The “Moneyball Thinking” Needed in Education
[CLICK HERE to read this Blog
on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]
Dear Colleagues,
Introduction: Writing Federal Grants
One of the things that I help districts and schools with is grant-writing.
Grant-writing in education. . . especially when writing federal grants for the U.S. Department of Education. . . is not intuitive.
Instead, it is definitely strategic, somewhat repetitive, and it has many layers of preparation and process.
It is not like writing a novel. In fact, it is more like publishing a book of five to six different short stories with a thread of continuity running between them.
Bottom Line: When you write a
federal grant, you write for points.
Thus, the grant proposal is eventually written section-by-section. . . making sure that each section will receive the maximum number of points... even as the “story” of the proposed grant is not described logically and sequentially.
And when a proposal is evaluated
by the U.S. Department of Education’s grant reviewers, they similarly read each
section separately. . . awarding points independently for each section. Indeed,
if something required in Section A is “answered” in the proposal’s Section C,
the reviewers do not go back to Section A (where that information was missing)
and recalculate the score.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
The Shortage of Mental Health Providers in our Schools
A recent U.S. Department of Education grant focused on the mental health needs of students across the country, and the shortage of trained mental health providers in our schools. The primary goal of the grant was to provide additional funds to help states and districts attract, train, and retain more mental health practitioners.
The Department recently awarded 23 of these grants totaling approximately $19 million.
Critically, many of the grant proposals that were not selected lost points because (a) the submitting district or school already had enough mental health practitioners. . . based on the number of enrolled students and the nationally-recommended ratios of students-to-practitioners; or (b) they did not demonstrate how they were going to retain the practitioners attracted by the grant money. . . after the five-year grant was over and the supplemental money was gone.
The fact that. . . perhaps due to
the pandemic or other local conditions. . . these grant-applying districts had more
students with more mental health needs (when compared, for example, to their
pre-pandemic years or nearby districts), was irrelevant to the grant reviewers.
_ _ _ _ _
The grant process aside, for districts with “enough” mental health practitioners, it typically is not about finding more money to hire more staff. It is more about objectively evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of how the current practitioners are being used.
Indeed, I know districts with schools that each have one or more full-time counselors, a full-time social worker, and a full-time school psychologist. . . in addition to a full complement of special education teachers and, sometimes, a shared applied behavior specialist or behavioral interventionist.
Many times, they truly do not need more staff. They need to re-think how they are using and teaming the existing staff.
I also know districts that. . . when you really look at their budgets and their (lack of) collaboration with community agencies. . . have enough money and/or potential community resources to effectively address their students’ mental health needs.
What is “missing” is the
willingness and/or the skill to modify how they prioritize and allocate money
to mental health positions or externally-relevant contracts.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
“Moneyball Thinking” is often Missing in Education
Clearly, I am using these mental health grants and the need for more mental health practitioners as but one example of how our districts and schools often think and run.
Indeed, I could be similarly talking about, for example: (a) effective instruction and intervention in literacy; (b) how to successfully transition all students from one grade level to another. . . ensuring that their academic or social-emotional needs are addressed on Day 1 of the new school year; or (c) ways to improve students’ interpersonal and self-control skills as applied to peer-on-peer teasing, taunting, bullying, and harassment.
But in these conversations, the importance of embracing—metaphorically—a “Moneyball Mentality” while completing a well-designed needs assessment is paramount.
According to Wikipedia (with edits):
Moneyball is
a 2011 American biographical sports drama film about the Oakland
Athletics baseball team's 2002 season and their general manager
Billy Beane's attempts to assemble a competitive team with half (or even a
third) as much money as his rivals. In the film, Beane (played by Brad Pitt)
and his deputy Peter Brand (played by Jonah Hill) scour the major
leagues for undervalued talent by taking a sophisticated sabermetric approach to
scouting and analyzing players, triggering skepticism and resentment
within the baseball community.
Sabermetrics (originally SABRmetrics)
is the original or blanket term for sports analytics, the empirical analysis of
baseball, especially the development of advanced metrics based
on baseball statistics that measure in-game activity. The term is
derived from the movement's progenitors, members of the Society for
American Baseball Research (SABR), founded in 1971, and was coined
by Bill James, who is one of its pioneers and considered its most
prominent advocate and public face.
The term “moneyball” is used for the
practice of using metrics to identify "undervalued players" and sign
them to what ideally will become "below market value" contracts,
which debuted in the efforts of small market teams to compete with the much greater
resources of big market ones.
According to historicbaseball.com:
As we reflect on the ongoing influence of Moneyball
and data-driven decisions in baseball, it’s clear that this is not just a
passing trend but a fundamental shift in how the game is understood, played,
and enjoyed. The marriage of data and baseball has not only transformed the
sport but has also enriched it, adding depth and complexity to America’s
pastime. Moneyball might have started as a novel approach by a small-market
team, but it has blossomed into a movement that has reshaped the very fabric of
baseball.
This exploration of Moneyball’s enduring legacy
provides a comprehensive understanding of how data-driven strategies have
reshaped baseball. From on-field tactics to front office decisions, and from
player development to fan engagement, the impact of analytics is profound and
pervasive. As baseball continues to evolve, the lessons of Moneyball will
undoubtedly continue to influence its future, ensuring the game remains both a
cherished tradition and a modern, dynamic sport.
_ _ _ _ _
The point here for education?
While districts and schools do collect, analyze, and sometimes use their data (often because it is required by their state department of education and the U.S. Department of Education). . . my sense—from working with schools across the country for 40+ years—is that they often use data randomly or haphazardly, their analyses are not always incisive or decisive, and they rarely successfully apply the data for meaningful and sustained change.
At best, while districts may collect and analyze systems, school, staff, and student data. . . they rarely use sophisticated data analytics.
Moreover, education as a whole has not yet experienced the pervasive, transformative “Moneyball” internalization of mindset, methods, and management that Bill James, Billy Beane, and Peter Brand inaugurated.
Indeed, we have “large market” (usually, urban or county) districts that have too much data, and do not know how to synthesize them to their most-meaningful “least common denominators.”
And, we have many “small market” (usually, rural or small, incorporated town) districts that do not have the resources to fully analyze their data to the same end.
Said differently: If we keep
doing the “same old” analyses, we will continue to use the “same old” methods,
and continue to get the “same old” (and unhappy) results.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Right Now: The Best Time to Conduct a Needs Assessment
Right now. . . as districts begin to plan and budget for the next school year, and schools are asked to evaluate their status to project their 2025 to 2026 needs. . . this is the best time to objectively conduct a needs assessment in the one or two areas either of most concern and/or most impact.
This could certainly focus on the specific areas suggested above. . . whether your mental health professionals are working effectively and efficiently, literacy, transitioning student data and outcomes from one year to the next, improving students’ interpersonal and self-control skills as related to teasing, taunting, bullying, and harassment.
Or it could go “bigger,” to look at, for example: (a) the efficacy of your multi-tiered early intervention and special education services; (b) how your SEL activities or program are integrated into school safety and climate, classroom management and engagement, and student behavior; (c) the interface, collaboration, and impact between district and school administrators and leaders; (d) how data are being used to truly understand and impact curriculum, instruction, and student progress.
But the Needs Assessment may need to be comprehensive. . . it may be best completed by an outside expert. . . and it definitely needs to be done by someone with a Moneyball Mentality and Methods.
These methods should include:
· A Historical and Current Status evaluation, including a psychoeducational and ecological assessment of the current problem, and three (four, with the pandemic) years of longitudinal data;
· A Strengths and Assets, Weaknesses and Limitations, Opportunities and Resources; and Threats and Barriers (SWOT) analysis;
· Audits of the school and schooling areas relevant to the problem (and its potential solutions), including an internal (school/district) and external (community and beyond) Personnel Skill and Expertise assessment; and
·
A Gap Analysis and Closing-the-Gap Action Plan.
_ _ _ _ _
All of this collectively should:
· Analyze student, staff, and schools’ history, status, gaps, and needs in the area of concern;
· Identify the approaches, activities, and initiatives that are working and that need to be maintained or extended;
· Identify the approaches, activities, and initiatives that are not working and need to be phased out, retired, or discontinued;
· Identify the service, support, and intervention gaps that are resulting in unmet student needs. . . determine their root causes, and research and link proactive, strategic, or intensive actions to address the needs and causes; and
· Complete audits to determine how to best align curricular, intervention, technological, and staffing resources and solutions to meet as many student needs as possible.
While an outside-expert Needs Assessment is a financial investment for a district or school, it is also a critical investment in the success of a district or school, and its students and staff.
But this investment also typically provides financial returns. . . relative, for example, to the need to pay for (a) more costly and intensive services and supports; (b) more specialized interventions and personnel; or (c) new staff recruitment, interviewing, and training to replace other staff who have resigned because they are unhappy with a district or school’s progress or commitment to excellence.
Moreover, a district’s or school’s success also often helps its reputation in the community. . . a key predictor, for example, of residents’ support of local education-related taxes or bond issues for the district when they come up.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Summary
This Blog discussed the results of a recent U.S. Department of Education grant program focused on the mental health needs of students across the country, and the shortage of trained mental health providers in our schools. We shared that some districts did not receive this grant because they actually have enough mental health practitioners. . . they are just not using them effectively or efficiently.
We next talked about the need for educators to adopt “Moneyball Thinking” relative to their current school improvement thinking and practices. Using the 2011 film dramatizing how the Oakland Athletics major league baseball team used data analytics to revolutionize how it selected its players as a metaphor, we suggest that education needs to similarly rethink its data analysis applications to revolutionize its practices.
Finally, we connected and applied
this new thinking to the Needs Assessment process in schools, advocating for
changes in this process so that student, staff, school, and system outcomes can
be significantly improved.
_ _ _ _ _
I hope that this Blog has been insightful, motivating you to reflect on your current (and past) school improvement and success practices, while rethinking how they might be transformed by “Moneyball Thinking.”
I am constantly rethinking and revalidating how I analyze and apply the information and data collected through Needs Assessment and other consultation-related activities. Given this, I know that—in partnership with the districts and schools with whom I work—we have helped thousands of districts go “to the next level of excellence” relative to their practices and, more importantly, their student, staff, school, and system outcomes.
As noted above, this is the best time of the year to conduct a Needs Assessment in either your most troublesome areas, or the areas where you want to extend and solidify your emerging successes.
If you and your team would like to talk with me, please feel free to e-mail or call me, and we can schedule a free first consultation session.
I hope to hear from you soon.
Best,
Howie
[CLICK HERE to read this Blog
on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]
