johnsonaskewpresenta
TRANSCRIPT
1
Public School Reform
Developing a Student Achievement Business Model
Askew Institute
February 6, 2004
• Meta Analysis• Cost Benefit• Academic Business Plan• Pay for Performance• Data Warehouse• AAA Plan• Online Assessment• Return on Investment
Developing a Student Achievement Business Model
School District of Palm Beach County
Meta-analysis presentation
Fall 2003
Factors that Accelerate Achievement
Student Home environment
Learned intelligence / background knowledge Motivation
Teacher Instructional strategies
Classroom management Curriculum design
Class Class size
Paraprofessionals Peer performance
School Guaranteed and viable curriculum
Challenging goals and effective feedback Parental and community involvement
Safe and orderly environment Collegiality and professionalism
Marzano, R. J., 2003
School Factors Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum
Opportunity to Learn
Has a rigorous, well-articulated curriculum
Addresses the content in assessments used to make judgments about student achievement
Monitors the extent to which teachers actually cover the articulated curriculum
Time
Allocates instructional time
Engages students during instructional time
Ensures students are successful at the tasks in which they are engaged
Marzano, R., 2003
2
4
8
10
11
12
15
31
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Cooperation
Leadership
School Climate
Parental Involvement
Pressure to Achieve
Monitoring
Time
Opportunity to Learn
* The average gain in percentile points of the average student in the experimental group compared to the average student in the control group.
Marzano, R., 2000; Borman, G.D.; Hewes, G.M. et al., 2000
School Factors
Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum: Opportunity to Learn
Percentile Gain*
Opportunity to Learn affects student achievement more than double any other school factors.
School Factors
Leadership
Research on principal leadership responsibilities has revealed the following attributes to be among the most important for a site-based
leader to possess.
10
10
10
10
11
11
11
12
12
12.5
13
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Ideals/Beliefs
Affirmation\
Resources
Order
Monitoring / Evaluation
Outreach
Culture
Change agent
Input
Intellectual stimulation
Situational awareness
Waters, T., Marzano, R., and McNulty, B., 2003
Percentile Gain
Definitions of leadership attributes located on notes page.
Lea
der
ship
att
rib
ute
s
In Dallas, teacher effectiveness accounted for a 34-50 percentile difference after three years for students who started at similar achievement levels.
27
42
76 76
0
15
30
45
60
75
90
Pe
rce
ntil
e
Jordan, Mendro & Weerasinghe, 1997
After 3 years of very ineffective teachers After 3 years of very effective teachers
60
60 = Beginning Percentile Score
Ending Percentile Score
Math
Math
Reading
Reading
Teacher Effectiveness
Teacher Assignment EffectivenessIn Tennessee, African-American students are more likely than White students to have less effective teachers.
14%
27%22%
16%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Least Effective Teachers Most Effective Teachers
Per
cent
with
Inef
fect
ive
Tea
cher
s
African American Students White Students
Sanders and Rivers, 1996
Teacher Assignment ExperienceNationally, poor and minority students are more often taught by teachers with less experience.*
20%
11%
21%
10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
% te
ache
rs w
ith >
3 ye
ars
expe
rienc
e
High-poverty schools Low-poverty schools
High-minority schools Low-minority schools
*Teachers with three or fewer years of experience. “High” and “low” refer to top and bottom quartiles.National Center for Education Statistics, “Monitoring Quality: An Indicators Report,” December 2000.
Teacher Assignment ExperienceFY2002 School District of Palm Beach CountyHigh-poverty, high-minority elementary schools generally have less experienced teachers.
FY2002 % Receiving Free/Reduced Lunch
100806040200
FY
20
02
Te
ach
er A
ve
ra
ge
Ye
ars E
xp
erie
nce
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
r = -.28
Florida School Indicators Report and School Accountability Report data analyzed by DREA
25%
14%19% 16%
40%
20%
31%
18%
0
20
40
60
80
100
Math Science English Social SciencePe
rce
nt o
f un
de
r-q
ua
lifie
d te
ach
ers
Less than 20% free/reduced lunch Greater than 49% free/reduced lunch
*Teachers who have less than a minor in the field. National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future, 1996, as customized by The Education Trust, Inc.
Teacher Assignment Subject Matter KnowledgeNationally, classes in high-poverty, high-minority high schools are more often taught by under-qualified* teachers.
Teacher Assignment Advanced DegreesFY2002 School District of Palm Beach CountyHigh-poverty, high-minority high schools tend to have asmaller percent of teachers with advanced degrees.
Florida School Indicators Report and School Accountability Report data analyzed by DREA
FY2002 % Receiving Free/Reduced Lunch
100806040200
FY
20
02
% T
ea
ch
er
Ad
v.
De
gre
es
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
r = -.44
Teacher Vacancies
Districts often find it difficult to hire teachers for their poorest schools.
Applications for teacher vacancies in Maryland's poorest and wealthiest districts.
1996-1997
826 665
1800
6109
01000
20003000
40005000
60007000
Num
ber
Vacancies Applications
Prince, 2002: “The Challenge of Attracting Good Teacher and Principals to Struggling Schools.”
Baltimore
(poorest district in state)
Montgomery County
(wealthiest district in state)
Teacher VacanciesFY2003 School District of Palm Beach County
r= .40
Teacher TurnoverFY2002 School District of Palm Beach CountyHigh-poverty, high-minority elementary schools experienced higher teacher turnover than more affluent schools
FY2002 % Receiving Free/Reduced Lunch
100806040200
% T
each
er T
urno
ver
30
20
10
0
r = .48
FY2002 FSIR and SACR, as analyzed by DREA.
Parent and Community InvolvementSchool District of Palm Beach County 2002High-minority, high-poverty schools tend to have fewer volunteer hours contributed
Cost Effectiveness Analyses
FY2001 Elementary Schools – Highest Total Budget
FY2001 Elementary Schools – Lowest Total Budget
Middle School of the Arts
FY2001 Middle Schools – Highest Total Budget
FY2001 Middle Schools – Lowest Total Budget
FY2001 High Schools – Highest Total Budget
Dreyfoos School of the Arts
FY2001 High Schools – Lowest Total Budget
FY2001 Elementary Schools’ Budgets & Federal Lunch
r = .76
FY2001 Middle Schools’ Budgets & Federal Lunch
r = .82
FY2001 High Schools’ Budgets & Federal Lunch
r = .69
FY2001 ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS’ BUDGETS & READING GAINS
FY2001 Relationship Between Cost per Student and FCAT SSS Reading Gain
Elementary Schools
r= .14
FY2001 ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS’ BUDGETS & MATH GAINS
FY2001 Relationship Between Cost per Student andFCAT SSS Math GainElementary Schools
r = 0.0
FY2001 MIDDLE SCHOOLS’ BUDGETS & READING GAINS
FY2001 Relationship Between Cost per Student and FCAT SSS Reading Gain
Middle Schools
R = .22
FY2001 MIDDLE SCHOOLS’ BUDGETS & MATH GAINS
FY2001 Relationship Between Cost per Student and FCAT SSS Math Gain
Middle Schools
r = .14
FY2001 HIGH SCHOOLS’ BUDGETS &
READING GAINS
FY2001 Relationship Between Cost per Student and FCAT SSS Reading Gain
High Schools
r = .37
FY2001 HIGH SCHOOLS’ BUDGETS &
MATH GAINS
FY2001 Relationship Between Cost per Student and FCAT SSS Math Gain
High Schools
r = .10
FY2003 Relationship Between Cost per Student and Percent Receiving Free/Reduced Lunch Percent
Elementary Schools
r = .83
FY2003 Relationship Between Cost per Student and Percent Receiving Free/Reduced Lunch Percent
Middle Schools
r = .76
FY2003 Relationship Between Cost per Student and Percent Receiving Free/Reduced Lunch Percent
High Schools
r = .56
District Average
SDPBC Budget Department, as analyzed by DREA
r = .21
FY2003 Relationship Between Cost per Student and FCAT Reading GainElementary Schools
District Average
r = .39
FY2003 Relationship Between Cost per Student and FCAT Math Gain
Elementary Schools
District Average
SDPBC Budget Department, as analyzed by DREA
r = .21
FY2003 Relationship Between Cost per Student and FCAT Reading Gain
Middle Schools
SDPBC Budget Department, as analyzed by DREA
District Average
r = .44
FY2003 Relationship Between Cost per Student and FCAT Math GainMiddle Schools
District Average
SDPBC Budget Department, as analyzed by DREA
r = .03
FY2003 Relationship Between Cost per Student and FCAT Reading Gain
High Schools
District Average
SDPBC Budget Department, as analyzed by DREA
r = .10
FY2003 Relationship Between Cost per Student and FCAT Math Gain
High Schools
www.palmbeach.k12.fl.us/
Academic Business Plan
0
20
40
60
80
100P
erc
en
t
All 39.5 43.4 39.3 45.3 47.1 49.5 54.1 58.7 63.3 67.9 72.5 77 81.6 86.2 90.8 95.4 100
Black 14.9 16.5 15.5 20.8 23.4 26.5 33.2 39.9 46.5 53.2 59.9 66.6 73.3 80 86.6 93.3 100
Hispanic 28 33.1 28.3 34.4 37 39.7 45.2 50.7 56.1 61.6 67.1 72.6 78.1 83.6 89 94.5 100
White 53.1 58.4 54.6 61.8 63.5 66.2 69.3 72.3 75.4 78.5 81.6 84.6 87.7 90.8 93.9 96.9 100
FRL NR NR NR 27.3 30 33 39.1 45.2 51.3 57.4 63.5 69.5 75.6 81.7 87.8 93.9 100
ESE NR NR NR 11.4 12.6 14.3 22.1 29.9 37.7 45.5 53.3 61 68.8 76.6 84.4 92.2 100
LEP NR NR NR 12.4 14.1 17 24.5 32.1 39.6 47.2 54.7 62.3 69.8 77.4 84.9 92.5 100
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
As additional data becomes available, it will be added and projections will be adjusted to reach the FY2014 goal of 100%.
Only grades 4, 8, and 10 tested in FY98-00.
Base- Annual Progress Benchmarks Goal line
No Child Left Behind Goals
Key Result 3Percent of Students Scoring Level 3 and Higher on FCAT Reading
Data Warehouse
Building an Information Foundation in a Large District
School District of Palm Beach County
• Dr. Art Johnson, Superintendent• Katheryn Gemberling, Consultant
Excerpted from presentation made at the Council of Greater City Schools
October 24, 2003
Algebra Initiative: All Grade 9 Student Successfully Complete Algebra
• Class size of 20• Certified Math Teachers• Support for High Risk Students
– Students in Stanines 1-3– Second period of math: Intensive Math
• Other Considerations– All Algebra 1 students take the same first semester
exam and the same end-of-year exam.– All teachers use district grading scale for exams.
EDW Upfront Web Screen
Students taking Algebra at High Poverty SchoolClass Size
Students taking Algebra at Low Poverty SchoolClass Size
High Risk High School Students’ Performance on Algebra I ExamTaking Intensive Course
High Risk High School Students’ Performance on Algebra I ExamNOT Taking Intensive Course
Grade 9 Students taking Algebra I Semester Exam Grade at Each High School
Grade 9 Students Algebra I Who Entered Proficient (Level 3 – FCAT Math)Semester Exam Grade at Each High School
Factors that Accelerate Achievement
Student Home environment
Learned intelligence / background knowledge Motivation
Teacher Instructional strategies
Classroom management Curriculum design
Class Class size
Paraprofessionals Peer performance
School Guaranteed and viable curriculum
Challenging goals and effective feedback Parental and community involvement
Safe and orderly environment Collegiality and professionalism
Marzano, R. J., 2003
Grade 9 Students taking Algebra I Who Entered Proficient in MathSemester Exam Grade at One High School for Each Math Teacher
School District of Palm Beach County Distribution of Gain for Elementary FCAT SSS Reading -- Teacher/Class Combinations*FY2001 to FY2002
42%
9%
1%1%
9%
38%
%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Class Average Gain in LNCE*
Per
cent
of T
each
er/C
lass
es
-17 to -10 -10 to -5 -5 to 0 0 to 5 5 to 10 10 to 19
Increasingly Negative Gain Increasingly Positive Gain
DREA
* An LNCE (Local Normal Curve Equivalent) gain of +15 would move a class from the 25 th to the 50th percentile.
Source ofhigh
performing teachers
Lagging and Leading Lagging and Leading IndicatorsIndicators
Lagging Leading
End of Year
Delayed Feedback
General Direction
During the Year
Immediate Feedback
Specific Direction
Can change end of year outcome
Can’t change end of year outcome
www.palmbeach.k12.fl.us/
Accelerated Academic Achievement Plan
FY2004 Fall & Winter Diagnostic TestMath Predicted Levels
Compared to SelfFY2003 & FY2004 Fall & Winter Diagnostic Test &
FY2003 FCAT Math LevelsAll Grades
Looking Good
Compared to StandardFY2003 & FY2004 Fall & Winter Diagnostic Test &
FY2003 FCAT Math LevelsAll Grades
70A
NCLB Group PerformanceFY2004 Fall and Winter Diagnostic Test
NCLB Counts (N= 30)
30
NCLB Group PerformanceFY2004 Fall and Winter Diagnostic Test
Percents
38Lvl 3+
On line Assessment
Public Education: The best investment we make