Strategic Priority Evaluation Matrix
Strategic Priority Area Priority 1: Student Academic Outcomes & Wellbeing
Timeframe
1st Preference
2nd Preference
3rd Preference
4th Preference
Leadership Rationale & Key Themes
1 Year
Option 5, v2 (Avg 1.83) (11 Top)
Option 4 (Avg 2.33) (4 Top)
Option 3 (Avg 2.50) (4 Top)
Option 6 (Avg 3.33) (0 Top)
Leadership favored Option 5v2 for its ability to focus resources on specific grade bands, despite short-term disruption. Option 4 was ranked second as it is less disruptive to the majority of students than full reorganization. Option 6 was ranked last due to concerns that "giant elementary schools" are the "least optimal choice" for student wellbeing. Long-term confidence in Option 5v2 solidified (17 top choice votes), with leaders noting it allows for "targeted instruction" and "better efficiency with programming.” Option 6 remained the lowest ranked, viewed as hindering personalized connections. Option 5v2 allows for a "collective reset" and "targeted PL" (Professional Learning) for grade-level teams. Options 3 & 4 were viewed negatively for creating division by "singling out" specific staff communities for closure. Option 5v2 was strongly preferred for fostering long-term collaboration and innovation among staff with similar instructional priorities. Option 6 (large schools) raised concerns about principals becoming managers rather than instructional leaders, reducing support for staff.
5 Years
Option 5, v2 (Avg 1.17) (17 Top)
Option 4 (Avg 2.72) (2 Top)
Option 3 (Avg 2.94) (0 Top)
Option 6 (Avg 3.17) (0 Top)
Priority 2: Responsiv e Support for Staff
1 Year
Option 5, v2 (Avg 1.41) (13 Top)
Option 4 (Avg 2.47) (2 Top)
Option 3 (Avg 2.94) (2 Top)
Option 6 (Avg 3.18) (0 Top)
5 Years
Option 5, v2 (Avg 1.18) (16 Top)
Option 4 (Avg 2.71) (1 Top)
Option 3 (Avg 3.06) (0 Top)
Option 6 (Avg 3.06) (0 Top)
Priority 3: Welcomin g & Inclusive Communi ties
1 Year
Option 5, v2 (Avg 1.31) (13 Top)
Option 4 (Avg 2.50) (2 Top)
Option 6 (Avg 3.06) (0 Top)
Option 3 (Avg 3.12) (1 Top)
Option 5v2 is seen as the "primary option for equitable disruption" where everyone "starts fresh". Option 3 was ranked lowest, with leaders noting that closing a specific school creates "lasting harm" and "resentment.”
Made with FlippingBook Digital Publishing Software