Let’s Collaborate to Close the Academic Achievement Gap

Let’s Collaborate to Close the Academic Achievement Gap

2007 CSBA Annual Education Conference and Trade Show

Student Issues Conference Groups

2

Today’s Presentation

Jo Ann Yee – CSBA Senior Director, Strategy Development, Achievement, Diversity, and Urban Affairs

Overview - Student Issues Conference Groups

3


Leslie Jordan – Research Consultant

Survey Results – Closing the Achievement Gap

4

Today’s PresentationYear 3 of Student Issues Conference Groups

Closing Academic Achievement Gap:

Schools must be – but can only be – a partof the solution.

We cannot close the achievement gap without schools.

But schools cannot close it by themselves.

Focus today: “Collaboration”

5


Diane Siri – ARCHES

Lilia Tanakeyowma – Santa Ana Partnership

Robyn Fisher and Bobbie Brooks –Southern Alameda County Regional Educational Alliance

6

Closing the Achievement Gap

CSBA’s Vision Statement

The California School Boards Association envisions a state where the public schools are widely recognized as the foundation of a free and democratic society, where local citizen governing boards are fully vested with the means to advance the best interests of students and the public, and

where the futures of all children are driven by their aspirations, not bounded by their circumstances.

7


How will we know when the gap has been eliminated?

The achievement gap will be eliminated when the academic performance levels of student subgroups do not measurably correlate with race, socioeconomic status or cultural circumstances.

8


In order to eliminate the gap, we must improve the achievement of all students . . .

9

. . . and accelerate the achievement of our lower achieving students.

Stu

de

nt

Ac

hie

vem

en

t

Now Future

All Students

Lower Achieving Students


10

CSBA Goal: All districts are focused on improving student achievement and closing achievement gaps.

CSBA’s Role: To encourage local and state efforts to close the achievement gap.


11

Communications

Learn More California:Adequate Funding

Campaign

State and federalLegislation

CurriculumInstitute

AnnualConferenceGovernance

Services

Policy Services Policy Analysis

Conference GroupOn

Student Issues

Conditionsof Children

CSBA’s commitment to support and encourage state and local efforts to close the achievement gap is integrated

throughout our work

CSBA’s Ongoing Work to Support Closing the Gap

12


What are they?

13

How are they different from other CSBA

activities and services?


14


Not:

A CommitteeA Task ForceA ConferenceAn Event

15


ARE:

A networkAn allianceA forumA place and way to learn and work together

16


“Student Achievement Network and Forum”

Alliances of people and districts that share an interest in working together to address the needs of targeted groups of students:

American IndiansAsian Pacific IslandersBlacks/African AmericansHispanicsStudents in county-based community day or juvenile court schools.

17

This approach recognizes that raising student achievement and closing achievement gaps requires long term, sustained efforts at the local level - in classrooms, schools, and districts.

The focus of the conference groups is on the work of local school boards and districts.


18

Role of CSBA

Encourage, convene, and support networks

Raise public awareness

Provide information


19

•Demographics•Achievement Data•School Conditions

•What Questions Should the board ask?

•Where Do We Go FromHere?

•We Don’t Need Another Task Force or Committee

• Need a networkof Districts

•Introduced Initiative•Established a Common Understanding ofAchievement Gap

Conference GroupsYear 1 - 2005

Assess the Field

AEC Workshops Theory of Action

What does the Research Tell us?

20

•Where are the targeted students?

•Identify targeted districts

•Not “best practices”• Systemic reform.•CSBA Effective Governance

•CSBA Effective Governance•What are districts

currently doing? •Group dialogues


Assess the Field What does the Research Tell us?

AEC Workshops

•Effective district-wide practices?

•Effective Boards?

Theory of Action

2121

Research: Systemic Reform 1. Centralized Systemic Reform2. District-wide Focus on Student Achievement and

Closing the Achievement Gap3. Data Driven Decision Making4. Budget Aligned with Strategic Goals5. Curriculum and Instruction Aligned to Standards6. Professional Development Aligned with Strategic

Goals7. Strong Instructional Leadership at School Sites8. Accountability Strengthened Through Teamwork9. Continuous Commitment to Improve


22

Target Select Districts

Collected racial and ethnic enrollment data for all districts.

Identified critical mass using “cut point” criteria.

Created “Targeted Districts”


23

Juvenile Hall/Court School Students

24

Asian Pacific Islander Students

25

African American/Black Students

26

American Indian Students

27

Hispanic students

28

•Is Closing the Achievement gap THE priority?

•Are districts already working together?

•First Year •Collect Annual Data•Partnerships work

•Survey Results•Examples of Partnerships•Baseline Data•First Annual Report



Theory of ActionAEC Workshops

•Establish Baseline Data•Survey Says Districts are

working on closing achievement gap

29

Survey – July 2007

In July – Sent survey to superintendent of every member district

Received 132 responses, roughly 10% response rate

Surveyed districts have similar demographics compared to the rest of the state

30

Survey Respondents vs. CA Districts

7 4 . 3 %

1 2 . 3 %

9 . 7 %3 . 0 %0 . 7 %

6 5 . 2 %

1 8 . 9 %

1 2 . 9 %

3 . 0 %0 . 0 %

0 %

1 0 %

2 0 %

3 0 %

4 0 %

5 0 %

6 0 %

7 0 %

8 0 %

9 0 %

1 0 0 %

A l l D i s t r i c t s S u r v e y e d P o p u l a t i o n

0 - 5 , 0 0 0 5 , 0 0 1 - 1 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 1 - 2 5 , 0 0 02 5 , 0 0 1 - 5 0 , 0 0 0 5 0 , 0 0 1 a n d O v e r

District Size -- ADA

31

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

ESD USD COE HSD

44.5%

28.7%

5.3% 7.5%

36.4%

31.1%

12.9% 12.9%

All Districts Surveyed Population

District Type


32

Total Percentage of Minority Students

20.3%

23.4%

17.3%

14.5%

17.2%

15.2%

26.5%

23.5%

15.9%

18.2%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


0-20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 80-100%


33

Targeted Districts – “Significant” Populations

0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%80.0%90.0%

100.0%

Hispanic American Indian

Black API

33.2%

19.6% 13.3% 13.5%

36.4%

29.5% 18.2%14.4%



34

Percentage of Students Who Receive Free and Reduced Price Lunch

21.0%

19.6%

23.5%

18.9%

9.6%

22.7%

21.2%

25.4%

20.4%

10.3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


0-20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 80-100%


35

Closing the achievement gap among subgroups of students is an officially stated goal or priority for our district/county office of education.

Yes

No

Don’t Know

Survey – Question 1

36

Survey Results Question 1

D o n ' t K n o w

0 %

N o1 5 %

N o A n s w e r2 %

Y e s8 3 %

Closing the Achievement Gap is a Stated Priority in the District

37

The goal or priority to close the achievement gap is stated in the following official documents of our district/county office of education (check all that apply).


38

Our vision Our mission Our strategic plan Strategic Goals Local school plansThe superintendent's evaluation The board's evaluation Don't Know None Other (please explain in "Comment" box below)


39

Closing the Achievement Gap is a Priority Stated in the…

66.7% 62.1%

37.1% 35.6%

25.0%

10.6%3.8%

0.0% 0.0% 0.0%0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

Local

School

P l ans

St r ategi c

Goal s

St r ategi c

P l an

M i ssi on V i si on None Other Boar d's

Eval

Supts Eval Don't

Know

Survey ResultsQuestion 2

40

Closing the achievement gap has been an official district/county office of education goal or priority for the last:

1-4 years5-8 Years9-12 years13 or more yearsDon’t KnowNone


41


Number of Years the District has been working on “Closing the Achievement Gap”

43.2%

31.1%

6.1% 2.3%

10.6% 6.8%

0.0%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

1-4 years 5-8 years 9-12years

13 ormoreyears

None NoAnswer

Don'tknow

42

We have strategies, programs, or interventions that are specifically developed and targeted to improve the academic achievement of these groups of students (check all that apply):


43

American IndianAsian Pacific IslanderBlack/African AmericanHispanic/LatinoEnglish LearnerImmigrantLow Socio Economic StatusSpecial EducationCommunity Day/Court SchoolsNoneDon't KnowOther


44


Programs Focusing on Specific Students

80.3%75.8% 73.5%

60.6%

25.8%

22.7% 22.0% 14.4%

9.8% 5.3%

2.3% 0.0%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

EL SE Low SES His Black/ AA Cour t I mm AI API Ot her Non e Don 't Kn ow

45

Our schools/districts/county offices of education are working in partnership or collaborating with the following organizations to improve student achievement (check all that apply):


46

Alliance for Regional Collaboration to Heighten Educational Success (ARCHES) California Academic Partnership Program (CAPP)Cal-PassCalifornia Collaborative on District ReformCalifornia Department of Education


47

Other school districts or COEsColleges and universitiesLocal governments (city, county, etc)Community, civic, and/or business based organizationsNon-profit organizations (United Way, YMCA, etc) Philanthropic organizations/foundations


48

Consulting or technical assistance organizations (SpringBoard Schools, WestEd, Leap Frog, etc) NoneDon't Know Other (Please explain in "Comment" box below)


49


Collaboration with …71.2%

51.5%

44.7% 43.2%

30.3%24.2%

22.0%

15.9%6.8%

8.3%

1.5% 0.0%

4.5%

0.0%

73.5%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

Dis/ COEHigher Ed CDE Con sult in g

Fir ms

Non

Pr of it

Foun dat ion s Local

Gov

CAL

Pass

ARCHES CAPP CA

Collabor at ive

Busin ess Non e Don 't Kn ow Ot her

50

Our local board of education is involved in the district or county partnerships by (check all that apply):


51

Approving the engagement or formation of the partnerships

Serving on a related committee of the partnerships

Attending the meetings of the partnerships


52

Receiving regular reports of the partnerships

They are not involved

Don't know

Other (Please explain in "Comment" box below)


53


Board Involvement in Collaboration

5 2 .3 % 5 0 .0 %

2 3 .5 % 2 5 .8 % 2 1.2 %

2 .3 %0 .0 %

0 .0 %

10 .0 %

2 0 .0 %

3 0 .0 %

4 0 .0 %

5 0 .0 %

6 0 .0 %

A p p r o v a l R e c e i v i n gR e p o r t s

C o m m i t t e e A t t e n dM e e t i n g s

N o tI n v o l v e d

O t h e r D o n ' t k n o w

54

We have a district or countywide data system that can disaggregate student data by (Check all that apply):


55

English language fluencyLearning disability (per special education criteria)Race and ethnicitySocioeconomic levelsGenderEnrollment history (to track transience


56

Enrollment history (to track transienceSchoolGrade levelTeacher NoneDon't knowOther (Please explain in "Comment" box below)


57


Data Disaggregation8 7 . 9 % 8 7 . 1% 8 6 . 4 % 8 3 . 3 % 8 2 . 6 % 7 8 . 0 %

7 1 . 2 %

5 9 . 1%

8 . 3 %5 . 3 % 3 . 8 %

0 . 0 %0 . 0 %

1 0 . 0 %

2 0 . 0 %

3 0 . 0 %

4 0 . 0 %

5 0 . 0 %

6 0 . 0 %

7 0 . 0 %

8 0 . 0 %

9 0 . 0 %

E L F lu e n c y G r a d e le v e l S c h o o l S E S R a c e / E t h T e a c h e r L e a r n in g

D is a b ilit y

E n r o l

H is t

G e n d e r N o n e O t h e r D o n 't k n o w

58


We have a district or countywide data system that can collect individual student academic achievement data.

Yes

No

Don’t Know

59


N o , 6 . 8 %

N o A n s w e r ,

4 . 5 %D o n ' t

K n o w , 0 . 0 %

Y e s , 8 8 . 6 %

Student Achievement Data

60


We have a district or countywide longitudinal data system that can track individual student academic achievement data from year to year.

Yes

No

Don’t Know

61


Y e s , 7 4 . 2 %

N o , 1 7 . 4 %

D o n ' t K n o w , 0 . 0 %

N o A n s w e r , 8 . 3 %

Longitudinal Student Achievement Data

62

Survey Results

8 3 . 3 %

1 5 . 2 %

1 . 5 %

8 8 . 6 %

6 . 8 %

4 . 5 %

7 4 . 2 %

1 7 . 4 %

8 . 3 %

0 %

1 0 %

2 0 %

3 0 %

4 0 %

5 0 %

6 0 %

7 0 %

8 0 %

9 0 %

1 0 0 %

C l o s i n g t h eA c h i e v e m e n t G a pi s a S t a t e d P r i o r i t y

D i s a g r e g a t e dS t u d e n t D a t a

L o n g i t u d i n a l D a t aS y s t e m

Y e s N o N o A n s w e r

Priorities vs. Data Collected

63

•Identify partnerships.•Create and connect

with statewide networks

•How Should School Boards Be Involved?

•How do Collaboratives Connect with Each Other?

•Connect districts to districts;

•Share what works; •maintain momentum

at the local level.

•Second Annual Report•Specific workshops focused

on AI, API, Black, Hispanic, and Comm/Court Schools



AEC Workshops Theory of Action

Documents

Let’s Collaborate to Close the Academic Achievement Gap