First Things First A Framework for Systemic High School Reform James P. Connell, Ph. D. Institute...
-
Upload
rosamond-francis -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
0
Transcript of First Things First A Framework for Systemic High School Reform James P. Connell, Ph. D. Institute...
First Things First First Things First A Framework for Systemic A Framework for Systemic
High School ReformHigh School Reform
James P. Connell, Ph. D.James P. Connell, Ph. D.Institute for Research and Reform in EducationInstitute for Research and Reform in Education
US Department of Education High School SummitUS Department of Education High School SummitOctober 8, 2003October 8, 2003
ArchivedArchived InformationInformation
Who Are We?Who Are We?
Institute for Research and Reform in EducationInstitute for Research and Reform in Education
IRRE is a not-for-profit organizationIRRE is a not-for-profit organization
We developed First Things First, a We developed First Things First, a comprehensive K-12 research-based reform comprehensive K-12 research-based reform frameworkframework
Who Do We Work With?Who Do We Work With? Urban DistrictsUrban Districts
– Kansas City, KS (all 28 elementary, eight middle Kansas City, KS (all 28 elementary, eight middle and five high schools)and five high schools)
– Kansas City, MO (all four comprehensive high Kansas City, MO (all four comprehensive high schools and one magnet high school)schools and one magnet high school)
– Riverview Gardens, MO (one urban high school Riverview Gardens, MO (one urban high school and two middle schoolsand two middle schools
– Houston, TX (three large high schools and four Houston, TX (three large high schools and four middle schools)middle schools)
– New Orleans, LA (10 high schools)New Orleans, LA (10 high schools) Rural DistrictsRural Districts
– High schools in Greenville and Shaw, MS High schools in Greenville and Shaw, MS
Who Are Our “Sponsors”?Who Are Our “Sponsors”?
Public and private investors in Public and private investors in educational reformeducational reform– Private foundationsPrivate foundations
Carnegie FoundationCarnegie FoundationEwing Marion Kauffman FoundationEwing Marion Kauffman FoundationGates FoundationGates Foundation
– State and U.S. Departments of State and U.S. Departments of EducationEducation
– Public school districtsPublic school districts
FTF StrategiesFTF Strategies
Small Learning CommunitiesSmall Learning Communities
Family Advocate SystemFamily Advocate System
Instructional ImprovementInstructional Improvement
Over 150 SLCs now being implemented in Over 150 SLCs now being implemented in comprehensive high schoolscomprehensive high schools
Implementation standards for SLCsImplementation standards for SLCs– Small and tallSmall and tall– Thematic with student and teacher choiceThematic with student and teacher choice– PurePure– Common planning timeCommon planning time– Flexible allocation of resourcesFlexible allocation of resources– Collective responsibilityCollective responsibility
For student outcomesFor student outcomes For instructional improvementFor instructional improvement
Small Learning Communities (SLCs)
Evidence of EffectivenessEvidence of Effectiveness
From Kansas City, KansasFrom Kansas City, Kansas– Approximately 20,000 studentsApproximately 20,000 students
50% African American50% African American25% Hispanic25% Hispanic20% Caucasian20% Caucasian5% Other ethnic groups5% Other ethnic groupsOver 70% free and reduced lunchOver 70% free and reduced lunch
– Completed third year of district-wide Completed third year of district-wide implementation of FTF in 2003implementation of FTF in 2003
Student CommitmentStudent Commitment
Five Year Trend In KCK -Five Year Trend In KCK -High School Attendance RateHigh School Attendance Rate
70%
80%
90%
100%
1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02ALL COMPREHENSIVE HIGH SCHOOLS (N=4)
Source data: Kansas State Department of Education
All high schools implementing FTF
KCK Dropout Rate – KCK Dropout Rate – Five Year TrendFive Year Trend
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02ALL COMPREHENSIVE HIGH SCHOOLS (N=4)
Source data: Kansas State Department of Education
All high schools implementing FTF
KCK Graduation Rate – KCK Graduation Rate – Five Year TrendFive Year Trend
40%
50%
60%
70%
1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02
COMPREHENSIVE HIGH SCHOOLS (N=4)
Source data: Kansas State Department of Education
All high schools implementing SLCs
StrategiesStrategies
Small Learning CommunitiesSmall Learning Communities
Family Advocate SystemFamily Advocate System
Instructional ImprovementInstructional Improvement
Family Advocate System (FAS)Family Advocate System (FAS)
What is it?What is it?– A commitment by all professional and A commitment by all professional and
other qualified staffother qualified staffTo work with approximately 15 students and To work with approximately 15 students and
their familiestheir familiesFor as long as they are in the schoolFor as long as they are in the schoolTo ensure academic success for those To ensure academic success for those
studentsstudents
Family Advocate System (FAS)Family Advocate System (FAS)
What is it?What is it?– Structured training and ongoing support Structured training and ongoing support
for all professional staff to: for all professional staff to: Find and use one-on-one time with students Find and use one-on-one time with students
effectivelyeffectivelyMonitor student progress with an academic Monitor student progress with an academic
and behavioral profileand behavioral profileEstablish regular and productive Establish regular and productive
communication with parentscommunication with parentsConduct effective family conferencesConduct effective family conferencesWork with colleagues to ensure each Work with colleagues to ensure each
student’s successstudent’s success
Parent Conference Attendance In Four Parent Conference Attendance In Four SLCs At One Comprehensive High SchoolSLCs At One Comprehensive High School
25%
75%
30%
65%
25%
50%
25%
50%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
SLC A SLC B SLC C SLC D
Pre FAS Post FAS2001-02 school year
StrategiesStrategies
Small Learning CommunitiesSmall Learning Communities
Family Advocate SystemFamily Advocate System
Instructional ImprovementInstructional Improvement
Instructional ImprovementInstructional Improvement
Provide students who need it mostProvide students who need it most– more instructional time in literacy and more instructional time in literacy and
math, math, – lower student/adult ratioslower student/adult ratios– attention to specific learning needsattention to specific learning needs
Work with all teachers to actively Work with all teachers to actively engage all students with rigorous, engage all students with rigorous, standards-based instruction aligned standards-based instruction aligned with high stakes assessmentswith high stakes assessments
Student PerformanceStudent Performance
Trends In 11Trends In 11thth Grade Reading Assessment Scores: Grade Reading Assessment Scores:
Kansas City, Kansas High SchoolsKansas City, Kansas High Schools
34%29%
25%
36%
44%45%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
2001 (N=977) 2002 (N=988) 2003 (N=1050)
Proficient/Advanced Unsatisfactory
Source data: Kansas State Department of Education
Trends In 8Trends In 8thth Grade Reading Assessment Scores: Grade Reading Assessment Scores:
Kansas City, Kansas Middle SchoolsKansas City, Kansas Middle Schools
56%
37%36%
14%
29%33%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
2001 (N=1431) 2002 (N=1453) 2003 (N=1512)
Proficient/Advanced Unsatisfactory
Source data: Kansas State Department of Education
Trends In 5Trends In 5thth Grade Reading Assessment Scores: Grade Reading Assessment Scores:
Kansas City, Kansas Elementary SchoolsKansas City, Kansas Elementary Schools
29%32%
47%41% 37%
21%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
2001 (N=1617) 2002 (N=1608) 2003 (N=1647)
Proficient/Advanced Unsatisfactory
Source data: Kansas State Department of Education
Closing The Racial Achievement Gap Closing The Racial Achievement Gap In Kansas City, KansasIn Kansas City, Kansas
(Grade 5, 8 and 11) (Grade 5, 8 and 11)
48%
29%
55%
45%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
% of Readers
Proficient or Above
2002 2003
Non Minority Minority
Source data: Kansas State Department of Education
N=905 N=3140 N=896 N=3313
Closing The Economic Achievement GapClosing The Economic Achievement Gap in Kansas City, Kansas in Kansas City, Kansas
(Grades 5, 8 and 11)(Grades 5, 8 and 11)
43%
28%
53%
44%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
% of Readers
Proficient or Above
2002 2003
Paid Lunch Free/Reduced
Source data: Kansas State Department of Education
N=1338 N=2721 N=1291 N=2918
Contact InformationContact Information
IRREIRRE
215.545.1335215.545.1335
www.irre.orgwww.irre.org
[email protected]@aol.com