_{Development of this tool was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under grant number ESR-9731070 to the National Alliance of State Science and Mathematics Coalitions. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation}

INFRASTRUCTURE COMPONENT	TRADITIONAL SYSTEM	AWARENESS & EXPLORATION	TRANSITION	EMERGING NEW INFRASTRUCTURE	PERFORMANCE-BASED SYSTEM
Expectations and Curriculum
Standards, Assessment,and Accountability	Student promotion is based on seat time and content coverage rather than demonstrated performance on standards Focus is on teaching rather than learning Tests are used to compare students to each other rather than report on what they know and can do Accountability systems focus mainly on input and process regulation, and report results without consequences attached to performance System is not focused on promoting common, high goals and academic outcomes for all students Higher education faculty reward systems fail to recognize links with K-12	National standards in mathematics and science are reviewed to develop state and/or local content standards in science and mathematics Data on the efficacy of a standards-based systems are collected and reviewed Standards-based assessments are explored and developed to determine how well students are meeting goals A growing realization that all students must achieve high standards leads to exploration of strategies for holding the system (districts, schools, teachers and students) accountable for meeting this goal Higher education institutions consider implementing practices to accommodate students graduating from standards-based high schools, using transcripts and non-traditional assessments recognize links with K-12	States require districts and schools to use standards that meet or exceed state standards Districts, schools and teachers begin to identify needs and develop teaching and learning strategies to meet standards New tests are developed to assess student progress on standards; performance standards are established A dual assessment system may be used comprised of an NRT and performance test to provide results on national norms and standards An accountability system is developed to focus on continuous progress towards meeting standards for all students New policies trade flexibility for achieving results Higher education researches the validity of other assessments and methods of documenting achievement recognize links with K-12	Districts rethink local policies, including reallocating resources, to support standards and high performance State and local assessments provide information on how well students meet standards; results are disaggregated and reported by gender and ethnicity to promote equity Stakeholders, as well as students and teachers, begin to be held accountable for system results Resource banks are created to share standards, best practices and local assessment practices Consequences for both high and low performance become part of the accountability system Assessment of student achievement of standards replaces college examinations for recent high school graduates recognize links with K-12	Standards are revised periodically to take into account new learning goals Instruction is based on students' performance on multiple measures and is tailored to student needs High performance is rewarded; technical assistance is provided for low performing schools and sanctions are imposed if results do not improve The accountability system relies on disaggregated student achievement data to help ensure that all students meet standards Accountability system collects financial data as well as other information to support decision making by policymakers Higher education admissions is based on demonstrations of competency such as test scores or portfolios recognize links with K-12
Curriculum and Instruction	State curriculum guidelines consist of lists of required fact mastery or courses Curriculum and instruction are textbooks-and test-driven rather than guided by student needs Curriculum and instruction are oriented towards providing minimal, basic skills rather than challenging goals	NSF-supported and other standards-based, high quality curricula are sought for use Growing recognition that a performance-based system will require greater flexibility in curriculum, how time is used, and instruction to meet needs of diverse students	Existing curriculum is mapped to standards; gaps are filled New measures and evaluation strategies are developed to assess the impact of curriculum and instruction on student achievement	States provide models, best practices, resources, information and limited technical assistance to assist districts on implementing standards Districts revise policies to ensure that curricula fit community needs	Curriculum and instruction are flexible enough to help all students meet high standards Only programs that produce results are used and "scaled-up" Student achievement gains are used in program evaluation
INFRASTRUCTURE COMPONENT	TRADITIONAL SYSTEM	AWARENESS & EXPLORATION	TRANSITION	EMERGING NEW INFRASTRUCTURE	PERFORMANCE-BASED SYSTEM
Expectations and Curriculum
Pre-Professional: Recruitment, Selection,and Course-taking	Recruitment of minority students and candidates to teach in areas experiencing shortages is limited Higher education admissions criteria include GPA, class rank, and standardized test scores Higher education Arts & Sciences programs are not integrated and are not aligned with content standards recognize links with K-12	States, higher education institutions, and districts consider collaborating to proactively recruit prospective teachers States consider alternative routes as a strategy to recruit professionals from other fields or retirees Higher education faculty and administration begin to recognize the relationship of K-12 standards to under-graduate course content and quality and their institutional responsibility for preparing K-12 teachers recognize links with K-12	States identify financial incentives for recruiting and retaining quality teachers, especially in high demand areas States develop programs for high school students promoting teaching as a career recognize links with K-12	States provide alternative routes to training high quality candidates and teachers with emergency certificates Grants are awarded to schools of education with programs to attract qualified students Higher education faculty in Arts & Sciences and Education collaboratively integrate content and pedagogy into their curricula Training and incentives are provided to teacher preparation faculty to implement best practices Grant funding criteria are used to support teacher education reforms recognize links with K-12	A variety of incentives, such as scholarships, loan forgiveness, and summer jobs, are offered to able candidates and those willing to teach in shortage areas A variety of indicators such as scores on teacher licensure exams, program reviews, and feedback from induction programs are used to improve teacher preparation programs Coursework is directly related to helping all students achieve high standards recognize links with K-12
Apprenticeship: Induction and Mentoring	Undergraduates in teacher preparation programs have limited time and roles in K-12 schools Practice teaching assignments are frequently based on convenience rather than on students' interests and needs and on the presence of quality monitoring mechanisms	There is a growing awareness that a high quality induction experience can positively influence a teacher's skills and promote retention in the profession	Some higher education institutions form relationships with school districts to develop creative partnerships	New teachers are provided mentors, support networks, and materials New teachers work in schools that have demonstrated effectiveness in helping students meet standards Higher education institutions enter into partnerships with districts to support teacher preparation and induction recognize links with K-12	Schools with induction programs are monitored and evaluated Schools that provide exemplary induction programs are recognized and rewarded Information databases on effective induction programs are created Equal partnerships between higher education and K-12 are developed for induction and mentoring recognize links with K-12
Professional: Ongoing Professional Development	Professional development usually consists of single, unconnected events and are limited to a few days a year Professional development rarely provides extensive, in-depth work on academic content Schools have little control over professional development offerings Districts provide little time or resources for ongoing professional development within the schools Professional development is supplier- not demand-driven Few schools or districts track their professional development expenditures Evaluation of professional development activities is based on participant satisfaction	State, school board and central office staff realize that professional development must be ongoing, focused on improving the teaching and learning process, standards-based, and related to district and school goals Universities, schools and communities begin to explore opportunities for collaboration related to standards States, districts and schools explore new ways to assess the impact of professional development opportunities, such as skill acquisition, transfer of learning to the classroom, improvement of student learning, and institutional change	Professional development is designed to help promote the use of standards and related assessments by all teachers and administrators Standards for professional development begin to be developed New measures and evaluation strategies are developed to assess the impact of professional development on student achievement Ongoing training in content, diverse instructional strategies, and equity issues are available to all teachers There is a growing awareness that professional development must be ongoing and long term, and that it must meet the needs of individual teachers, schools, and districts	Teacher or subject area networks and other mechanisms are created to support long-term teacher development Districts revise policies to provide adequate time for high quality professional development States provide time for professional development, resources, brokering institutional support, incentives to universities, schools, districts, and teachers to undertake professional development Outreach centers and school networks offer information and support services to promote student success The focus of professional development programs is on teaching that enables students to meet expectations States develop standards for professional development and share with districts	Professional development opportunities are data-driven and designed to promote student achievement Only those professional development programs that result in student learning gains are "scaled up" States develop on-demand information systems about professional development opportunities related to comprehensive reform school designs or teacher networks and provides data on their effectiveness Incentives are provided for teachers to access high quality professional development; accountability mechanisms ensure dollars are well spent
Teacher Education: Program Approval, Licensure,and Compensation	Approval of teacher preparation programs is based on inputs Teacher certification is based on completion of required courses Teacher pay increases are based on accumulation of continuing education units, which are consequently the main incentive for teachers to engage in professional development activities	Policymakers realize the need to base teacher preparation program approval on the quality of graduates Data that show the impact of quality teaching on student achievement are disseminated to policymakers and the general public There is a growing realization that a standards-based system requires all teachers to possess significant content knowledge and diverse instructional strategies Districts restrict awards of continuing education credit to courses they have approved Few incentives are offered to teachers for learning new skills	Results of studies such as TIMMS are used to gauge the quality and appropriateness of teacher preparation programs Professional standards boards set standards for teacher preparation program approval Professional standards boards set standards for teacher testing and licensing State professional development standards are linked to teacher re-licensure Some districts provide additional pay to teachers in shortage areas or to teachers who assume additional responsibilities Some states and districts provide an annual pay increase for NBPTS certification	Teacher preparation program approval standards include performance measures and indicators Alternative providers of teacher training are sanctioned Tools to test teachers' knowledge of content and pedagogy are developed Tests are aligned with K-12 standards Programs to certify teachers holding emergency certificates are developed Districts and unions agree on pay scales that reward teachers for increased knowledge and skills rather than Continuing Education Units	Teacher preparation program approval is linked to graduates' achievement, such as pass rates on teacher licensure Cut scores on teacher licensure tests are set to ensure competency levels and predict success Teacher and administrator certification is based on demonstrated knowledge and skills Teachers' and administrators' compensation is based on reliable and valid assessments of knowledge and skills and is related to meaningful gains in student achievement Student achievement gains are used in teacher evaluation Teacher preparation may be deregulated and alternatives to certification are created
INFRASTRUCTURE COMPONENT	TRADITIONAL SYSTEM	AWARENESS & EXPLORATION	TRANSITION	EMERGING NEW INFRASTRUCTURE	PERFORMANCE-BASED SYSTEM
Leadership and Public Engagement
Coalitions, Partnerships, and Networks	Networking is rare and viewed as insignificant. Partnerships are one-shot, supplemental, and function outside of the system Special interest groups work independently No "maps" of reform efforts and opportunities exist No group has the responsibility to coordinate efforts and fill gaps There is no mechanism to share what is being learned across reform efforts	Key stakeholders are identified and mapped to possible avenues of involvement A few networks are organized to meet school and district needs Growing realization that partnerships need to be longer term and more integral to educational goals Realization by policymakers that it will take several years until standards are implemented and student test scores rise Consideration of creating coalitions to achieve common goals	Attempts are made to understand existing networks, their common aspects, and the groups they serve. Networks are used to facilitate the sharing of information and ideas Coalitions are formed to broker information and advocate for reforms Technology, such as web sites, chat rooms and list serves are used to connect networks and facilitate communication	A state-level coalition of business, community, education, and policy leaders supports education reform Efforts are made to coordinate and align actions of multiple parties in support of reform National organizations provide information and leadership to a network of state-based coalitions Coalitions are able to mobilize public opinion and access the policymaking process	A state-level coalition of business, community, education, and policy leaders works together on a continuous basis to improve the state's education system Networks and coalitions ensure continuity, evaluate progress and impact, and apply new learning to system reform Networks serve as communication and information channels, professional support mechanisms, and continuous learning venues
Public and Political Support	Well-funded special interest groups demand and focus policymakers' attention on their issues Interactions among stakeholder groups are formal and "pro forma" External communication occurs via public awareness campaigns Parents feel education system is "good enough"; don't take action to support improvement Business involvement in education consists of "adopt-a-school" relationships	Public opinion polls and focus groups identify public concerns on education Community members recognize that the education system is not meeting the needs of all students Community members want evidence that standards-based education increases student achievement Business leaders want more involvement in education and the policymaking process to ensure high quality workforce	Task forces are formed to recommend changes for states, districts and schools Public is involved in the development and review of standards and other policies Public is included in efforts to identify student content standards and performance standards Political leaders understand importance of education and include in political platform Business takes lead in hosting summits to spotlight key education issues	Coalitions provide continuity and "keep the vision" for reform as term limits accelerate turnover of political leaders State and local leaders understand the value of listening to and acting on the public's concerns Efforts are made to coordinate and align actions of multiple parties in support of standards-based education Business makes long term commitment to improving education by providing leadership and financial support to solve key education issues	Public supports education because they are integrally involved in designing policy and evaluating progress Community members expect high performance and demand information to evaluate progress State and national organizations play an increasing role of educating new political leaders and providing evidence-based information about high performance systems Business requires student transcripts and other evidence of student performance when making hiring decisions
INFRASTRUCTURE COMPONENT	TRADITIONAL SYSTEM	AWARENESS & EXPLORATION	TRANSITION	EMERGING NEW INFRASTRUCTURE	PERFORMANCE-BASED SYSTEM
Policymaking
Policymaking and Policy Alignment	Policies are developed piecemeal and in isolation Policies respond on a crisis basis to problems, rather than drive a broad vision of reform Policies focus on defining inputs rather than defining outputs or performance Additive policies and regulations hamper local flexibility and send mixed messages Policies focus on system "inputs" Regulations are increased and tightly monitored as a way to improve performance State policy, when reviewed as a whole, may be contradictory and send mixed messages to educators "One size policy fits all" results in a uniformity that inadvertently creates achievement gaps	Policymakers assess the pros and cons of specific input and process related policies, and explore more results-oriented policies Growing awareness among policymakers that education must be viewed as a system and that policies are related and reinforcing Growing realization that education could be improved by allowing districts and schools to determine the strategies to help students meet standards Content standards are developed to identify what students should know and be able to do and become the basis for policy alignment Policymakers realize that implementing standards will require changes in many other policies	Policymakers review education code to eliminate unnecessary regulations Joint task forces are created to promote a bipartisan and comprehensive policy approach to education Legislature, higher education board and state board begin to meet together to coordinate policymaking Other policies are aligned to support standards such as: assessments that measure student progress on standards; teacher licensure requirements that ensure teachers have the skills to help students meet standards, etc. Policymakers rethink the state role in supporting the use of standards in classrooms and building local capacity such as increasing resources for teachers' professional development	Policymakers begin to create support structures to help districts and schools implement a standards-based education system Constant attention is paid to the results of new policies; revisions in policy are made as needed Accountability systems are expanded to provide more "actionable information" for state policymakers Key state organizations and networks collaborate with policymakers to ensure policy drives best practice Incentives, such as pay for knowledge and skills, are developed to focus attention on performance National resources, such as Achieve, ECS, NASSMC, CCSSO, and NCSL provide policy information to education leaders	Policies are written in terms of school, district or system performance Policies are continually evaluated and revised in relation to their contribution to creating and supporting a high performance system Policymakers "hold the line" in requiring high performance, even under public pressure to lower standards Funding and resource allocation drive educational goals and student achievement Policies are continually evaluated and reviewed to determine their contribution to a high performance system Performance of traditionally low performing groups is constantly analyzed and policies created or revised to support high achievement for all students
INFRASTRUCTURE COMPONENT	TRADITIONAL SYSTEM	AWARENESS & EXPLORATION	TRANSITION	EMERGING NEW INFRASTRUCTURE	PERFORMANCE-BASED SYSTEM
Resources
	Large discrepancies in per pupil funding are common between districts Categorical funding streams produce "silos" in state education agencies and districts Compensatory/special education funding and most federal funds follow the child and often dictate the services the individual child receives Few districts can identify how their resources are spent Fund accounting is used to track expenditures Districts can't identify which expenditures get results	Some states revise finance formulas to increase state aid to promote equity Realization of the need to know how much money it takes to educate students to a basic level of proficiency on standards Policymakers, including those at the federal level, look for ways to combine and coordinate resources Districts begin to identify different revenue streams and discuss how to coordinate Foundation and state grants support implementation of innovative reform strategies and projects Policymakers realize need to link expenditures to results but know tracking mechanisms are not in place	Researchers conduct studies to determine cost of educating all students to high standards. Policymakers seek other sources of funds to take pressure off local property taxes The federal government reduces regulations on spending federal dollars through programs such as Ed Flex Title I dollars are focused on Comprehensive School Reform Designs to promote higher student achievement Pilot incentive programs reward districts and schools for reallocating and/or converging existing resources to invest in standards-based reform Districts begin to implement new financial software that allows them to track expenditures and relate them to student performance	Policymakers know cost of educating students to standards; create a finance formula to address this SEA staff coordinate federal funds and allow districts to use a uniform planning form to coordinate federal resources with district improvement plans Districts know all sources of funds and where dollars are being spent so resources can be coordinated and converged State adopts incentive programs that reward districts and schools for reallocating resources and successfully increasing student achievement. Districts know where resources are allocated and cost/benefit analyses are routinely conducted Programs that don't produce results are eliminated	Base funding for each district is determined by the costs of helping the average student reach state standards Additional funding is provided to help special needs students to reach state standards Federal policies and resources are flexible and support a high performance system Only previously proven programs and strategies are funded for use in schools and districts Links between resources and results are routinely determined Rewards are provided for high performance; sanctions and assistance for low performance Schools and districts "scale-up" programs that improve student achievement
INFRASTRUCTURE COMPONENT	TRADITIONAL SYSTEM	AWARENESS & EXPLORATION	TRANSITION	EMERGING NEW INFRASTRUCTURE	PERFORMANCE-BASED SYSTEM
Information and Use
Data-Driven Decision Making	Data collection is focused on what was done rather than what was accomplished. Program evaluations are conducted but rarely used for continuous improvement Assessment results are rarely used to guide improvement Data is not provided in a user-friendly form Achievement and other data are not disaggregated by gender and ethnicity, not input and process equity	Policymakers begin to identify new sources of information to judge progress in a standards-based system Large-scale data collection efforts begin to be designed with end users in mind Increasing pressure to disaggregate data to promote equity	State policymakers use accountability results to shape their interactions with schools and districts Data are turned into information that can be used for decision-making Data from state accountability systems provide disaggregated data on subgroups Districts, schools and teachers use test results and other information to identify areas for needed improvements	Student achievement data is discussed openly and publicly States can help or train others to help translate data Consequences for performance are created throughout the system Data warehouses are created and data "cleansed" for easy access and manipulation by end users	Student achievement is the primary indicator used to evaluate school effectiveness Information on student and school results drives continuous improvement State ensures that information in available "on demand" through online sources Accountability is ensured through continuous, integrated data collection, management, analysis, and reporting
Reporting	Only information required by the state is collected Most information is produced and stored in printed forms Uniform reporting and compliance processes are required for all schools Public is a passive recipient of information and data	Surveys and focus groups are used to find out what kind of data and information are most important to districts, schools, parents and community members Exploration of using assessment results to guide improvement Design of accountability systems are reconsidered in an effort to report usable data to districts, schools and parents	Districts begin to find ways to join different data sets to create a complete picture of student achievement	States produce annual report cards on districts and schools, supplemented by locally-selected data Online or web-based information is used by districts or schools to create report cards and make information available to any community member at any time Public sessions held to explain and explore the meaning of the data on report cards Data are reported by subgroups to identify achievement gaps and strategies to close them	Continued polling and listening through formal and informal means provide information from internal and external audiences. State ensures that information is available "on demand" through electronic and other sources. Accountability is ensured through continuous, integrated data collection, management, analysis, and reporting