Tumwater School District gets update on strategic plan draft; consultants ask board for feedback

Assistant Superintendent Megan Dawson and consultants from Performance Fact gave the Tumwater School District Board of Directors an update on the district’s strategic-planning process and requested board and community feedback on draft materials.

The presentation, led by a Performance Fact facilitator who said his team “pride[s] ourselves on being a facilitator, meaning we're here to guide,” reviewed the plan’s schedule, stakeholder engagement to date, and the three-part structure consultants will propose: a clear portrait of a graduate, instructional expectations, and the infrastructure to support instruction.

Megan Dawson told the board the work will help the district prioritize spending amid current budget challenges. “This strategic plan will help us prioritize our spending and focus our vision on the most important cornerstones of our work as educators and as an overall district,” she said.

The consultant summarized engagement to date: a core planning team that included about 40 people (students, teachers, parents, community members, administrators), an instructional-focus team of primarily teachers, an alignment team made up of community partners (police, fire, higher education and other community organizations), family and community forums, and student sessions. He said the teams had already produced draft materials and that the consultant team expected to “wrap it up” within six to eight weeks.

Boards members and staff were shown sample plans from other districts (Federal Way, North Kitsap, Yakima) and asked to review both a full plan and a shorter “readout/digest” version. The consultant said each district’s final product is tailored to local needs and that Tumwater’s would include a long-form version and a four-page digest for broad sharing.

The presentation described a proposed “portrait of a graduate” exercise and four goals for student success developed by the teams: a strong PK–3 start, social-emotional development, academic proficiency, and a strong high school finish. The consultant explained a unifying “theory of action” built on four pillars (differentiated and culturally responsive instruction; relationships with families and community; shared responsibility/resource-focused collaboration; and a culture of excellence and accountability) and said strategies for each goal would be tailored to that goal while anchored in the four pillars.

Board members asked how the portrait’s broader attributes would connect to measurable indicators. The consultant replied that teams were converting the portrait into goals and metrics that would populate a progress dashboard. Dawson added the district would work with state regulators and partners to make sure required services (for example for multilingual learners) remain in compliance while redesigning delivery to match funding.

Dawson said the district has posted “work to date” materials on the district website (a strategic planning link that includes a 35-page student-data analysis and session artifacts such as posters, notes and quotes) and that the planning team expected to finish work on a schedule running through April. Board and public members were invited to provide written feedback on the draft materials.

The presentation and the board’s discussion focused on alignment of goals and measures and how the final plan should tie the portrait of a graduate to concrete actions and indicators.

The board did not take any action during the update; the item was an information presentation and request for feedback.