Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Inequality/Inequity at the School DoorAddressing the Achievement Gap in a Different WayAcademy for Educational Studies Conference San Antonio, TXMarch 7-‐9, 2016Presenters: Angel Ford & G. Victor Hellman, Ed.D.
The Education Facilities Clearinghouse is program of the Graduate School of Education and Human Development of the George Washington University and is funded by the United States Department of Education.
Discussion Points• Inequality in school facilities• Unsatisfactory school buildings affect learning• Inequality of facilities and resources contribute to the achievement gap• Equalize facilities and resources and equalize achievement
School Facility Conditions
• The average school building is over 40 years old (NCES, 2014)• Not always a problem•Maintenance • Retrofits
School Facility Conditions• The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) gave school facilities a “D” (ASCE, 2013). • “Below standard”• “Significantly deteriorated”• “Strong risk of failure”
• Only 60 percent of schools have a plan for improvements/repairs (NCES, 2014).
Deferred Maintenance (Council of Great City Schools, 2014)
•Estimated to be between $271 billion and $542 billion•Depending on life cycle of 50 or 25 years.
School Facility Conditions
• National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES, 2014)• 53% of public schools need repairs, renovations, and modernizations to be in good condition• 29% need improvements to meet minimal safety standards
Facility Conditions Affect Achievement
• Affects occupants’ attitudes, motivations, and performance (Bowers & Urick, 2011; Cleveland & Fisher, 2014; Earthman & Lemasters, 2011; Mompremier, 2012; Uline, et al., 2010).
• Directly affects achievement• Virginia -‐ students scored 2.2 – 3.9 percent higher when in satisfactory buildings (Bullock, 2007). • Texas -‐ academic achievement was 4-‐9 percent higher in schools in the best conditions (Blincoe, 2008).
Elements that Affect Achievement
• Lighting• Acoustics• Climate Control• Building Age• Overcrowding & school size• Indoor Air Quality• Color/Aesthetics
Achievement gap
• Standardized testing• Drop-‐out rates • College readiness• General academic achievement (Wright, 2012).
• Cycle – poor achievement = poor funding (Wright, 2012).
Achievement gap
• Lower socio-‐economic students• English language learners• Students with disabilities•Minorities• Homeless students• Students in foster care (NEA, 2015)
2013 NAEP% Proficient
Free Lunch Reduced Lunch Not Eligible
8th Grade Math 16% 23% 35%8th Grade Reading
18% 28% 42%
Achievement gap (NEA, 2015)
Socio-‐Economic Factors
Achievement gap (NEA, 2015)
English Language Learners
•2013• ELL students averaged 23% to 30% below their counterparts in proficiency levels.•Only 3 to 4% of ELL eighth graders were proficient in math and reading.
Effective Classroom Design
• Flexible/Adaptable• Individual work areas• Layout for whole class discussions/interactions• Spaces for small group work• Spaces for concurrent differentiated learning • Integrated technology
•
Facility Conditions
Facility Conditions
Opportunity Gap
Achievement Gap
California Facility Funding (Vincent & Jain, 2015)•Most school districts underspend•Wealthy districts spend more on facilities/capital improvements• Poor districts spend more on maintenance and operations for facilities
District Spending in California (Vincent & Jain, 2015)
• Under half met maintenance and operations spending benchmark (3% CRV)• Under half met capital renewal benchmark (2% CRV)• 40% fall short on both benchmarks, leaving them with lower assessed value• Higher valued districts spend more on facilities• Facility needs are higher and more burdensome where more low income students attend
Figure from Vincent & Jain (2015)
Recommendations (Vincent & Jain, 2015)• Establish set funds for facilities• Distribute funds equitably• Improve planning and budgeting standards• Establish statewide facility database as a guide
What can be done?• Policy changes• Disseminate information about learning environment impacts• Construction of new schools• Renovations of older buildings• Engagement of the community• Professional development on classroom design and layout
Future research• Replicate studies, qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods• Establish programs to create the best physical environments and study the effects.• Study effects of school conditions on teacher retention.• Data Mining• Combining/Linking NCES datasets
References• American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). (2013). 2013 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure.Reston, VA: American
Society of Civil Engineers. Retrieved from http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/a/#p/schools/overview• Baker, B. D. (2014). America’s most financially disadvantaged school districts and how they got that way. Center for
American Progress. • Baker, B. D., & Corcoran, S. P. (2012). The Stealth Inequities of School Funding: How State and Local School Finance Systems
Perpetuate Inequitable Student Spending. Center for American Progress.• Bell, S. (2010). Project-‐based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The Clearing House, 83(2), 39-‐43.• Blincoe, J. M. (2008). The age and condition of Texas high schools as related to student academic achievement.
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Texas at Austin. • Bullock, C. C. (2007). The relationship between school building conditions and student achievement at the middle school
level in the Commonwealth of Virginia (Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University).• Caballero, D., Van Riesen, S. A., Álvarez, S., Nussbaum, M., De Jong, T., & Alario-‐Hoyos, C. (2014). The effects of whole-‐class
interactive instruction with single display groupware for triangles. Computers & education,70, 203-‐211.• Carter, P. L., & Welner, K. G. (2013).Closing the opportunity gap: What America must do to give every child an even chance.
Oxford University Press.• Cash, C. (1993). Building Condition and Student Achievement and Behavior. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University. Blacksburg, VA. • Cheng, G., English, S., & Filardo, M. (2011). Facilities: Fairness and Effects: Evidence and recommendations concerning the
impact of school facilities on civil rights and student achievement. Washington, DC: 21st Century School Fund, 192.
References• Cleveland, B., & Fisher, K. (2014). The evaluation of physical learning environments: a critical review of the
literature. Learning Environments Research, 17(1), 1-‐28.• Council of Great City Schools. (2014). Reversing the cycle of deterioration in the nations public school
buildings. • Conlin, M., & Thompson, P. N. (2014). Michigan and Ohio K–12 Educational Financing Systems: Equality and
Efficiency. Education Finance and Policy.• Duncanson E. (2014). Lasting effects of creating classroom space: A study of teacher behavior. The Journal of
the International Society for Educational Planning, 21(3), 29-‐40.• Earthman, G. I. (2006). My Classroom Appraisal Protocol. Survey Instrument. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University.• Earthman, G. I., & Lemasters, L. K. (2009). Teacher attitudes about classroom conditions. Journal of
Educational Administration, 47(3), 323-‐335.• Earthman, G. I., & Lemasters, L. K. (2011). The influence of school building conditions on students and
teachers: A theory-‐based research program (1993-‐2011). The ACEF Journal, 1(1), 15-‐36.• Ford , A. F., (2016). Planning Classroom Design and Layout to Increase Pedagogical Options for Secondary
Teachers. Educational Planning 23(1), 25-‐34. • Kozol, J. (2012). Savage inequalities: Children in America's schools. Broadway Books.
References• National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2014). Condition of America’s public schools facilities.
Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2014/2014022.pdf• National Education Association (NEA). (2015). Understaning the Gaps: Who are we leaving behind – and
how far? Retrieved from https://www.nea.org/assets/docs/18021-‐Closing_Achve_Gap_backgrndr_7-‐FINAL.pdf
• Owens, A., Reardon, S. F., & Jencks, C. (2014). Trends in school economic segregation, 1970 to 2010.• Parsons, E. C., & Turner, K. (2014). The Importance of History in the Racial Inequality and Racial Inequity in
Education: New Orleans as a Case Example. Negro Educational Review, 65(1-‐4), 99.• Smith, C. D. (2014). CONTINUED DISPARITIES IN SCHOOL FACILITIES: ANALYZING BROWN V. BOARD OF
EDUCATION’S SINGULAR APPROACH TO QUALITY EDUCATION. Tennessee Journal of Race, Gender, & Social Justice, 3(1), 3.
• Tanner, C. K. (2015). Effects of school architectural designs on students’ Accomplishments: An meta-‐analysis. Retrieved from the Education Facilities Clearinghouse: http://www.efc.gwu.edu/library/effects-‐of-‐school-‐architectural-‐designs-‐on-‐students-‐accomplishments-‐a-‐meta-‐analysis/
• Together, B. E. S. (2006). Growth and disparity: A decade of US public school construction.Building Educational Success Together, Washington, DC, www. edfacilities. org/pubs/GrowthandDisparity. pdf.
• Vincent, J. M., & Jain, L. S. (2015). Going it Alone. Center for Cities and Schools, University of California Berkeley.