Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
by
December 2009
DEDICATION
that.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
work.
chair, Dr. Larry Picus. I have never met a person who knows
it. It is not very often you get to work with the very best
Dr. Picus.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii
LIST OF FIGURES x
ABSTRACT xii
Chapter 1 1
Statement of the problem 7
Purpose of the Study 10
Importance of the Study 12
Methodology 15
Limitations and delimitations 15
Definition of Terms 16
Chapter 2 18
Introduction 18
Synthesizing the literature 19
Resource Allocation 20
Improving Performance 34
Leadership 38
Professional Development 43
Data: Assessments 53
Educational Adequacy 55
Conclusion 65
Chapter 3 67
Introduction 67
Population and Sample 73
Instrumentation and Data Collection 76
Data Analysis 80
Conclusion 82
Chapter 4 83
Restatement of the Research Question 83
Summary of School Characteristics 84
Characteristics and demographics 86
Note: Socioeconomically Disadvantaged (SD) 87
Performance Data of Study Schools 87
vi
School Resource Use 94
Summary of Finding 108
Understanding the problem and challenge 109
Set ambitious goals 110
Change the curriculum program and create a new
instructional vision 111
Formative assessments and data based decision
making 113
Ongoing, intensive professional development 115
Using time efficiently and effectively 118
Extended learning time for struggling students 119
Collaborative, professional culture 121
Widespread and distributed instructional leadership 122
Professional and best practices 123
Connecting the impact of resource allocation and
performance 127
Chapter 5 135
Background 135
Discussion of findings 138
Question One: What were the current instructional
improvement strategies at the school level? 139
Question Two: How were resources used to implement
the school’s instructional improvement
strategies? 143
Question Three: How are the actual resource
patterns at the school sites aligned with or
different from the resource use strategies
that are used in the Evidence Based Model? 146
Question Four: How does the availability of
resources affect the development and
implementation of the instructional
improvement plan? 148
Emerging Insights 151
It is your destiny. 151
My, what big goals you have! 152
Leadership matters 152
Commitment to excellence. 153
Recommendations for future research 153
Concluding remarks 155
Appendicies 172
Appendix A: Research Study Information and Site
Permission Letter 172
Appendix B: Document Request List 175
vii
Appendix C: Open-Ended Data Collection Protocol -
School Sites 178
Appendix D: Data Collection Protocol 181
Appendix E: Data Collection Codebook 202
Appendix F: Case Studies 219
3038 219
Instructional Improvement Strategies 222
Lessons Learned 235
Future Implications 240
3058 242
Instructional Improvement Strategies 244
Lessons Learned 257
Future Implication 262
3142 264
Instructional Improvement Strategies 266
Lessons Learned 280
Future Implications 286
3578 288
Instructional Improvement Strategies 290
Lessons Learned 304
Future Implications 308
3740 310
Instructional Improvement Strategies 313
Lessons Learned 325
Future Implication 329
viii
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
ABSTRACT
does.
1
Chapter 1: Introduction
students. However, each state may set it’s own content and
successful.
3
achievement.
effective strategies.
adequacy,
1. Successful District
2. Cost Function
3. Professional Judgment
4. Evidenced based.
methods, has invested more and more money over time into
achievement.
Research questions.
questions.
in common?
(Odden & Picus, 2008). This study will compare how schools
model.
not only how schools should spend their money but on how
can help identify what programs are needed the most to help
achievement.
Methodology
State of California.
Definition of Terms
standards.
minutes.
Chapter 2
Literature Review
Introduction
taxes.
Resource Allocation
high performing schools and how they expend time and money:
conference fees.
tutors, etc.
counseling.
25
research that finds limited added value from aides (Odden &
Archibald).
achievement.
reasons for the gap between the potential and the reality
in US schools,
Outside Services
as tutors.
time progressed.
Time
curriculum as well.
Staffing
day.
Schools
East
instructional
staff
full-time
teacher
32
regular
instructional
group
Average size 15 12 29
advisory group
that English learners are more likely than any other group
are needed.
Improving Performance
(Odden):
35
4. Scheduling
7. Professional development
8. Technology
different programs.
achievement:
Krathwohl, 2001)
collaborate.
Leadership
the work being done to achieve the goals set out by state
Culture
by the team.
Collective leadership
ix).
the theoretical world and the practical into one with every
personnel.
the gaps between what they want to do and what they are
Professional Development
student achievement.
Focus.
COHERENCE
& Picus).
personal compensation.
Birman, & Yoon, 2001). Joyce (1988) states that there must
wide initiatives.
student.
(Louis, Marks, & Kruse, 1996). Louis and Marks (1998) found
Time
can be added to four of the five school days with the fifth
work collaboratively.
51
and administration.
Schools
East
minutes/week
longest planning
period
52
school.
Data: Assessments
needs of students.
about what and how they teach and assess students. Louis
the school.
Educational Adequacy
these studies.
1. Cost functions
3. Professional judgment
4. Evidence based
(2008) feel that the best the cost function approach can
school district.
Rothstein).
which may vary and which may create models that vary as
student achievement.
64
needs.
Conclusion
form the crux and the context of what this study will
Chapter 3
Methodology
Introduction
chapter will review the purpose of this study and the study
successful.
successful schools.
Adequacy Model?
common expenditures?
School Level
School Characteristics
Class size 25 25
work days
% Disabled 12 12
% Poverty 50 50
% ELL 10 10
% Minority 10 10
Personnel Resources
Core teachers 18 24
Facilitator/Mentors
71
students
Teachers for 3 4
disabled students
students
Aides
Principal 1 1
72
Material
and comparing them with the evidence based model and other
Criterion
Similar Significant
California Academy of
Elkhorn M 10 10 Yes
Academy H 10 10 Yes
75
McGarvin (Sarah)
Intermediate M 10 10 Yes
Sutter Middle M
Department of Education.
who and how schools receive various benefits that may not
the early Fall of 2008. The request for document letter can
Data Analysis
development plan.
Conclusion
Chapter 4
the top 10% of schools in the state and in the top ten
85
Table 4.1:
characteristics
study.
study and the Evidence Based Model (EBM). School types for
the middle schools. The EBM calls for middle schools that
Total # English # SD
two years ago. 3058 was the only exception to that, not
6 3038
5 3058
4 3740
3
3578
2
3142
1
0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Year
rank of 10, did not reach that same rank among similar
7
6 3038
5 3142
4 3578
3
3058
2
3740
1
0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Year
comparing the two middle schools in our study, one can see
in the state.
2008 for the schools under study. While many of the school
began under 800, all have improved to over 800, the state
target. Both 3578 and 3038 showed the greatest growth over
note that 3142 began over the state target of 800 and that
in 2008.
91
Figure: 4.3. Change in API score from 2004-2008 in schools
of study
950
900
850
API
800
750
700
650
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
3142 846 856 869 867 872
3740 807 826 852 870 897
3578 757 802 821 840 849
3058 753 805 825 826 827
3038 751 794 818 844 843
Year
middle school students, the state uses the results from the
uses the results from the California High School Exit Exam
3578
90
3142
85 3038
80 3740
75
70
65
60
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Year
Standards Test (CST) for high school the state uses the
highest percentage in 2004 and was not lower that the rest
75 3740
70
65
60
55
50
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
resources.
Class size 25 25
% SD 50% 50%
middle school and 2.5 teachers for high school for after
school.
for students and the school. For example, the EBM allots
99
one guidance counselor for every 250 students and for every
$140 per pupil in the middle school and $175 per pupil in
the high school. Lastly, the EBM provides for $200 per
middle school pupil and $250 per high school pupil for
located in Appendix F.
Extended
Tutors EL Teachers
School
9.9 more FTEs than 3038 because it has many more students
Pupil
Librarians & Secretaries &
Support
Technicians Clerks
Staff
level of support.
106
Table 4.7 Administration and Instructional facilitators at
schools of study with EBM suggested adjustments
Assistant Instructional
Principal
Principal Facilitator
3142 1117/67 1 1 1 +2 0 +5
Schools
Technology Administrators
Discretionary
Account
Summary of Finding
5. Professional development
9. Distribute leadership
practices.
differences.
District also used CST data to set goals for the school and
110
state standards.
time. The ambitious goals for 3740 were to make sure that
proficient.
instructional vision
their curriculum and vision but had not fully completed the
113
development at 3038.
meet student needs. While the school did not have fulltime
model, the process and goals for the coach remained ill
to work together.
part of the school day. 3142 was very clear in its focus to
over two years. While there were only two voluntary buy-
before school, during lunch and after school; that was time
additional support.
did not actively seek them out. This led some schools to
Maps (Thinking Maps & Inc, 2009), and other research based
development experiences.
Table 4.9 simply means that the school has taken the step
indicates that the step had not begun or was still in the
F.
127
Table 4.9 Completion of ten steps to double performance by
school
Schools
the problem
Vision
Learning
performance
of schools with the schools resource use and the ten steps
128
its performance.
examining the API in Figure 4.3, 3058 was flat from 2006-
clearly has room for improvement given its flat scores for
beyond ELL and students who have not passed the California
3038 was also generally ranked at the top with a “10” when
Figure 4.3, 3038 showed steady growth until 2007 and 2008,
to “pay the teachers and keeps the light on”, he had enough
students.
provide $55,850 for PD which would not only allow for the
Chapter 5
Background
implementation.
future study.
Research questions
questions:
Discussion of findings
achievement.
the school.
Moreover, 3058 had not taken any steps towards seeking out
organically.
143
curricular mapping.
had some pupil free days for staff development and most
is comprised.
afterschool support.
146
privatizing” instruction.
area.
147
the EBM did suggest additional teachers for the other three
functions.
and the end of the school year, were needed to continue the
Emerging Insights
It is your destiny.
work from and to plan around. Schools did not ignore the
Leadership matters
financial resources.
Commitment to excellence.
resources to schools.
Concluding remarks
structures in place.
the money but why to spend the money. Schools must not be
References
Garet, M. S., Porter, A., Desimone, L., Birman, B., & Yoon,
K. (2001). What makes professional development
effective? Results from a national sample of teachers.
American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.
Letter
Thank you for your preliminary agreement to participate in my dissertation study. This
memo provides a brief description of the topic, the study, and the site permission letter (template
enclosed).
I have the privilege of working with Larry Picus, Ph.D. at the University of Southern
California, a nationally recognized expert in the area of school finance adequacy – the topic of
my dissertation. The basic premise is that we have a body of research about effective
academic proficiency, and an expectation that all students will achieve those levels of
proficiency. At the same time, we have school funding systems that were not based on any of
these performance expectations. I hope to contribute to research efforts that have begun by
painting a picture of what an adequate education looks like by identifying resource use (e.g.,
FTEs teaching English, instructional minutes, FTEs serving as classroom aides, etc.) at high
173
performing “10/10” secondary schools. The ultimate hope is to figure out how much it costs to
provide every child with the resources s/he needs in order to achieve proficiency.
This fall I’d like to conduct a structured interview with you and/or appropriate staff
members (e.g., Title I coordinator, assistant principal(s), department chairs – as you see fit). The
interview follows a specific format and includes examination of a variety of documents (e.g,
master schedule, bell schedule, school improvement plan, budgets). I hope to conduct the data-
collection interviews in October and November. All schools remain anonymous. The data
In order to receive approval for this study, I must turn in “Site Permission Letters” for
each potential site to the Institutional Review Board. Enclosed, please find a template for the
letter. Would you be so kind as to transfer the text to your school’s letterhead, sign the letter,
After confirming receipt of the “Site Permission Letter,” I do not anticipate troubling you
again until end-of-summer/early fall to set an appointment. However, if you would like to
schedule earlier, please let me know your preferred date(s). As I mentioned in our conversations,
the interview is lengthy – part of the reason you may be inclined to include additional staff
Thank you again for this initial commitment to help me complete my Ed.D. while
Please do not hesitate to contact me with any thoughts or questions! I can be reached as
follows: email: vrgonzal@usc.edu, mobile phone: xxx.xxx.xxxx, work phone (Manual Arts High
School): xxx.xxx.xxxx. It will be an honor and a privilege to work with you! Many thanks!
Victor Gonzalez
175
All of these documents should be for the current 2008-09 school year.
This list will likely include any person who works in the physical space of the
employee, as well as what their job entails (for a principal or classroom teacher, this may
be obvious, for special education staff or student support staff, this is not readily clear).
• Some staff are paid to work less than 1.0 FTE with the school, yet are
housed at the school full-time. Only the portion of the day that the staff person provides
than one project (e.g. 0.5 FTE reading coach, 0.5 FTE resource room).
• Distinguish how special education and ELL staff provide support (e.g. do
• Individuals who serve the school may not be listed and instead are based
out of the district or regional education agency (e.g. speech therapy, visiting coaches) so
A list of all district employees who do not appear on school staff roster, but who
diagnosticians, etc) and which schools they provide services to, expressed in FTE units.
For instance, a special education diagnostician who works with 3 schools might be listed
three times on this sheet (0.5 FTE, 0.3 FTE, 0.2 FTE) depending upon the number of
days she is allocated to the various schools. Note: You will only be recording the
proportion of FTEs that she spends providing services to the individual school you are
studying.
It is helpful to have a copy of the bell schedule to talk through the amount of
Budgeted dollar amount for all other consultants other than professional
Daily rate for substitute teachers who replace sick teachers. (This is not for
• Substitutes and Stipends (teacher time): Dollar amount for substitutes and
development activities, and costs of transportation within the district for professional
development.
for professional development activities, and rental or other costs for facilities used for
professional development.
Sites
for improving student performance. Ask the questions in the order that they appear on
this protocol. Record the principal’s answers as s/he gives them and focus on getting the
key elements of the instructional improvement effort with less emphasis on the process
aspect.
B. What were the resource pieces of the strategy? How long have the
resources been in place?
1. Early Childhood program: Is it half or full day? Number kids? Staffing
ratios? Eligibility?
4. Professional Development:
• When are the professional development days scheduled for? (E.g.
Summer Institutes, Inservice Days)
• What is the focus of the professional development?
• Do you have instructional coaches in schools? Were there enough
coaches? (Did they need more but couldn’t afford it?)
7. Technology
E. Was there accountability built into this improvement plan? (E.g. School
Board report which helped solidify focus)
School Profile
School Name
School Pseudonym
Address
City
State Zip
CA
Phone
Fax
Website
Notes
182
Title
Principal
Last Name
Phone #
Fax #
Email Address
NOTES:
Title
Phone #
Fax #
183
Email Address
NOTES:
Title
Last Name
Phone #
Fax #
Email Address
NOTES
184
District Profile
District Name
District State ID
Title
Superintendent
Last Name
Phone #
Fax #
Email Address
NOTES:
185
Title
Last Name
Phone #
Fax #
Email Address
NOTES:
186
Title
Last Name
Phone #
Fax #
Email Address
NOTES:
Grade Span
contained)
AYP
NOTES:
Education)
Kindergarten
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
189
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
Grade 9
Grade 10
Grade 11
Grade 12
English/Reading/L.A.
190
History/Soc. Studies
Math
Science
Foreign Language
NOTES:
Art
Music
PE/Health
Drama
Technology
191
Drivers Education
Study Hall
Athletics
Description:
NOTES:
Librarian
Library Media
192
Specialist
Library Aide
NOTES:
FTEs or
Non-Certified Tutors
ISS Teachers
ISS Aides
Title I Teachers
Title I Aides
Staff
NOTES:
disabled students)
NOTES:
Program
minutes
minutes
Staff
minutes
weeks
School
NOTES:
196
FTEs and
Consultants $
substitutes
Other Teachers
NOTES:
Contract
Instructional Facilitators/Coaches
Trainers/Consultants $
Administration
Travel $
NOTES:
Guidance
Attendance/Dropout
Social Workers
Nurse
Parent advocate/community
liaison
Psychologist
Speech/O.T./P.T.
Health Asst.
199
Non-teaching aides
Services Staff:
NOTES:
Administration FTEs
Principal
Assistant principal
Other Administrator
Description of Other
Administrator:
200
Secretary
Clerical staff
Security
Custodians
NOTES:
on 1 on 2 on 3 on 4
Specia
l Education
Grade
201
Grade
Grade
Grade
Grade
Grade
Grade
Grade
8
202
I. School Profile
Aniston;
that category.
210
A. Librarian/ Library Media Specialist: Number of FTE
licensed librarians or media specialists who
instruct students
B. Library Aide: Number of FTE library aides who help
instruct students
that category.
that category.
XIII. Administration
that category.
3038
The API for school 3038 had increased steadily for the
between 2004 and 2005, 14 points between 2005 and 2006 and
840
820
800
780
760
740
720
700
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
API 751 794 818 844 843
last five years. School 3038 has been a “10/10” school for
the last two years. In the 2004 and 2005 school years, 3038
similar school
s ra
ank, even
n while it’s
i API continue
ed to ris
se.
T
This is due,
d in part,
p to the impr
rovement at other
r schools
s
r
relative to 3038 own perf
formance. Accordi
ingly, wh
hile
subsequen
nt years may not have sho
own as dr
ramatic an
a
improveme
ent as ea
arlier ye
ears, 303 een able to
38 has be
schools.
Figure: F3038.2.
F F Statewid
de Rank and
a Simil
lar Schoo
ol Rank for
f
s
school 30
038
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
2004 200
05 2006 2007 200
08
Statewide Rank 8 8 9 10 10
0
Similar
r School
Ra
ank 3 3 8 10 10
0
222
Figure: F3038.3. Annual Measurable Objectives, percent of
students proficient in English/Language Arts and
Mathematics.
Percent Proficient 90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
-04 -05 -06 -07 -08
English/
Language 60.8 69.6 76.8 74.3 74
Arts
Mathematics 63.1 69.1 78 81.4 79.7
Focus on Assessment
were listed for the CAHSEE and CST exams. The pacing plans
pacing plan and to use the agreed upon materials. Two weeks
manner with the expectation that teachers will use the data
224
development time.
Focus on Standards
that was not on the CST nor on the CAHSEE. For example,
novels are not used because “novels are not on the test.”
The principal insisted that staff “get with the plan or get
benchmark assessments.
Professional Development
The principal was convinced that money was not the key
data.
Instructional Strategies
strategies.
• Nonlinguistic representation
• Cooperative learning
classroom learning.
Parent Involvement
was usually conducted via the PTSA and the booster club for
the school.
enough money to pay the staff and keep the lights on. While
Lessons Learned
Ambitious Goals
upon.
Professional Development
on this effort.
Opportunities
Instructional Leadership
the light on” and teacher salaries. Therefore, they had not
Future Implications
3058
Price Lunch.
API
840
820
800
Axis Title
780
760
740
720
700
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
API 753 805 825 826 827
from 2004 to 2006 but has largely stayed flat for the last
fluctuated between nine and ten during the last ten years.
95
% Student Scoring Proficient
85
75
65
55
45
35
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Mathematics 71.6 66.8 69.3 73.2 68.3
English/Language Arts 69.7 67.7 69.1 68.3 72.1
year of 72.1.
Instructional leadership
year.
align where their courses end and begin with the subsequent
teachers course.
Data
department chairs.
Professional development
instructional practices.
Intervention
Parental involvement
Colleges (WASC).
733 fewer students receiving free and reduced meals and 281
Lessons Learned
standards.
assessments.
learning.
Professional development
as coaches.
struggling students
special needs.
department meetings.
Instructional leadership
Future Implication
has reached a plateau for the last two. However, while its
expertise.
3142
API
875
870
865
860
Axis Title
855
850
845
840
835
830
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
API 846 856 869 867 872
265
score that 3142 had in 2004 of 846 and the upper limit of
five years, with its last year being its highest rank as a
“10/10” school.
Instructional Vision
Assessments
their own.
270
students responses.
Planning
Goals
progress.
272
Differentiation
skill required.
Parents
Summer 1 per 15
School students –
anticipated
enrollment
calculation: 2.2 fewer
50% of teachers than
Economically currently
Disadvantaged allocated to
students 3.5 3142
Teachers for
learning- and
mildly 7.4 or 1.4
disabled additional
students 3 6 teachers
Teachers for 100% state
severely reimbursement
disabled for top 1%
students minus federal 2 teachers
funds and 3 aides State funded
Services for $ 25,925
gifted additional
students $25/student $ 2,000.00 dollars
Career/Technica .3 weight per
l Education CTE student
to maintain
low class
sizes $7,000
per CTE
teacher
contract NA NA
Substitutes Assuming
costs of
10 days per $150/day;
teacher for 4,440.00
professional additional
development $ 1,800.00 dollars
277
Professional 10 days
Development intensive
professional
development
included in
teacher
contract in
summer
Instructional
Coaches
(delineated
above) Planning
& Prep Time: 10
summer days
Calculate:
$50/pupil for
additional
conferences,
consultants,
trainings, etc. $0.00 $55,850.00
Dollar/Pupil
Resources
Technology Calculation: 1
computer per 3
students
Actual
Distribution: 1
computer per 4
students plus
1:1 ratio for
administrators .2 FTE
and teachers. Technology
$250/pupil Coordinator $279,250.00
Instructional
Materials $140/pupil $156,380.00
Student 3142
Activities provides
one period
of
leadership
for
$250/pupil students $279,250.00
279
have fewer FTEs for Extended Day and Summer School support,
activities.
Lessons Learned
curriculum-mapping.
281
instructional vision
manner.
to students.
part of the school day. 3142 was very clear in its focus to
completion of homework.
practices.
Future Implications
achievement.
288
3578
priced meals.
API
860
840
820
800
780
760
740
720
700
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
API 757 802 821 840 849
API
where its API grew almost fifty points. Since that growth
10
9
8
7
6
Statewide Rank
5
Similar School Rank
4
3
2
1
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
and has been a “10/10” school for the last two years.
290
English/Language Arts.
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Mathematics 69 74 75 80 79
English/Language Arts 62 70 68 67 71
that the resistant portion of the staff did not feel the
Data Use
for support.
instruction.
Professional Development
Interventions
Parent Involvement
Technology
3578 served the same grade span as the EBM but was
over three times the size with almost 2,000 students. Class
for its size, 3578 had fewer students receiving free and
nine FTE tutors and almost five FTE for an extended school
substitutes with the EBM, the school would gain almost ten
development.
Lessons Learned
high performing schools are not all the same in focus and
requirements.
Ambitious Goals
Professional Development
practices.
Time
Collaborative Culture
Widespread Leadership
uneven.
Future Implications
ago. Since then its increase has been smaller and smaller.
and the ceiling for API scores, 3578’s AMO score have
remained almost flat for the last five years. For example,
3740
15%. There are 249 English Language Learners (ELL) and 469
API
920
900
880
860
840
820
800
780
760
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
API 807 826 852 870 897
risen for the last five years, from 807 to 897. Figure
as seen in Figure F3740.1, its rank did not show the same
95
85
% Proficient or above
75
65
55
45
35
2003‐04 2004‐05 2005‐06 2006‐07 2007‐08
English/ Language
52.7 61.1 67.6 74.4 76.1
Arts
Mathematics 62.1 69.9 72.8 68 73.2
academic year.
313
(Frey & Fisher, 2009) but the school was also developing
case study.
Demographic Data
Background
Ambitious
goals Instructional
Lessons
improvement
learned Standards
strategies
based
instruction
Understanding
the problem
Data
315
Standards-based instruction
the content may have been low. For example, in the course
skill.
practices.
Data
departments.
Interventions
not have many of the barriers that face other schools. Many
317
student.
Professional Development
Parent involvement
who do not speak English. The school would like to see more
Technology
computer.
Lessons Learned
used CST data to set goals for the school and district at
Ambitious goals
push just a few more students over the “bubble” but has set
levels.
instructional practices.
procedure.
schedule.
Point and SDAIE strategies. This group was the only group
Boys and Girls club were not certificated nor did they
Instructional Leadership
Future Implication
materials.