gene's sod presentation

C E N TE R F OR E D UC ATI ON A L EF F E CT I V E N E S S , I N C .

“What is making a difference in the highest improving schools in the

state?”OSPI January 2009 Conference


Sue MillsExecutive Director


• Field-based research, service, and data-centric tools to support School & District Improvement

• Partnerships with 500 Schools in 100 districts in WA• Assist all schools & districts in WA School & District

Improvement programs (125 schools and 41 districts)– What we do & how we do it varies based on serving districts from 80

students K-12, to districts over 30,000 K-12.

• The largest database of school effectiveness information in the state of Washington (Nine Characteristics of High Performing Schools)– 44,000 Staff (from 515 distinct schools)– 118,000 Students (30% from homes where English is not primary

language)– 41,000 Parents (30% from homes where English is not primary

language)

Data and CEE


Welcome! In this session we will:

• Discuss impact of culture (Nine Characteristics) upon school performance

• Present Nine Characteristics survey findings from 2007 and 2008 Schools of Distinction

• Compare SOD to a sample of WA schools gathered over same period of time

• Hear from “the field” on the strategic value of the Nine Characteristics data (perceptual)


“The relationship among the adults in the schoolhouse has more impact on the quality and the

character of the schoolhouse – and on the accomplishments of

youngsters – than any other factor.”

– Barth, 2001


Is there a relationship between the Nine Characteristics and

student achievement?


Remembering the 2008 Award Winners

• 94 schools were identified as the “highest improving” schools

• 53 elementary schools (14 repeat)

• 21 middle schools (3 repeat)

• 20 high schools (4 repeat)


School Student Demographics• Poverty ranges from 1% to 82%.

– 16 have greater than 50% poverty

• ESL/ELL ranges from 0% to 31% 21 - have more than the state average for ESL students served (state average is 7%)

• 31 are east of the Cascades• 63 are west of the Cascades• 32 are Title I Schoolwide


171

123

121

114

113

112

105

101 189

ESD Representation

• 101 = 13 (6)• 105 = 5 (9)• 112 = 7 (8)• 113 = 5 (9)• 114 = 3 (5)• 121 = 33 (21)• 123 = 4 (10)• 171 = 9 (11)• 189 = 14 (7)

(Last year)


Elementary Schools RMLI 2002-03

WA State Grade 4: RMLI '02-'03 Baseline

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0

Percent Poverty

Re

ad

ing

/ M

ath

Le

arn

ing

Ind

ex

WA 4th Grade

2008 Schools of Distinction


Elementary Schools RMLI 2008

WA State Grade 4: RMLI 2008

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0

Poverty

Re

ad

ing

/ M

ath

Le

arn

ing

Ind

ex

WA 4th Grade



Middle Schools RMLI 2002-03


0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0

Percent Poverty

Re

ad

ing

/ M

ath

Le

arn

ing

Ind

ex

WA 7th Grade



Middle Schools RMLI 2008


0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0

Percent Poverty

Re

ad

ing

/ M

ath

Le

arn

ing

Ind

ex

WA 7th Grade



High Schools RMLI 2002-03


0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0

Percent Poverty

Re

ad

ing

/ M

ath

Le

arn

ing

Ind

ex

WA 10th Grade



High Schools RMLI 2008


0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0

Percent Poverty

Re

ad

ing

/ M

ath

Le

arn

ing

Ind

ex

WA 10th Grade



Let’s look at a repeat winner . . .

East Port Orchard Elem

South Kitsap SD


Reading Achievement

WASL 4 Reading: Percentage of Students Meeting Standard

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

E. Port Orchard Elem South Kitsap SD State State Uniform Bar

Copyright © The Center for Educational Effectiveness, Inc., 2004

Lower than state 2 of 5 yrsLower than district 4 of 5 yrs.

Above state and district the last 2 years



0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010




0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010




Math Achievement

WASL 4 Math: Percentage of Students Meeting Standard

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010



Lower than state 4 of 5 yearsLower than district 5 of 5 yrs

Above state and districtthe last 2 years


WASL 4 Reading: Percent of Students by Level

31%44% 52% 45% 49% 48%

36%

-38%-23% -17% -11% -19% -11% -20%

-11%

-6%-5%

-9%-4%

-7%-3%

19%

25%25% 36% 28% 33%

41%

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

20%

40%

60%

80%

MeetingStandard

100%

49% NOT meeting standard to77% MEETING standard

All Schools of Distinction accelerated Reading and . . .



31%44% 52% 45% 49% 48%

36%

-38%-23% -17% -11% -19% -11% -20%

-11%

-6%-5%

-9%-4%

-7%-3%

19%

25%25% 36% 28% 33%

41%

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

20%

40%

60%

80%

MeetingStandard

100%


-18% -22% -13%

-9%-14%

-12%

42% 34% 34%

32%30% 40%

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

20%

40%

60%

80%

MeetingStandard

100%


WASL 4 Math: Percent of Students by Level

-30%-39%

-23%-33% -26%

-11% -16%

-35% -13%

-16%-15% -22%

-19%-22%

27% 25% 31% 22% 30% 30% 30%

8%22%

31%30% 23%

39% 33%

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

20%

40%

60%

80%

MeetingStandard

100%

. . .accelerated Math as well.

65% NOT meeting standard to63% MEETING standard


What about the Nine Characteristics?

Do they matter?


“…(don’t) aim only for kids. Adults are only kids grown up, anyway.”

Walt Disney


The following 6 slides were prepared by

G. Sue Shannon, Ed.D.OSPI Senior Researcher

August 2007


Nine Characteristics of High-Performing Schools1. A clear & shared focus2. High standards & expectations for all students3. Effective school leadership4. High levels of collaboration & communication5. Curriculum, instruction & assessments aligned

with state standards6. Frequent monitoring of learning & teaching7. Focused professional development8. A supportive learning environment9. High levels of family & community involvement


Second Edition: Expanded Concepts1. Effective processes for improving schools2. Expanded perspectives on effective leadership3. Relational trust4. Quality instruction, grading practices, monitoring5. Professional learning communities6. Cultural competence & culturally responsive teaching7. Family & community engagement in schools8. High school improvement9. District improvement10. Need-based allocation of resources (funding, staffing,

& support)


Relationships among characteristics


Nine Characteristics Resource

-- 2nd Ed. the review process

• Reviewers examined original document & suggested revisions & new resources.

• Author reviewed recent research studies & professional literature.

• Author revised document to expand & deepen the discussion of the characteristics.

• OSPI documents were added to pertinent characteristics.

• Reviewers read & commented on second edition.


Conclusions from review

• The original research-base has not changed; nine characteristics are still viable, thus maintained.

• Characteristics are explained and developed for deeper understanding.

• Implementation ideas are expanded using current research and professional literature.

• Graphic illustrates relationships between & among characteristics.

• School improvement cycle of inquiry is suggested.• Schools and districts must move beyond planning to

doing to close the “knowing-doing gap.”


“Culture influences everything that happens in a school – including student

achievement” (Tony Wagner 2006)


This session will use EES perceptual data to quantify the

presence of the Nine Characteristics in 48 of the

most improving schools (top 5%) in the state of Washington


In addition – we will use EES data from the past 15 months

as a comparison set – a representative sample of 322 WA public schools (16,937)


Where in this state?

ESD by Respondents

ESD105, 2199, 14%

ESD112, 2406, 15%

ESD113, 125, 1%

ESD114, 1458, 9%

ESD121, 5070, 32%

ESD123, 1860, 12% ESD171,

1129, 7%

ESD189, 803, 5%

ESD101, 724, 5%

ESD by Respondents

ESD105, 226, 14%

ESD112, 209, 13%

ESD113, 99, 6%

ESD114, 177, 11%

ESD121, 301, 20%

ESD123, 118, 7%

ESD171, 314, 21%

ESD189, 52, 3%

ESD101, 82, 5%

School of Distinction Winners WA Comparison Set


Job position of respondents

Position Administrator2%Para-

Professional / Instr. Aide

12%

Classif ied Support Staff

14%

Certif icated Support Staff

6%

Certif icated Teacher

66%

Position Administrator2%

Para-Professional /

Instr. Aide13%

Classif ied Support Staff

12%

Certif icated Support Staff

6%Certif icated

Teacher67%

WA Comparison SetSchool of Distinction Winners


What level of school?

School Level

K-12, 347, 2%

Elementary, 8461, 50%

Middle / Jr. High, 3843,

23%

High School, 3992, 24%

School Level

Other, 6, 0% K-12, 90, 6%

Elementary, 1109, 74%

Middle / Jr. High, 218,

14%

High School, 96, 6%

WA Comparison SetSchool of Distinction Winners


Sample elems v SOD elems

Comparison Perspective- 9 Characteristics of High Performing Schools Percent Positive Responses

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Readiness To Benefit

Clear & Shared Focus

High Standards & Expectations

Effective School Leadership

Collaboration, Communication &Community

Parent & Community Involvement

Supportive Learning Environment

Frequent Monitoring of Teaching &Learning

Focused Professional Development

Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment

MDB elems SOD elems

Note: Further from the center implies more positive responses

Copyright © 2006 Center for Educational Effectiveness. All Rights Reserved.


Comparison with CEE's Data RepositoryPercent Positive Responses (Further from the Center is MORE Positive)

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%Readiness To Benefit




Collaboration & Communication





Curriculum, Instruction, andAssessment: Programs & Processes

Elementary Schools MS/JH Schools High Schools Schools of Distinction

`


CEE Data Repository Schools Your Site


The next slides divide the SOD winners into 3 groups and contrast those 3 groups

with each other as well as the comparison MDB group.


The Four Groups:

• SOD 2007 = 875

• SOD 2008 = 321

• SOD repeat winners = 391

(TOTAL SOD = 1,587 )

• MDB Comparison Set = 16,937

(WA 9/07 – 12/08)


The 10,000 foot viewComparison Perspective- 9 Characteristics of High Performing Schools

Percent Positive Responses

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%











2007 Winners 2008 Winners Repeat Winners Comparison Set None



Comparison Perspective- Organizational TrustPercent Positive Responses

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Integrity

Openness

ReliabilityBenevolence / Caring

Competence

2007 Winners 2008 Winners Repeat Winners Comparison Set




High Standards and ExpectationsHigh Standards and Expectations

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Our staff believes that allstudents can meet state

reading standards

Our staff believes that allstudents can meet state

math standards

We hold one anotheraccountable for student

learning



Collaboration and Communication

High Levels of Collaboration and Communication0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Students understand theexpectations and standards

of this school

When there is a problem inmy school, we talk about

how to solve it

Parents & communityunderstand the expectations& standards of this school



Supportive Learning EnvironmentSupportive Learning Environment (Chart 2 of 2)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Students in this school areengaged in learning

We have a system forcelebrating student

success

I receive recognition orpraise for a job well done

Staff members enforceconsistent behaviorexpectations and

consequences in theirclassrooms



Monitoring of Teaching and Learning

Monitoring of Teaching & Learning0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Struggling students receiveearly intervention andremediation to acquire

skills

We are frequently informedabout how well we are

doing

We monitor theeffectiveness of

instructional interventions



Focused Professional DevelopmentFocused Professional Development

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Our teachers engage in professional developmentactivities to learn and apply reading skills and

strategies

The training I have been to in this district helps me domy job better

Our teachers engage in professional developmentactivities to learn and apply math skills and strategies

Appropriate data are used to guide building-directedprofessional development



Curriculum-Instruction-Assessment


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

This school provides curriculum that is relevant andmeaningful

Our staff demonstrates a thorough understanding ofstate learning standards for reading

Common assessments are used to inform instruction


EES Question MDB vs SOD

Students in this school are engaged in learning -14.7%

Struggling students receive early intervention and remediation to acquire skills

-13.8%

Students understand the expectations and standards of this school

-13.8%

Parents & community understand the expectations & standards of this school

-13.6%

Common assessments are used to inform instruction -13.5%

We are frequently informed about how well we are doing -12.6%

Our staff demonstrates a thorough understanding of state learning standards for reading

-11.8%

Our staff demonstrates a thorough understanding of state learning standards for math

-11.7%

Our teachers engage in professional development activities to learn and apply math skills and strategies

-11.1%

The mission/vision of this school and district are aligned with each other

-10.9%

Our staff believes that all students can meet state math standards

-10.8%

Instruction is personalized to meet the needs of each student -10.4%

When there is a problem in my school, we talk about how to solve it

-10.4%

All teachers integrate literacy and numeracy concepts into their teaching

-10.3%

This school provides curriculum that is relevant and meaningful -10.2%


Let’s come back to our example School of Distinction – East Port Orchard Elementary


East Port Orchard Elem 12-08

Comparison with CEE's Data RepositoryPercent Positive Responses (Further from the Center is MORE Positive)

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%Readiness To Benefit




Collaboration & Communication





Curriculum, Instruction, andAssessment: Programs & Processes

Elementary Schools MS/JH Schools High Schools East Port Orchard Elem

`




This is EPO’s data over time . . .Comparison Perspective- 9 Characteristics of High Performing Schools


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%











December 2008 November 2007 April 2007



What about Trust?: The “Glue” That Makes us Whole

“You must trust and believe in people or life becomes impossible.”

Anton Chekov

“If we don’t have trust in each other, then we will always find reasons not to win”


EPO’s Organizational TrustComparison Perspective- Organizational Trust


0%10%

20%30%

40%50%

60%70%

80%90%

100%Integrity

Openness


Competence

December 2008 November 2007 April 2007




EPO Trust In ComparisonTRUST Comparison with CEE Data Repository


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Integrity

Openness


Competence

Elem MS / JH HS East Port Orchard Elem

`

Further from Center is More Positive




From the Superintendent of South Kitsap S.D. - David LaRose:

• I begin virtually all presentations with our message of values, beliefs and culture as the “why” behind all decisions about “what” we do.

• "Culture always should precede programs. If teams of people do not improve, a school never will."


”Culture Eats Strategy for Breakfast”

Values and culture stand out as one of the strongest and most consistent contrasts between beat-the-odds schools and the comparison schools.

Beat The Odds (2006)


An example – the impact of a PLC on the culture of a building

Comparison Perspective- 9 Characteristics of High Performing Schools Percent Positive Responses

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%











Oct 2008 Dec 2007 March 2007 May 2006 Oct 2005



A Culture of Collaboration

Improved districts build a culture of commitment, collegiality, mutual respect, and stability.– Professional culture of high standards– Trust, mutual respect, and competence– Opportunities for peer support, collaboration,

and develop professional learning communities

Shannon & Bylsma (2004)


System Support

The key, is not simply that the successful schools have data – it’s who is using the data and how they use the data.

Beat The Odds (2006)


Measuring and Reporting

Successful turnarounds are typically marked by measuring and reporting data frequently and publically.

School Turnarounds (2007)


High Quality Teaching and LearningThe Instructional Work of the Organization

Reduce isolation and open practice up to direct observation, analysis, and feedback.– Make direct observation of practice,

analysis, and feedback a routine feature of work.

Elmore (2000, 2002, and 2004)


References You Can UsePrimary• Elmore, R. (2004). Knowing the Right Things to Do: School Improvement and Performance-Based

Accountability. Washington, D.C.: National Governors Association- Center for Best Practices.• Marzano, R. (2003). What Works in Schools: Translating Research Into Action. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.• Beat The Odds (2006). Morrison Institute for Public Policy (2006). Why Some Schools With Latino Children

Beat the Odds…and Others Don’t. Tempe, AZ.: Morrison Institute for Public Policy, Arizona State University, jointly with Center for the Future of Arizona. (aka: “Beat The Odds (2006) ).

• School Turnarounds (2007). Public Impact (2007). School Turnarounds: A review of the cross-sector evidence on dramatic organizational improvement. Public Impact, Academic Development Institute- prepared for the Center on Innovation and Improvement. Retrieved from: http://www.centerii.org/ (aka: School Turnarounds (2007)).

• Shannon, G.S. & Bylsma, P. (2004). Characteristics of Improved School Districts: Themes from Research. Olympia, WA. Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction.

• Shannon, G.S. & Bylsma, P. (2003). Nine Characteristics of High Performing Schools. A research-based resource for school leadership teams to assist with the School Improvement Process. Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction. Olympia, WA.

Secondary• Center for Educational Effectiveness (CEE) (2005). Longitudinal Change in Staff Perceptions of the 9

Characteristics of High Performing Schools in OSPI SIA Cohort-II and III Schools. Redmond, WA: Center for Educational Effectiveness.

• Elmore, R. (2000). Building a New Structure For School Leadership. Washington, D.C.: The Albert Shanker Institute.

• Elmore, R. (2002). Bridging the Gap Between Standards and Achievement. Washington, D.C.: The Albert Shanker Institute.

• Quinn, R. and Rohrbaugh, J. (1983). A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: Toward a competing values approach to organizational analysis. Management Science, 29(3), 363-377.

• Tschannen-Moran, (2004). Trust Matters, Leadership for Successful Schools. San Francisco, CA. Jossey-Bass.

gene's sod presentation

Education

schools districts

high schools rmli

distinct schools

highestimproving schools

elementary schools rmli

middle schools rmli

sample of wa schools

wa public schools