Characteristics of High- and Low-Achieving English-Language Schools

Transcription

1 This bulletin summarizes results that are part of a larger, comprehensive study being conducted by EQAO to better understand school and teacher practices that contribute to higher levels of student achievement on the Assessments of Reading, Writing and Mathematics in the primary and junior divisions. The focus of the analysis for this bulletin was on the responses to the principal, teacher and student questionnaires to identify differences in attitudes and behaviours between respondents in high- and lowachieving schools. EQAO Research EQAO undertakes research for two main purposes: to maintain best-of-class practices and to ensure that the agency remains at the forefront of largescale assessment and to promote the use of EQAO data for improved student achievement through the investigation of means to inform policy directions and decisions made by educators, parents and the government. EQAO research projects delve into the factors that influence student achievement and education quality, and examine the statistical and psychometric processes that result in high-quality assessment data. Characteristics of High- and Low- English-Language By Rhona Shulman, M.A., and Michael Kozlow, Ph.D., Education Quality and Accountability Office SUMMARY OF TRENDS OF EDUCATIONAL INTEREST BASED ON QUESTIONNAIRE DATA FROM AND Characteristics of High- Relative to Those of Low- Teacher Responses (Class Level) n More sharing of information and use of a wider variety of means of communication with parents and guardians n Greater sense of community (co-operation, respect, pride) among students and staff n More mathematics classes taught in the morning n More evidence of improvement-goal setting, high student expectations and enforcement of rules n More use of EQAO resources in Grade 3 n More years of teaching experience Principal Responses (School Level) n More sharing of information with parents and more parent participation and collaboration with teachers n Greater sense of community n Greater success in accomplishing improvement goals for mathematics n More meetings related to school data and instructional and student matters for the Grade 3 sample n More opportunities for extended learning activities n Lower rate of student absenteeism Research conducted by Rhona Shulman, M.A., For EQAO Michael Kozlow, Ph.D., Director, Data and Support Services, EQAO Acknowledgement This research project was a collaborative effort among EQAO staff on the Assessment and Data Management and Analysis teams. Student Responses n More engagement in reading and mathematics n More use of subject-specific cognitive strategies and instructional tools n More participation in physical activities outside school n More discussions with parents or another adult at home about school work, school activities and school agenda n Less frequent playing of video games, watching of TV and use of the Internet There is a high level of congruency between the characteristics reported in high-achieving schools and the indicators identified in the literature on effective school practices.

2 METHOD The and questionnaire results for principals, teachers and students were sorted into high- and low-achieving-school categories based on the definitions in the sidebar. High- and low-achieving schools for Grades 3 and 6 were identified separately, which yielded two samples for each year (the Grade 3 sample and the Grade 6 sample). If a school had both Grade 3 and Grade 6 students, the principal completed only one questionnaire. Therefore, there are some principal questionnaire results that apply to both samples. Demographic information for the students in the samples was also analyzed. Principal, teacher and student responses were summarized for each sample, and differences between the responses in high- and low-achieving schools were examined. Responses were considered to be similar if the difference was smaller than five percent, which was considered to be an educationally meaningful difference. The questionnaires were revised and expanded between the two test administrations. The revised questionnaires for had a specific focus on mathematics, while the questionnaires for covered reading, writing and mathematics. There were a number of items common to both sets of questionnaires. The questionnaires included numerous items (see sidebars); only the highlights are presented in this bulletin. CHARACTERISTICS THAT ARE RELATED TO ACHIEVEMENT BASED ON FINDINGS FROM TEACHER AND PRINCIPAL QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES Sense of Community: Teachers in high-achieving schools responded more favourably than teachers in low-achieving schools to most items related to school climate (tone and relationships promoted in the school). The trends for principals were similar to those for teachers, but the responses for principals were more positive than those for teachers in both high- and low-achieving schools, and the differences were smaller for principals. School Climate: Percentage of Principals and Teachers in the Grade 3 Sample Who Strongly Agree or Agree * Teachers Principals Questionnaire Item High- Low- High- Low- Students take pride in this school. 90% 69% 96% 90% There is strong school spirit in this school. 80% 61% 91% 83% Students at this school respect one another. 82% 52% 93% 81% There is co-operation at this school among students. 88% 64% 95% 86% There is co-operation between students and teachers. 91% 76% 96% 90% There is co-operation between teachers and parents. 86% 63% 92% 83% Staff consistently enforces rules for student conduct. 74% 64% n/a n/a The school culture promotes success for all students. 91% 80% n/a n/a Had support of other staff in work toward math improvement goals. 73% 65% n/a n/a * A similar pattern of differences was observed in the responses of principals in the Grade 6 sample and in those of Grade 6 teachers. 2

3 Teaching Mathematics in the Morning: A larger percentage of teachers in high-achieving schools than in low-achieving schools reported teaching mathematics classes in the morning (37% compared to 32%, respectively, in Grade 3, and 51% compared to 46%, respectively, in Grade 6). Use of EQAO Resources: A larger percentage of Grade 3 teachers in high-achieving schools than in low-achieving schools used EQAO resources for a variety of purposes (see table below). Smaller differences among Grade 6 teachers were noted for the following: using sample EQAO student assessments and scoring guides as a model for designing assessments, using EQAO data to identify how well students are meeting curriculum expectations, and communicating with parents and guardians about student achievement. High- in which 75% or more of the students achieved the provincial standard or above (Levels 3 and 4) EQAO Resources Used Most Frequently by Grade 3 Teachers in Scoring Guides 80% 73% Released Assessments 68% 60% Student Achievement and Questionnaire Data 67% 61% 81% 76% 70% 64% 75% 69% Low- in which fewer than 50% of the students achieved the provincial standard or above (Levels 3 and 4) To illustrate model solutions To show students how questions and tasks relate to expectations To identify how well students meet expectations To identify areas of program strength/areas for improvement To inform program planning To guide school improvement planning initiatives These definitions are based on the EQAO reading results from and the mathematics results from High- Low- Years of Teaching Experience: A larger percentage of primary- and juniordivision teachers in high-achieving schools than in low-achieving schools had taught for 11 years or more (on average 49% and 39%, respectively). A larger percentage of teachers in low-achieving schools than in high-achieving schools had taught for two years or less (on average 44% and 34%, respectively). Staff Collaboration and Improvement Planning: Principals in the Grade 3 sample in high-achieving schools had more frequent meetings to discuss school data and instructional and student-related matters than did principals in low-achieving schools. As well, a larger percentage of principals in highachieving schools reported considerable success in accomplishing goals related to improvement planning for mathematics than did their colleagues in low-achieving schools in both the Grade 3 and Grade 6 samples. Components of Teacher Questionnaires n Classroom demographics (2 items) n Teaching background, experience and professional development (16 items) n Resources for instruction and assessment of reading, writing and mathematics (58 items) n Teacher collaboration (6 items) n Use of EQAO resources (25 items) n School climate (23 items) n Parental engagement (20 items) 3

4 Demographic and Contextual Similarities The profiles for principals in high- and low-achieving schools were similar in terms of n gender, n training and experience, n professional development, n use of EQAO data and n ways in which results were communicated to staff. The profiles for teachers in high- and low-achieving schools were similar in the following respects: n gender, n professional development,* n accessibility of resources for instruction and assessment and n frequency and use and availability of specified resources. * More teachers in low-achieving schools had participated in special education courses. Components of Principal Questionnaires n Background information, experience and professional development (10 items) n School demographics (4 items) n Staff collaboration and improvement planning (18 items) n School climate and learning opportunities (16 items) n Use of EQAO resources (12 items) n Parental engagement (30 items) Improvement-Planning Activities: Percentage of Principals in the Grade 3 Sample Who Indicated the School Was Very Successful or Successful in * Questionnaire Item High- Low- Analyzing student achievement data 42% 27% Identifying strategies to improve instruction 45% 30% Clarifying expectations for student achievement 48% 32% Establishing one or more improvement teams 50% 40% * A similar pattern of differences was observed in the responses of principals in the Grade 6 sample. Teachers in high-achieving schools reported more frequent but briefer meetings to plan or discuss instruction, general school issues, tracking of student progress and participation in school-based professional development activities; teachers in low-achieving schools met a bit less often but for longer periods of time. Parental Engagement: Although there were some similarities between the responses of teachers in high- and low-achieving schools to the questions on parental engagement, teachers in high-achieving schools were more proactive in sharing information and used more ways to communicate with parents and guardians, particularly in Grade 3, than those in low-achieving schools. A larger percentage of principals in high-achieving schools than in lowachieving schools indicated success in sharing information with parents, parent participation in school activities and parents working collaboratively with teachers. Smaller differences were reported for items related to considering parental input and providing school activities for parents and families (e.g., sessions on mathematics and literacy and on ways to provide academic and social support for their child). Parental Engagement: Percentage of Principals in the Grade 3 Sample Who Indicated to A Great or Some Extent in * Questionnaire Item Parents or guardians participated in school activities High- Low- 85% 73% Parent showed support for teachers efforts 93% 79% Parents volunteered in classroom activities 83% 59% Parents worked collaboratively with teacher to meet learning goals 80% 53% * A similar pattern of differences was observed in the responses of principals in the Grade 6 sample. 4

5 Extended Learning Opportunities ( ): A large percentage of principals in both high- and low-achieving schools indicated that extended opportunities were provided for students in reading (in the Grade 3 sample, 79% of principals in high-achieving schools and 75% in low-achieving schools responded to a great or some extent ). Fewer schools offered extended learning opportunities in mathematics; a greater percentage of principals in high-achieving schools than in low-achieving schools responded to a great or some extent (e.g., 41% of principals compared to 25%, respectively, in the Grade 3 sample). A similar pattern of responses was observed among principals in the Grade 6 sample. CHARACTERISTICS RELATED TO ACHIEVEMENT ACCORDING TO FINDINGS FROM STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC DATA AND QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS Demographic Similarities: Students in high- and low-achieving schools were similar with respect to the following demographic variables: birth in Canada, length of time in the board, first language learned at home and use of English at home. Demographic Differences: For both cohorts and both grade levels, there was a consistently larger percentage of students with special education needs in low-achieving schools than in high-achieving schools. Percentage of Students with Special Education Needs (Excluding Gifted) High- 12% 14% 13% 14% Grade 3 Grade 6 Grade 3 Grade 6 Low- 28% 23% 24% 19% Grade 3 Grade 6 Grade 3 Grade 6 Student Population The number of schools and students was different in the two cohorts due to a change in selection criteria based on reading achievement in and mathematics achievement in

6 STUDENT ATTITUDES In What Ways Were Students Attitudes Similar? Student responses in high- and low-achieving schools were similar for 18 of 45 items in both Grades 3 and 6. Students in high- and low-achieving schools responded in a similar way to the following items: n perceptions about writing; n use of a computer at school; n reading materials outside school, such as comics, graphic novels and instant messages, and n participation in activities such as art, music and after-school clubs outside school. These trends were consistent between and Components of Student Questionnaires n Engagement in reading, writing and mathematics (15 items) n Cognitive strategies and instructional tools used in mathematics (9 items) n Computer use (3 items) n Out-of-school activities (5 items) n Screen time (6 items) n Parental engagement (7 items) Differences in Students Engagement with Literacy and Numeracy: The most notable finding was that the small differences between the engagement in mathematics and reading of the Grade 3 cohort in high- and low-achieving schools became larger in Grade 6. Responses for students in high-achieving schools were more positive than those for students in low-achieving schools. The results for Grade 6 students are presented in the graphs below. Grade 6 Students Engagement in Mathematics, Percentage of Students Who Responded Most of the Time 46% 36% Likes Mathematics 56% 41% Good at Mathematics 34% 22% Solve Difficult Mathematics Questions 37% 29% Uses Mathematics Outside School Grade 6 Students Engagement in Reading, Percentage of Students Who Responded Yes 57% 46% 69% 57% 73% 63% Like to Read Good at Reading Read by Self at Home High- Low- 6

7 The above attitudes of students with special education needs were similar in high- and low-achieving schools. Among other students, the attitudes were more positive in high-achieving schools. Other Differences: Students in high-achieving schools responded somewhat more favourably than students in low-achieving schools to items such as the following: n reading by myself every day or almost every day (59% and 53% of students, respectively); n reading the whole math question to make sure I know what to do (72% and 64% of students, respectively); n participating in sports and other physical activities three to seven days per week (81% and 73% of students, respectively) and n talking about school activities with a parent or another adult at home (73% and 67% of students, respectively). A larger percentage of students in low-achieving schools than in high-achieving schools indicated doing the following when not at school: n playing video games every day or almost every day (41% and 35% of students, respectively) and n watching four TV programs or more after school (59% and 50% of students, respectively). Gender: Gender differences were similar in high- and low-achieving schools for most questionnaire items. IMPLICATIONS The findings in this review confirm that characteristics identified and associated with effective schools were present to a greater extent in highachieving schools than in low-achieving schools. In particular, the largest differences were observed for the following factors: n school climate established by school staff for learning, n meeting improvement-planning goals, n parental engagement and n engagement of students in learning. The characteristics exemplified by teachers, principals and students in these high-achieving schools could be a useful starting point as teachers and principals focus on school improvement planning to improve the learning opportunities for students in their schools. 7

8 Some Areas to Consider It is important to keep in mind that the data presented in this bulletin are summary results of high- and low-achieving schools and that they do not characterize all schools in either category. There is a wide range of response patterns in both groups. The purpose of this bulletin is to stimulate conversations that will lead to action on behalf of students. It is important that principals and teachers reflect on how the findings apply to their school. The following points may assist in guiding discussions toward leadership action: n the importance of common goals, values and expectations among students, staff and parents; n the promotion and nurturing of positive relationships among colleagues, students and parents; n effective use of data 1) to meet curriculum and instructional goals and 2) to improve student achievement; n successful strategies for engaging parents in their children s learning and strategies to improve current practices; n levels of student engagement in their own learning and success and n information and strategies for teachers to help all students become effective learners (differentiated instruction). The following resources on the EQAO Web site may be of some assistance in addressing some of these issues: n Exploring the Underlying Traits of High-Performing n Strategies That Work for : Thinking Globally in the Postmodern World n School Stories Case Studies: on the Journey of Learning SAMPLE SIZE The number of schools and completed questionnaires for each of the eight samples are presented below. Number of and Completed Questionnaires Primary Division: Grade 3 Junior Division: Grade (Reading) (Mathematics) (Reading) (Mathematics) High Low High Low High Low High Low Principal Questionnaires Teacher Questionnaires Student Questionnaires Carlton Street, Suite 1200, Toronto ON M5B 2M9 Telephone: Web site: 8