformation. The features align directly with sold and represent schools and district practices, policies and structures to support the adolescent learner. We have tried to group these 10 elements into three broader categories and think about providing challenging and encouraging and sorry providing challenging and engaging instructional design which is our features four five six and 10. Creating relationship centered learning which is our our features 1 2 8 and nine and finally building professional capacity for effective teaching and leading features seven and three. We'll talk a lot more um about kind of how we build the infrastructure for this professional learning, but I just want to share that our 10 features provides a research base, but examples of schools and districts that are engaged in school change efforts and there are digital resources, videos, cases, tools, and policy reports. An upcoming center research synthesis also outlines how student experience and outcomes um in relationship centered schools that are intentionally small. Um the ways in which this um leads to structures um that increase graduation rates, boost college enrollment, and reduce racial disparities in school discipline. So moving on to talk about the professional capacity building, we'll have a chance to hear from leaders who enga who are engaged in the process of redesigning high schools in their states and creating such infrastructures that provide develop development opportunities to facilitate this work. In our final chapter of the cent's report on redesigning high school, we outline the policy conditions needed to sustain systems change. These are learned from previous era of improvement efforts. We know that districts must plan highquality professional development, whether that's district-wide school-based or job embedded. We need to build and sustain a pipeline of wellprepared educators from diverse backgrounds. And we need to select highquality instructional materials that align with the framework for redesign. And finally, it is critical that we focus on effective and efficient redistri redistribution of resources in order to provide support for the most marginalized learners. State and federal agencies in order to engage in this transformation need to build capacity within the system and create an ethos of improvement not compliance. It we need to think about the data collection and feedback and how this can support better outcomes for young people. And we need to focus on expanding powerful learning experiences experiences and rewarding student achievement and the reallocation of fund really need to um address the underresourced students in order to address gaps in opportunities. So I want to share a little bit about the high school transformation state network that was launched by NASBY recently. In May 2023, NASBY released a report entitled high schools that matter with a series of cases by experts. They they focused on how can the students how can students high school experience be restructured for their long-term success. In the opening uh chapter, Russell Ali and Tim Nolles outline a new architecture for high school that moves beyond seat time and credit hours. And last year, NASBY partnered with knowledge works and the coordination in coordinate and with coordination from Carnegie Foundation for the advancement of teaching. They invited six states to learn together. The network is examining its practices and policies derive at a shared understanding of the barriers and opportunities to redesign state systems. We know that the cross learning cross sharing helps to define the role of states in this high school redesign process. They have begun to learn the ways in which highlighting policy structures, ensuring adequate resources, establishing a vision for learning and post-secondary readiness and the coordination of these crossstate initiatives are critical to the success and implementation. Our panelists today hail from six of the two of the six states in the NASBY network. Um, the network consists of uh state teams from California, Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri, New York, and Washington. I've had the privilege to sit on the advisory board that's charged with providing guidance on project goals, sharing relevant research, and to foster connections across the network. There's also a student advisory committee that's running parallel to the adults um who are supporting these efforts. So, today we're going to learn from leaders in Washington State and Indiana. They're each at different phases in this work. The conversation will focus on their successes, growth areas, and what is next in their state in the high school transformation journey. To introduce our panel, I'll hand it off to Ryan Saunders, our director of state policy for LPI. Ryan is also a member of the educator quality educator quality team and he supports the work of teacher licenser collaborative and the ed prep lab. Welcome, Ryan. >> Thank you so much, Cheryl. Uh and we are now going to turn from that great look at the research and some of the overarching uh theory of action for this work to hear about the ways uh these two states, Indiana and Washington are putting it into practice and how they're thinking expansively about the goals we are setting for learners and how to ground those goals in a holistic view of young people and how they learn and develop. Um, we're going to hear about their common vision and how they're working to build it across their state for high school graduation and the pathways into life beyond school and really thinking about the systemwide policies that they're working on that are going to enable school redesign and support efforts to transform the student experience. Now, to help us get a deep look at the work in Washington and Indiana, I'm joined by four amazing leaders. Um, hailing from I'm just flag here. I'm going to introduce them, but you can get a full bio in the chat and you can hear more about their their record today. Um, but I'm joined from the Pacific Northwest by Alyssa Müller, director of policy at the Washington State Board of Education, and Randy Spalding, executive director at the Washington State Board of Education. And then coming to us live from the crossroads of America, Byron Ernest, the chair elect of the Indiana Board of Education and chair of the National Association of State Boards of Education, our great partners at NASBY, and Representative Bob Benning, serving in the Indiana House of Representatives since 1992, representing House District 91. Um, so welcome to all of you. Um before we dive in, I want to remind everyone in the audience that you should feel free to drop your questions into the chat as we go. We'll make time for Q&A. Uh but to kick us off, we have some structured questions that have been provided to the panelists ahead of time. No gotchas. Um we're going to start with Washington State who's going to tell us a little bit about their future ready initiative and a strategic plan the board of education is working on. uh which Washington set out in 2024 on this ambitious multi-year effort to revamp the state's graduation requirements with a focus on essential skills and inter sorry interdisiplinary and inclusive learning. That's tough to say together. Now, can you talk to us about this future ready initiative and how it's setting out to reshape schooling across the state and as you all put it lay the groundwork for a more dynamic and responsive education system in Washington. and I will turn it over to you Randy and Alyssa to kick us off. >> Uh thanks so much. Really appreciate the opportunity. Um so just to ground things a little bit in Washington uh the state board of education uh has responsibility for graduation requirements, accountability and other things broad mandate around um around um advocacy for our system of education. We're not the state education agency. Uh and so I think that's just important grounding as we look at how we're structured in the state. And last year the board adopted a our strategic plan and it's a different structure for a strategic plan. We were really focused in this plan on how we do our work and less about what the outcome we might anticipate uh at the end of that work is uh in terms of uh specific initiatives and that sort of thing. And so um in doing that we really put an emphasis on uh setting up a structure to co-develop our policies with those who are served in our system and particularly focused on those who have not been well served by our educational system. Um and so to do this um we are working towards authentic engagement with students, families, communities that we serve. And um uh we also formally adopted uh our profile of a graduate which was developed through another sort of community-led process a few years earlier. Um and we're using that profile as a as a guide as we reexamine the high school graduation requirements in collaboration with our stakeholders. One of the key challenges that we're trying to address here is uh that we keep hearing from uh students, families, employers, and legislators that there are areas where the diploma is lacking. They want uh additional things added, things like greater relevance in the curriculum, financial education, life skills, etc. At the same time, we hear that the requirements are not flexible enough, that they're too complex, they don't give enough room for students to explore. And so um we recognize that these are all true at the same time and they appear to be in conflict and and so it's really created this structure where we are looking at at kind of how can we reconcile these things and create a framework that provides students with that agency and flexibility that they need to be able to achieve their goals postsecary while also meeting the expectations for uh the that they're prepared for what comes next as well. And so that's that's really the balance that we're trying to find in this work. And um uh we're working with uh folks who have not often been in the policy conversations through this process as well. So we've uh we can talk a little bit more about our community engagement work around that, but really trying to work through trusted partners to connect with uh folks who uh like say have normally not been engaged in this work. >> That's fantastic. And I want to take kind of on the threads you described especially that piece about uh we'll get more back to the community engagement and some of the work you all are doing to bring everyone along in this process which is about building that common vision which hopefully carries forward into implementation. Um, but I want to think a little bit about your focus on kind of that both end of how do you incorporate kind of needs across the system for everyone's learning and also provide that flexibility because I think that's something that Indiana has really been focused on as they've moved into their own process of implementation. So I want to invite uh our friends uh Bob and Byron. Um, we've heard from Washington about this effort to build their new vision for high school graduation requirements and the ways it's meant to align in this broader strategic plan, connect with other initiatives in the state. Um, Indiana is already deep into implementation for a lot of your own revamped vision of the high school diploma that includes a deep look at developing pathways that can meet students across enrollment, employment, and enlistment. and you are currently working toward full implementation of the new Indiana diploma by 2029. Can you talk to us about your own process for designing this new diploma and how that work is helping drive innovative more personalized approaches to teaching and learning in your state? Yeah, Ryan. And one, it's really great to be here and and I think we need to back up just a little bit for us to to maybe give some context of how we got here. And so back in 2017, we actually created a by the legislature created a panel that was called graduation pathways panel which which really led the work for us and the vision that we now are are really operating under in that employment enrollment and enlistment that you mentioned for us. And and it actually came about because at that time we were still one of only, I believe, 14 states at the time who had a single graduation qualifying exam for students to graduate. And and and that became a real passion of mine because I just didn't think that was serving our students well, right? That did not value what I always say, every path matters for our students, right? So that led our way to where we had with that nine different pathways that our students could graduate under. Um you know whether it be an enrollment piece where we were using um SAT, ACT, whether we were using certifications um dual enrollment, those kinds of things with that. And so I think it's important that we mention that because um those really led the way then for the vision that our now work that we've done with the diploma and and those things really came about from that. And I I'll let Bob add to that from from his perspective. >> Yeah, I think Byron hit the nail on the head. Byron and als and I also in 2018 had the opportunity to go to see Switzerland and I I think that became an aha moment for a number of us and uh in terms of how do you get high schoolers engaged in their learning uh make it more personal but also allow them to develop the skills that employers are so desperately asking for at the same time they're learning. So um Indiana as as we've kind of looked at this has not been done in a silo. We are really worked very closely in terms of um developing a robust system u where our diploma is aligning with a youth apprentichip model so to speak and I would suggest that Indiana probably is further along. Um, for a long time we were, I think, kind of chasing a little bit Colorado, but I think even Colorado today would tell you that Indiana's really made some significant uh, uh, steps forward with that. And really the diploma and pathways pathways was kind of the early step forward where we were kind of looking how do we kind of make high school more relevant to kids as opposed to uh having what we would call remediation factories where we constantly would have to have kids uh couldn't pass the ECA and of course assessment for algebra which was the primary uh problem we had. How do we move it to a more robust learning system that all kids could embrace and find uh some pathway that made sense for them? And then uh like I said, the diploma then is really been a natural growth like Byron says from grad pathways onto um the the real focus right now is in what we call ENCAP which stands for Indiana career apprenticeship uh program. So it is really a um allon effort to really move to that uh earn and learn model. >> That's fantastic and I thank you both uh for kind of helping us understand how the historical progression there as well as the the role of the state legislature and really setting that process in motion with the panel you described Byron and kind of taking on that mantle. Um I want to before we shift to thinking about you know there's a lot of focus right now beyond building that vision about what what it challenges you come to when you get to implementation but I want to take a quick beat to think a little bit about stakeholder engagement and this comes from a question in the chat Keith who uh flagged the phrase trusted partners um that our our friends in Washington described. I want to give you both a quick chance. Can you talk a little bit about we'll start with our friends in Washington about what what did that stakeholder engagement process I know it's not done like it it's very clear you all are are very uh deliberative in this process at each stage but can you speak a little bit more in detail to what that stakeholder engagement process has looked like for you all and then we'll we'll hear from our friends in Indiana. Yeah, thanks. So, we uh so the state board and Alyssa may want to chime in on this one as well a little bit, but we have been um working towards authentic engagement um with through we we actually brought in a community engagement coordinator a few years ago and uh that that um person's job is really to figure out how we can reach those communities that we always are working on behalf of but often don't hear from. um and um in more authentic ways. And and so the trusted partner model for us has been working with community- based organizations that already have those connections to the the folks we want to connect with and and working with them in order to bring their voices into the policy conversation. And uh so we did that through a series of contracts over the last several years. And then in the future ready project itself, it's very structured. We have uh we're working with uh the family engagement network through Ed Northwest and they've got um a number of other organizations that they're working with. Again, they already have those natural connections with folks and um one of the other concepts that we're doing in Washington is we're compensating people for their uh their lived experience and things like that. So, they come in uh and the the coordinators who are doing the outreach are compensated, but then in addition, those who are coming to the meetings are compensated in other ways. Sometimes that's gift cards, sometimes it's other things like that, but ways to just recognize that people are bringing their expertise to the table that they might not uh otherwise share or may not be recognized in some ways. >> The only thing >> Yeah, the only thing I was going to add to that is just that um as part of what Ry's talking about as far as sort of working through those trusted partners, we have those community liaison and they actually sit on the task force. So they're compensated for their time and in between meetings they're collecting feedback from their communities and then they have sort of that extra role on the task force of having to relay that back in real time so that the task force is keeping community feedback at the center of their deliberations. >> That's fantastic. I I think the the piece about having the the coordinators, the staffing to prioritize that and kind of be that conduit is a really powerful example of of kind of reaching into the ecosystem and the networks that already exist in the state. Um Byron and Bob, I want to hear how have you all approached stakeholder engagement in your state? Um and can you speak a little bit about to that process? Ryan, I'll jump in first. And I think it even starts with one of the things that I'm really proud of is is a I I would even say my relationship with Representative Baining as the chair of the education committee, me as a state board meeting our member, our our relationship is really tight and and we talk a lot about things and and I appreciate that and I know that both of us have that same kind of relationship with our Department of Education right now and and I think that drives that. Right. And then I I would say even going back to our pathways, we included a lot of different partners in that. We had we had 12 different meetings during that process of grad pathways where we had organizations come in. We had uh we had individuals that made up that that uh committee that actually were parts of those. And so we did and but I don't want to just sugarcoat that to say that we did not have resistors or that because we did and and had a lot of that. And then the last thing I'll say and then I'll let Bob add to that. I would also say that one thing that we've done well with this is we have allowed early adopters. So with our grad pathway and and I'm calling those stakeholders and partners because those become partners in how to lead the way for everyone else, right? And gives us a chance to see areas where we need to do tweaks. But those early adopters, we've allowed that with grad pathways. We've now allowed it with our new diplomas where if as long as the students get the honor seals, they they can opt in now with those new diplomas. And I just think that early adopter piece is a part that people forget that those people can actually be those trusted partners or stakeholders in that too with those schools. >> Yeah, I would just add, you know, Byron actually general assembly required us to move forward to move away from a GQE with a different model. Byron uh chaired it. Uh I was on the commission, my colleague from the Senate. I think a unique thing you would see that we did, Byron had an illustrator at every meeting that would illustrate um a lot of what was being discussed uh in terms of topics. Um to Byron's point, there was it wasn't an easy process and there were the resistors. I think that probably the one um moment that I remember most is when the plan was actually adopted and our principal association which would be one of the ones you would think that you would want to bring along they were livid about the whole process but I think um if you if you reflect back uh to when it was adopted and look today today they're wildly u appreciative of the whole process and I think the other thing that Byron brings a point up. We allowed for early adoption of both the grad pathways and for the diploma track. And so when you see a number of schools raise their hand early on saying, "Hey, I want to be taking advantage of this early." that is a I think a representation that we've we've really hit um something that resonates with uh the constituency out there that they really want to uh embrace this change and see it valuable for the students that they're serving as a as an as opposed to where we were before. That's that's fantastic and and it really it kind of sets up this next question because I I I want to name that the effort to kind of develop and give space for the early adopters to kind of pilot and test likely provided you all a lot of early information about how the challenges those other stakeholders may encounter other groups as they try to push this and scale it statewide. Um, which really connects back to when Cheryl was describing this kind of improvement cycles mindset that states and leaders all kind of adopt and really are thinking about how we're really measuring progress because this these are huge systems we're talking about and and trying to change and move them requires kind of an awareness of a lot of different ways this may play out and a lot of different metrics for progress. Um, so I want to kind of think a little bit about how you all are thinking about measuring progress and put a little more finer point on that question. I'm going to start with Randy and Alyssa. Um, you know, we again hear a lot about implementation challenges when it comes to this work. It's it's very sometimes a little bit easier to set the vision maybe, but then bringing that vision into practice can carry a whole bunch of other challenges. Um, and part of that is having a clear sense of where you're going and how you're going to measure where you're going. Um, so can you talk a little bit about how Washington is thinking about measuring your own progress as you move toward implementation? I know you said a lot about how you guys you don't necessarily have the end in mind, but I'm curious how you're thinking about maybe what are some kind of signposts that let you know you're going in the right direction maybe. >> Yeah, thanks for that. And yeah, so we're we're still building it. So I put that caveat in first. But um I would say kind of referencing back to our strategic plan. We we identified two different kinds of metrics in our strategic plan. So one are sort of the traditional typical kinds of metrics you would see things like you know uh assessment scores, graduation rates, post-secary attendance etc. And uh we actually worked with LPI a few years ago on kind of building that out with some more predictive measures and things that were a little closer and more timely to that. And so part of our strategic plan will be to return to that framework uh after we've developed the future ready um uh initiative to look at what the system is doing. But we also recognize that as a board we are not the ones delivering education. So we're not the ones who can directly impact those metrics. And so we thought it was important to have some metrics that held us accountable for what we said we were going to do in the strategic plan. So those tend to look more like um are we doing the kinds of authentic engagement that we intend to do? Are we reaching the kinds of um the the populations that we want to reach? Uh are we getting that sort of input and using it effectively? How are we using our own resources as a board? So does uh does the amount of time on our board agendas match up with the priorities that we have as an organization for example? So those are the sorts of things we're doing in terms of measurement. I'd also say that implementation is absolutely key and we've seen that across all of our initiatives and so we've got two different um uh subcommittees in our task force for future ready that are looking at different elements of implementation. So one of those is focused on what we would traditionally think of of like you know do we have you know supportive um class scheduling and do we have the resources necessary and etc. We have a second subcommittee that's really looking at the educators. Do we have we um built in the provided the kinds of professional learning and support that they need in order to deliver on uh a uh student centered educational approach. Um and so that's the other element uh that we're bringing into that. So that's they'll be making recommendations that will inform uh our proposal at the end. So won't just be we're going to change the requirements in this way, but we're going to change the requirements and in order to do that, we need these additional things to make it happen. >> That's fantastic. And and uh and naming that piece, you know, again, back to my colleague Cheryl's presentation and thinking about the principles of redesign that the need to build capacity across the system and particularly for educators and leaders given they are the ones kind of on the the ground bringing this work to life. I think that's a really helpful uh reminder for everyone to how they're positioned within where you all are at in the process to kind of refine that next phase within that subcommittee and think carefully about that. So, I appreciate you kind of calling that out and naming that. Um Byron and Bob, can I uh bring you in on this question as well? Um I'd be curious how you all are thinking about implementation and and measuring your own progress right now. Um and any any early signs of success? I think you described a lot about those early adopters and the success of those pilots. I think you described as well the the principles as a good maybe that's a good measure of success as well. The the initial kind of reluctance or resistance turns into kind of uh champion of the work or kind of going along. Can you speak any more to other signs of success other ways you're thinking about progress? I'll talk a little bit maybe not success but ways we we definitely have moni been monitoring pathways was uh um you know obviously a new venture for Indiana and provided a lot of flexibilities for schools. What we noticed um shortly um probably two or three years in is under the uh category of enlistment we had allowed afab score of 30. What was what we used is the qualifying score to get in the United States Army is what we used. We had a lot of debate. We had uh the military come in and they uh at that point in time the US Air Force I believe was 50 I think the Navy was uh and they were at 40 and Marines um probably a little bit above but Army was 31. So we used 30. We used the qualifying score to get the United States Army. What we found was that schools were using that as really a um avenue to get kids qualified and so in their accountability they would immediately say well they've met the requirements for a diploma. So um unfortunately they took the pathway of least resistance and we were very concerned the legislature stepped in told state board you have to close this uh loophole. Um and at the same time the United States military was not meeting its recruitment um um numbers and therefore they had reduced the number uh qualifying I think at one point in time as for army got reduced to 10 so it's 10 percentile on ASV score as a note today the US United States military is actually hitting their recruitment numbers in fact the army hit it two months early and actually has a waiting list But um because of that we had to go make adjustments because we wanted to make sure that we were this was being used in an effective way that um kids were really taking ASVAB with the desire of going to United States military rather than taking ASVAB as a check box on the uh pathway to graduation. So uh and then we we continue our monitoring the number of uh kids and the selections that they are using as as a uh pathway and you know we'll intervene u appropriately. State board has also allowed for um we have locally created pathways. There's probably not as many of those coming in front of state board now as there were initially, but we we always wanted to make sure they were robust options that were going to not dead end kids, but really provide an opportunity for them to have that next step in life. >> I don't know if Byron has anything else. >> Byron, you want to jump in at all or we can keep cruising. And I I would say the next phase of this, Ryan, now that we're in the LA really the last phases of a new accountability system for Indiana, I would say we've also built this into that as well to where we have really gone to a multiple measures very student centered. So, so all of our data and accountability now revolves around the student as opposed to the way I think it's been done forever where it's around the school, right? Where now each student is looked at as an individual what are the data points that they've done. Not that we we still have the academic success and proficiency on on our exams is important, but we also know all those other areas. Um, again, I go back to what I said every every path matters for kids, right? And so therefore, we we've really steeped into that new accountability to where where we have lots of different things being looked at for each student. >> That's fantastic. Um, now there's there's some questions coming in the chat. We are going to get to those in a moment. I'm going to try to give you one more uh prepared question, but also I forgot to do this as we were going, but I want to give a shout out to uh Representative Bainy. described the international study uh group that you were a part of that went to Switzerland. That's I believe that was through NCSL, the National Conference of State Legislators, also a partner. Just want to name the the great kind of connection of that work to your work. So, uh always always excited to see people learning uh and finding new models. Go ahead. >> Shout out to that. I will say um the work we did in international NCSL's international study group honestly has been the catalyst for where Indiana is today. The uh India has been very fortunate that know we have a uh local foundation that has embraced our work and over the last two years, three years, it's probably taken 400 people to Switzerland to experience it and um you can see the development of what we're doing based on the investments that they're making. and making significant investments in pathways >> and and we'll include I know there was a there was a summary report I believe that came out of that that uh study group >> there's a report that I was intimately involved called no time to lose most requested report NCSL's ever done but there's been a follow-up um international study groups that have also had some additional reports >> that's m we'll make sure to include that in the followup I want to get to one one more prepared question then we're going to turn to the Q&A there's a lot of great questions a lot of connections of things you've already been talking about. Um, now this one it may touch on things you've already said, but I want to just take a moment to really reiterate a few things with a focus on kind of lessons learned, uh, challenges for people to things people can take away from your stories and your progress. So, we know everyone generally here is thinking about different opportunities to advance more innovative personalized schooling and learning opportunities, redesigning high school, thinking about building and reshaping these systems. What lessons and advice would you like to elevate for them to put a finer point on here? And can you share a few pointers on what to do and perhaps what not to do as groups move forward, other states think about implementing driving this work. I'll start with Indiana. Byron and Bob, do you want to jump in first? Well, I think yeah, I I will start and and I I think this is I'm going to use maybe some examples from my own personal professional life of what I do as well. I I think one thing that really has to happen with this, if we're really going to make high school relevant for our students, then we also have to work with industry and and that's every every part of industry to be able to know what is needed for our students as well as help them to be partners. So, for example, I I'm doing some work with with Indiana Pork, our our Association of the Pork Industry in Indiana right now, who who have really taken a leadership role that I've not maybe seen some other organizations do or businesses where they've actually created their own work-based learning program that they're now going out and and working with both on the on the business side of it as well as the schools and making that connection. So I think I if I was to say one piece of advice and you can say well maybe that doesn't have anything to do with policy. Well it does because I think we need to be looking at what does industry need in this um space because we're also looking at what does viability look like in this space for them right just to give an example. So I think that's one piece of advice is not to leave and and I think Indiana's done a great job particularly under under Representative Bainy's leadership on this. we've done a good job of including industry in that. So, that would be my big thing from a from a a what what should we be doing kind of thing. >> I I agree with Byron. There's a couple other things I would add is um as you're redesigning. First off, I'd look at data and data has helped inform what we're going what we're doing. I mean, clearly when you see that 25% of your high school seniors are chronically absent, you know that there's a reason for that. They they don't see high school being relevant. So we have got to change. The system as we know today is not meeting the needs of most of uh our significant number of our high school students. So um that was something that drives that. But I think there's a couple other things that you have to look at. Um number one is Indiana is um per capita is has more manufacturing jobs than any other state in the union. So as as we uh have kind of partnered with employers where we have a workbased learning requirement in our diploma. that was part of the pathways as well. It is that is probably one of our biggest struggles today honestly and challenges is getting employers even though Byron says yes we we are engaging with employers in a big way but changing the way they think because so often employers have sto stood outside the door at the high school saying I need this I need this you're not sending me what I need but they're not willing to get in and engage and so changing that thought process and really getting them to understand if you want this the the students developed to meet your demands, you're going to have to get in and get a little bit dirty. And you're also going to have to have schools understand that you can't use um education lingo with employers because they don't understand. And so there's it's trying it's almost two different languages between the two. Uh and then the last thing I'll say is um and it's still something we have not figured out totally is uh I mentioned the fact we're um number one uh in the country or number one or two in terms per capita uh in manufacturing. Manufacturing's changed a lot. Advanced manufacturing is not at all the factory that um when I grew up. It's not dirty and many many of them are uh computerized robots everything Byron and I've been through and seen a number of those. But still we have issues with liability and how do you engage and take a high school junior senior and put them in this and uh I actually have a meeting tomorrow where we're trying to figure out we've we've done a couple things. We've looked at a couple different states. Kentucky has I think work with a group called a deco and uh created a model where they use like an employment agency. But it is really probably one of our bigger challenges as well as changing the mindset of employers. And I one last thing I will say we are uh through the um philanthropy of the Richard and Fairbanks Foundation. We have taken what we're normally considered advocacy groups like the bankers, the manufacturers and and asked them to start looking this at this instead of advocacy where they're lobbying us or say board or somebody to look at a talent development pipeline. And so that has really been a huge help where we've got um these agent these groups coming together that uh in fact I was talking to um somebody yes over the weekend who said that healthc care will end up opening jobs in five different um hospital systems in Indiana for Indiana youth next school year. So um engaging employers critical but it's also the biggest challenge we have >> and and I think that speaks back to that a question of the effort to engage stakeholders at at the every stage of this work. You really describe kind of a a process of translating the work to different audiences so that you can build that common vision. And building the common vision isn't getting everyone to like agree to the same language necessarily, but it's understanding it from where they sit and their priorities and kind of agreeing to work kind of towards that common space in the middle. So I think that's fantastic in in terms of the work that you all have done with industry to bring them along. And I think your framing of kind of the advocacy groups as well, how to how to get them rowing in a common direction. Uh I also and just thinking real quick um there's a there's a question here that kind of thinks a little bit about how we're we're helping students think about this and and kind of going back to the stakeholders and other people involved like obviously the students going through this system are are fundamental. Uh but Randy and I want to give you all a little space to first respond to that question and then we'll talk uh about kind of how we're providing resources and services to students. Um but yeah, if you guys want to first think about the lessons you all would describe. >> Yeah, I think um I I think kind of where you just were landing there too around that sort of um communicate how we are communicating with the various stakeholders and so as we entered into this work we have uh as as I mentioned we're trying to reach folks who've not been involved in policy conversations. So that requires one kind of communication and then but we also have all the what we would call the usual suspects the people who are at the table and we need to kind of keep them uh in the fold as well and and build coalition around them and so um you know the I think the the some of the things cited at the top in the research presentation is really helpful because those are the same problems that we're trying to solve like how do we it's in the chat as well how do we engage students more effectively right how do we do all those things that's a common thing everybody in the system wants to do that. They want students to be engaged. They want students to learn. They want them to be well prepared for what comes next. It's the how that gets sometimes a little bit tricky. Uh and so sort of really building the coalition around those common threads. Um and the other thing I would say is that as we entered into this initiative, I mean we we knew we were taking on something big. Uh and we're a pretty small group. Um and we knew we would need time and because you cannot move this through uh you know this is not something we could do between two legislative sessions. This is spanning a couple of legislative sessions. So really um building in that time and again that's where the communication becomes essential because we we need patience from a lot of different parties to kind of work through this as we get to a proposal that is going to take a couple of years and and uh in this instance three legislative sessions uh uh from start to finish uh assuming we get it done when we hope to get it done. But uh so so being willing to take that time but also to try to you know ensure that um uh all the partners are on the same page to say yeah let's wait on making additional shifts in things while this process plays out so that we can have a good product at the end of it and a good proposal at the end of it that meets the needs of all the various stakeholders and partners. Um Alyssa is there more you would say on that? We we we also I should just mention we learned a lot from earlier work that she led in our mastery based learning and cl competency based piece and so maybe there's a piece Sarah that you'd want to draw in Alyssa. >> Yeah you're reading my mind Randy um through some of our mastery based learning also known as competency based education work I feel like we learned a lot about what works and what doesn't. Um certainly we benefited from watching some earlier states try to mandate competency based education and seeing that that didn't go very well. So in Washington we went with more the coalition of the willing approach and finding ways to really support school districts through funding when it's been available from the legislature as well as providing technical assistance on how to really implement culturally responsive competency based education in community with other schools doing the same work. So often we found that schools just need that explicit permission to be innovative um and then have the support and thought partnership um from state leaders and from their peers um other schools doing that same work to figure out how to make existing state level policy that's often as flexible as schools need work in their context with their community. Um, we found that districts have all different starting points for this work. But I think if the goal is to focus on making learning more relevant and engaging for students, then schools can be really creative and building from what they already have in place based on their local context. So maybe a school already has great work-based learning opportunities and so it's finding ways to bring in more of what students are learning outside of school into the classroom. Maybe districts already have a good structure for professional learning communities and collaboration time. So, it's having teachers team teach an interdisciplinary course. I feel like there's a lot of different ways to support personalized student- centered learning opportunities. It's just helping districts think through what works in their context. >> That's fantastic. And I just to put a finer point on that kind of writ large there's a lot of different ends to this work when you describe I think your mastery based work that preceded this this push on the future ready initiative. you described your uh your broader efforts on the profile of a graduate as well as kind of feeding into this work. Um, and then you think about Indiana with the work-based learning and apprenticeship kind of all these other ways this work can take shape and drive this bigger vision of innovation and redesign. And also both of you talked about there's a there's kind of this tension you want to build this system out while not holding back your early adopters or also allowing them to move forward and taking lessons from what's happening with their work. And I think that's another key piece here. you're building policy as you go while also not necessarily stopping people from doing the work they may be ready to do and using that as a as a model to kind of drive further change and scale. Um, and then also again I think there's an underlying piece here. It takes a lot of time and continuing to commit that political will over time to do this and do it right. not kind of get off rails, not change it midway. Like that takes a lot of well changes within reason, but not necessarily abandon it. And I think that's that's hard. That's not easy. I mean, we're looking at legislative sessions the past few years and looking ahead where there will be a lot of different things happening in states. And so I think it's really powerful just to remind people that some of the work is keeping people engaged and moving towards for for Washington, it may not be that outcome, but that common vision. Um, and I just to kind of speak to that a little bit more, I'd be curious for this audience. We see this for a lot of different audiences, but we also keep state legislators in mind and thinking about the next session. Is there any further advice you might give for specifically thinking about a legislator and what role they could play in supporting or driving this work in their state? And we'll we'll give a few minutes to kind of hear what you all think. And anyone can jump in depending on who has the moment. Ryan, I want to jump in because I want to say one thing that I think that that we've done and and this again was under Representative Badum's leadership and and I've had the chance to be part of some of it, but we we've done a couple of things that I've helped think have helped drive this in that a few years ago we enacted what what was called a 1003 because that was the bill name um flexibility waivers for schools which enabled them to come up with what are things that we need to do from a title 20 is is our education rule in Indiana. Um, and what are things that you need to do to get out of the way of doing the work that we've just described on this whole call, right? And then and then I would even reference right now, Representative Bain's doing a lot of work on what are some things in title 20 that just need to be changed or eliminated that are are keeping us from having the flexibility. um that we have. And so I think if if I was giving one piece of advice, it would be how could we change things to get the rule policy let out of the way, right? To for schools to be able to to innovate but yet still be held accountable for for the for the good work of our students. >> I would as a legislator, for instance, I know state of Washington, Sharon Tomos Santos is a very good friend of mine. Sharon is chairs the House Education Committee in the state of Washington. Um honestly I will say that um we've had we've learned a lot together and obviously we're opposite parties, blue state versus red state. Um but I one of the things that I do frequently and um number one we do a lot of collaboration but I also work very closely with a lot of advocates like on during session um I have a after on Thursday afternoons I always have a group of um individuals representing all the different education groups together including state board. So Byron is usually there. So, you know, we really talk about policy strategies. It's really the goal of trying to make sure that we're all working together, not working against each other. Um, and really, um, one person can't have all the ideas. um and really trying to uh coalesce and bring uh great ideas forward in terms of general assembly. But clearly I think there's a a number of uh legislators across this country that I could name that are very very definitely involved in education and have had um a great career in terms of working collaboratively. But I think working with state boards and uh governing bodies is very helpful as well. Well well because we like to uh I I don't think any is unique in the fact that we do kind of put the groundwork together um and then defer to state board to put the u really the meat on the bones. Now, I will say I was meeting with Secretary uh u Jenner the other day and uh somebody asked her a question if does the legislature have any authority over that and she she was like I wish there was a day and time legislature didn't have authority over something. So if if they get too far off the rails there's times where state board does you know get jerked back but um Dereg is an issue too. I really um believe that our system of governance and our system what we look at of education is not changed in 120 years and we do need to be moving more to professional system as opposed to a manufacturers type which is something we learned the international study group really we have a manufacturers model where we do we regulate all the inputs I would am trying to get moving to the point where we're looking more outcomes as opposed to I really don't care as much how you get there as long as you kids are going to be successful in the end and let's move and and make educ let educators have more control over their lives which is one of the reasons why we're looking at Drag as well. >> Thank you and Randy and Alyssa I want to give you one last word. We have to kind of wrap it up but I want to give you one last one last thought here on that question then we'll shift to Cheryl. Yeah, just really quickly I would just say that yeah that relationship with the legislature is is really essential in the work our competency based work was really driven by the legislature and and something that we uh really dove into uh and uh and then on the future ready work we've found that it's really our coalition of partners working with the legislature to say uh because it's it's hard to say take a pause on new policy new ideas uh related to graduation requirements but I think um that that um this message is resonated with a lot of folks and and we we haven't seen a lot added uh during this this time that we're working on this and so that's that's a a good thing for the moment uh even though there's a lot of urgent things that we need to address. Right. >> Well, thank you all so much. I'm going to turn it back over to my colleague Cheryl Jones Walker to wrap it up. And again, thank you so much for joining us. Cheryl, >> Cheryl, you're muted. Sorry. >> Thank you. Sorry. appreciate everyone being with us today and really just deep appreciation to our panelists um not just for sharing their time and expertise but their willingness to share some of the challenges which we can all learn so much from. I hope like me you've been inspired by their work um appreciate you Bob Byron Randy and Alyssa. I wanted to call your attention to the fact in just a two days in on Thursday at 11 we'll be here again same time same place at two two o'clock Eastern time we'll be talking about the ways in which um states are negotiating budget um concerns and and thinking about education funding in these times. So please come back and join us for that if you're able. I also just want to encourage you to be in contact with us at the center for school and system redesign. You can take this QR code and um sign up for our newsletter, look at our website, um be in touch with us for upcoming events. Um really appreciate all of you being here and want to thank you and wish you well um as the holiday season approaches. Thanks also to Ryan for your expert u facilitation and wonderful questions and to Elena for her opening remarks. Have a good afternoon.