Turning complex education challenges into systems that work.

The challenge

When I began leading the English Learner program at Broken Arrow High School, we served approximately 100 students with one teacher and one assistant. As enrollment grew to more than 400 students, the program expanded to four teachers and four assistants. The challenge was not simply adding staff and managing compliance. We needed a model that could support rapid growth while helping students become more fully connected to the academic and social life of the school.

My leadership response

Under the previous model, English Learner students were grouped together throughout much of the school day. We moved toward an inclusion model that spread students across a broader range of classrooms and teachers.

To make that change successful, I identified and developed teachers outside the EL department who could use instructional assistants effectively, were willing to participate in training, and were prepared to implement new strategies. We focused on building educator capacity rather than treating inclusion as a scheduling change alone.

At the same time, we strengthened the systems supporting a much larger program: class scheduling, ELAPs, student monitoring, documentation, staff communication, accommodations, and Ellevation workflows. One of the most difficult operational responsibilities was developing a reliable large-scale ACCESS testing plan for approximately 380 students, including schedules, staffing, technology, communication, makeups, and progress toward the 95% participation requirement.

Throughout the work, I listened closely to the teachers and assistants working directly with students. Their feedback helped us identify barriers, refine procedures, and determine what training, resources, and administrative support they needed to implement the model well.

The result

As students spent more of their day throughout the broader school community, they began identifying more strongly with the school culture as a whole. Students became involved in clubs and activities outside their existing EL peer groups, developed new connections, and experienced fewer discipline problems. The program grew from one teacher and one assistant serving approximately 100 students to four teachers and four assistants serving more than 400 students, while establishing stronger instructional, monitoring, and testing systems.

The challenge

I began as principal of Broken Arrow Virtual Academy on July 1, 2020—approximately six weeks before school opened. Although the district had an existing virtual option for grades 9–12, serving students in grades K–8 required an entirely new model. The academy also needed to support special education students virtually for the first time.

My leadership response

No single platform met the instructional needs of K–5 students, so I coordinated a collection of software products to create a workable elementary model. For grades 6–8, we expanded upon the existing high-school system. Drawing on my special education certification and experience, I also helped identify a suitable platform for students receiving special education services.

The immediate operational challenge was getting more than 5,000 students correctly loaded into multiple learning platforms before school began. Many bottlenecks existed within the software companies rather than the district, requiring constant communication with contacts at multiple organizational levels across several vendors.

Families were also learning an entirely new way of doing school. I developed a high-volume communication approach that helped parents understand where information would appear, when updates would be available, and how students would access their learning.

Teachers were learning the model while implementing it. We met daily to identify emerging problems, make adjustments, and clarify expectations. I eventually moved my office into the teachers’ workspace so I could remain accessible throughout the day and help solve problems in real time.

The result

Broken Arrow Virtual Academy opened as a K–12 program serving more than 5,000 students. We created workable learning pathways across multiple grade levels, expanded virtual access to special education students, coordinated numerous technology vendors, and established the communication and problem-solving routines needed to support students, families, and educators during an unprecedented school year.

The challenge

When I assumed responsibility for the Level One special education program, two issues needed immediate attention: staff morale and the process for scheduling, conducting, and completing IEP meetings by required deadlines. Teachers were frustrated when the appropriate participants could not attend meetings, while other staff members were frustrated by meetings scheduled with little notice. The result was a cycle of last-minute work, inconsistent attendance, missed or pressured deadlines, and growing frustration across the team.

My leadership response

I began by meeting individually with every staff member. Before changing procedures, I wanted teachers and support staff to have an opportunity to explain what was not working, where the pressure points were, and what they needed from leadership.

I then asked each teacher to bring me a schedule showing when every IEP on their caseload was due. I combined those schedules into a master calendar so we could see the workload across the entire program rather than managing each case in isolation.

The master calendar allowed us to identify days and weeks that were becoming overloaded, distribute meetings more evenly, and begin scheduling well in advance. Teachers had greater visibility into upcoming responsibilities, and general education teachers, service providers, administrators, and families received more notice and had a better opportunity to participate.

The process also gave me a practical way to monitor progress, identify potential bottlenecks early, and offer help before an approaching deadline became an emergency. The system created accountability, but it also communicated that leadership was there to support the work rather than simply check for compliance.

The result

Advance planning substantially increased participation by the people required for each meeting and improved the timely completion of IEP responsibilities. Teachers experienced fewer last-minute disruptions, the workload became more predictable, and staff morale improved as the process became clearer and more manageable.