Operator versus Partner: A Case Study of Blueprint School Network’s Model for School Turnaround

Download pdf here910 KB


Numerous high-profile efforts have sought to “turn around” low-performing schools. Evidence of these programs’ effectiveness, however, is mixed, and research offers little guidance on which types of turnaround models are more likely to succeed. We present a case study of turnaround efforts led by the Blueprint Schools Network in three schools in Boston. Using a difference-in-differences framework, we find that Blueprint raised student achievement in mathematics and ELA by at least a quarter of a standard deviation, on average. We document qualitatively how differential impacts across the three Blueprint schools relate to contextual and implementation factors. In particular, Blueprint’s role as a turnaround partner (in two schools) versus school operator (in one school) shaped its ability to implement its model. As a partner, Blueprint provided expertise and guidance but had limited ability to fully implement its model. In its role as an operator, Blueprint had full authority to implement its turnaround model, but was also responsible for managing the day-to-day operations of the school, a role for which it had limited prior experience.

Last updated on 05/14/2020