Arlington Heights SD 25 drafts one-page strategic plan framework after retreat; surveys show broad student and staff support

Arlington Heights SD 25 participants spent Feb. 24 finalizing a draft one-page strategic plan framework that leaders said will guide the district for the next three to five years.

Perry, the retreat facilitator, told more than a dozen tables of staff, parents, students and board members that the session’s objective was concrete: “by the end of today, we will draw every draft piece of the strategic plan put together,” he said, outlining a process that moves from long-range goals to measurable indicators, then to strategies and annual action plans.

Why it matters: District facilitators framed the retreat as the final step of a multi-session process that began with a data retreat and a SWOT analysis. Organizers said the one-page draft — containing mission, vision, core values, goals, indicators and strategies — will be shared broadly for feedback and returned to the board at a virtual meeting in March for final recommendation.

Survey and participation highlights: Perry reported that the planning process drew substantial input from multiple surveys and table work. He summarized survey findings as roughly 1,189 respondents across the instruments and said students in particular showed strong agreement: “95% of students said they could support either one of the mission statements,” he said, and that among students who expressed a preference they favored option two by about 58% to 42%. Perry said staff support was also high, and that the portrait-of-a-graduate language earned about 85% favorable response from respondents.

Process and substance: Facilitators asked table teams to select or refine one of two mission options (or write a new one), review two vision options, confirm core values and identify two to three high-level strategies per long-range goal. Brian, another facilitator who said he works at Lyons Township High School, illustrated the distinction between strategies and action plans, describing strategies as “not too granular” approaches that should guide later action planning and metrics.

Perry and Brian emphasized measurability and resource realism: goals should be tied to a small set of indicators, targets should be set by those responsible for the work, and implementation should be assigned to goal champions in central office who will report on progress annually.

Student voice and transparency: Facilitators repeatedly highlighted student participation as a central feature of the process; Perry noted that student voice informed the mission and vision options and that the process will document the inputs (SWOT, surveys and table feedback) so the board and community can trace how recommendations were developed.

Next steps: Facilitators said they will compile the table work into a one-page draft, circulate it for further community feedback, and convene a virtual two-hour meeting on March 18 for the final recommendation to the board. After board action the district will create annual action plans and assign goal champions for implementation and monitoring.

Procedural close: Kevin moved to adjourn the special meeting; Liz seconded. The board called for a voice vote; several attendees responded “Aye” and the chair stated that the motion carried. The meeting closed after a ceremonial gavel strike by student Grama Graham.

What officials said (selected quotes): “By the end of today, we will draw every draft piece of the strategic plan put together,” Perry said as he laid out the day’s agenda. He told participants that workable goals require measurable indicators and realistic targets so the district can “know all the time where we are around our goals.”

Brian said strategy language should be high-level and aligned to goals, with action plans and partnerships providing the granular work to achieve them.

The board’s next public step is a virtual session March 18 to review the draft and gather final input before formal board consideration.