Year Three Evaluation Report: SCUSD Small Learning Communities Grant

Prepared by:

Theresa Westover and Joanne Bookmyer

September 10, 2010

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 1 Executive Summary: Year 3 SCUSD SLC Evaluation Report

In July 2008, a U.S. Department of Education Cohort 8 Smaller Learning Communities (SLC) grant was awarded to Sacramento City Unified School District (SCUSD). The initial SLC grant was awarded for a three-year period but has been granted a one, possibly two-year extension, meaning that the funding cycle will end in 2012 or 2013.

The UC Davis School of Education’s Center for Community School Programs (CCSP), in the role of external evaluator, is charged with capturing formative feedback that might contribute to a better understanding of the program’s impact on the participating school sites and the students they serve, as well as contribute to program improvements. In years 4 and 5, the Center for Education and Evaluation Services (CEES), another division within the School of Education’s CRESS Center will serve as external evaluator. CEES has been responsible for data analysis the past three years and performed the statistical analyses presented in this report. The district itself is accountable to the funder for providing summative outcomes data.

This, the Third Annual Report summarizes external evaluation activities for the 2010/11. The evaluators administered and analyzed a teacher survey that explored the extent to which the project is meeting its goal of:

 Providing professional development for teachers in a way that increases their content knowledge while developing their capacity to implement high quality instructional strategies.

A significant portion of the grant funding is allocated for professional development activities provided by five of the Region 8 California Subject Matter Projects (CSPM): Area 3 Writing Project, Sacramento Area Science Project, UC Davis Math Project, California Reading and Literature Project, and The History Project. During Year Three each of the Projects continued to provide professional development to SCUSD teachers in each of the core subject areas, defined as Mathematics, Science, English, and Social Sciences (The History Project and the California Reading and Literature Project worked collaboratively with Social Sciences teachers). While encouraged to participate (a stipend and/or credit was provided) teachers’ participation was optional and varied across school sites and across subject areas. During the summer (2011) each of the CSMPs offered a Summer Institute. Again, participation in the Institutes was encouraged but optional and levels of participation varied across subject areas and school sites.

Other grant supported activities and strategies are linked to Academic Support (e.g., common planning time, training and implementation of academic conferencing, teacher quarterly benchmark reviews, and data utilization to improve ELA, math and science outcomes) and to Advisement/Counseling (e.g., a College Career Initiative, counselor training, development and initiation of a school-wide transcript evaluation service). The external evaluation did not evaluate any of the other grant components mentioned above.

All results included in this report should be considered as descriptive and suggestive rather than definitive. Due to the uneven distribution of survey respondents’ subjects taught across schools, it is

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 2 difficult to attribute any patterns in survey responses to either school location or subject taught. Similarly, the wide range in the number of respondents per school precludes drawing any firm conclusions about how survey responses may represent true variation among schools since the representativeness of the sample from each school is unknown.

Key Findings:

A total of 328 teachers were invited to participate in the survey and 153 teachers responded for a response rate of 47%.

The majority of teachers (82%) appear to have enjoyed their PD experiences and about two-thirds (66%) felt that the PD had contributed to improved student achievement at their school. Differences among schools and subject areas are not statistically significant and are difficult to interpret from a practical perspective, given the uneven distribution of respondents across schools and subject areas.

85% of responding teachers “strongly agree/agree” that the PD has increased their ability to provide students with regular opportunities to think and reason about key concepts and content in the subject area(s) taught.

85% “strongly agree/agree” that the PD has increased their ability to engage students in learning activities that allow them to deepen their understanding of key concepts and subject matter content.

80% “strongly agree/agree” that the PD has increased their ability to support students with a variety of strategies and tools that scaffold student learning.

71% “strongly agree/agree” that the PD has increased their ability to encourage students to learn from each other.

76% “strongly agree/agree that the PD has increased their ability to provide students with multiple opportunities to demonstrate their understanding of concepts, as well as to practice their skills/competencies.

Respondents were asked to respond to three open-ended questions regarding their (a) suggestions for improving the professional development, (b) the barriers they felt were most significant to student learning at their school, and (c) what they felt would be the most effective strategy to overcome those barriers.

Teachers’ suggestions about professional development were coded into nine categories: (1) subject matter content (e.g. “Keep focus on reading and writing”), (2) pedagogy/instructional strategy (e.g. “More help with differentiated instruction”), (3) changes to the PD approach or focus (e.g. “More site- based PD”), (4) assessment (e.g. “school-wide writing assessments to monitor growth”), (5) technology (e.g. “Demonstrate effective use of technology with follow-up”), (6) student engagement/motivation (e.g.” Ways to motivate students”), (7) special education (e.g. “More PD related to teaching student

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 3 classified as emotionally disturbed”), (8) collaboration (e.g. “More time for inter-disciplinary work with other teachers”), and (9) general negative comments (e.g. “Not that you would listen to”).

Teachers’ responses to the “what is the biggest barrier” question were similarly categorized into nine areas: (1) student behavior, attendance, and accountability, (2) student skills, knowledge, and language, (3) students’ families and community, (4) student engagement and motivation, (5) school or district administration, (6) school or district policies such as class size and/or emphasis on standardized test scores, (7) instructional practices and/or lack of teacher skill or motivation, (8) lack of resources or technology, and (9) collaboration.

It is notable that student engagement and motivation appear to be considered the leading barrier to student learning (25% of all barriers identified). It is also interesting that nearly half of the barriers (47%) center on student characteristics largely outside the control of the teachers (e.g. behavior, attendance, skills, language, families, and/or poverty).

Teachers’ open-ended responses to the “most effective strategy for improving student learning” question were summarized into 10 categories: (1) better/more parental accountability or involvement, (2) improve student discipline/accountability, (3) improve student engagement/relevance, (4) student supports such as tutoring or individualized attention, (5) improve teacher accountability, behavior, or school climate, (6) improve instructional practice, (7) improve relationship/professional learning community, (8) common assessments/pacing guides/focus, (9) change course offerings/scheduling/class size, and (10) improve school or district administration.

Teacher respondents do appear to believe that instructional practices can overcome the barriers to learning – a third of all strategies mentioned focused on improved pedagogy. An additional 14% of the strategies mentioned involved improving the relevance of instructional materials and/ or strategies for improving student motivation. Another 24% of the strategies mentioned also addressed changes under school and teacher control – improving professional learning communities and/or small learning communities and relationships and modifying class structures, schedules, or size

In summary, it appears that the teachers who responded to the survey, the vast majority of whom had attended the subject matter professional development provided by CRESS, found value in their participation. They reported that the professional development did provide them with tools to engage and support their students. While many reported significant barriers to learning in their schools, most also felt that these barriers could be overcome by focused efforts of teachers and administrators.

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 4 SCUSD Cohort 8 Smaller Learning Community Grant: Spring 2011 Teacher Survey

Introduction and distribution of respondents

In the spring of 2011 teachers in five Sacramento City Unified School District (SCUSD) High Schools were invited to complete a web-based survey regarding their participation in professional development over the previous year. A total of 328 teachers were invited to participate in the survey and 153 teachers responded for a response rate of 47%. The majority of responding teachers were from Luther Burbank (30% of all respondents - 50% of the Burbank teachers invited) and J.F. Kennedy (29% of all respondents - 69% of the JFK teachers invited) High Schools (Figure 1). The response rates for both Hiram Johnson and Rosemont were 40%, and McClatchy’s response rate was the lowest at 26%. The uneven distribution of response rates across schools should be kept in mind when examining the following analyses. Most (90%) respondents had participated in professional development (PD) activities during the previous year. Only the 135 who participated in PD are included in most of the analyses in this report.

Figure 1: Number of Respondents by School

Most respondents (84%) teach multiple grades (9-12). A third of the respondents indicated they teach all four grade levels at their school. This varied among the schools with more teachers at McClatchy reporting teaching all four grade levels (58%) and none indicating they only teach in one grade level and more at Kennedy (23%) indicating they teach only one grade (Figure 2). It also varied among the subject areas with more English teachers (35%) reporting teaching only one grade level than was true overall (17%) – although the majority of English teachers (52%) report teaching in two grade levels. More math teachers (74%) reported teaching all four grade levels than was true overall (32%). Most science teachers also report teaching in all four grade levels (42%), while the majority (50%) of history/social science teachers teach in two grade levels (Figure 3).

Figure 2: Number of grade levels taught by teacher by school

Figure 3: Number of grades taught by teacher by subject

Overall, 32% of the respondents teach English, 25% Mathematics, 20% Science, 23% History/Social Studies and 23% “Other.” This was a “check all that apply” question so teachers might teach in more than one subject area. Since most of those in the “other” category also taught in one of the four

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 5 primary subject areas, only a few teachers (5) remained strictly in the “other” category – these teachers are excluded from crosstabulations by subject area. Of these five, three are special education teachers. One teacher indicated teaching both English and History/Social studies – that teacher’s responses are included in both subject areas in crosstabulations because it is unknown which subject matter professional development he or she attended. Subjects taught by school location are displayed in Figure 4. In terms of response rates, 42% of the English teachers invited responded, 40% each of the math and science teachers responded, and 38% of the invited history/social studies teachers responded.

Due to the uneven distribution of subjects taught across schools, it is difficult to attribute any patterns in survey responses to either school location or subject taught. Similarly, the wide range in the number of respondents per school and the varying response rates per school precludes drawing any firm conclusions about how survey responses may represent true variation among schools since the representativeness of the sample from each school is unknown.

Figure 4: Subject taught by school

Professional development source, overall satisfaction, and perceived impact on student achievement

Among the 135 teachers who reported attending a content-specific professional development (PD) during the 2010-11 school year (including summer 2010), 61% reported attending one of the California Subject Matter Projects’(CSMPs) training associated with the SCUSD Cohort SLC grant, 31% reported participating in both a CSMP training and some other PD offering ,and 7% reported only attending “other” PD. The eight respondents who did not participate in a CSMP training were fairly evenly distributed among the subject areas (science has the least at 4% - 1 teacher - and history/social science the most with 10% - 3 teachers). Similarly, there is minor variation among the schools ranging from 12% (N=5) of the Burbank teachers attending “other” PD only to none of the teachers at Rosemont attending any non-CSMP PD.

When asked “Has the professional development you participated in during the 2010-2011 academic year helped you/your school meet its goal of improving students’ academic outcomes?” Most (66%) answered “yes,” 21% answered “don’t know/not sure,” and 4% (N=5) answered “no.” All of those who responded “no” and who also answered the previous question (N=4) had participated in a CSMP training; about 10% of those who were unsure of the impact of their PD on student achievement had participated in a non-CSMP training (Figure 5).

Figure 5: “Has the PD that you participated in this year helped improve student achievement?” by number of respondents participating in each type of professional development.

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 6 For purposes of statistical analyses, the categories of “no” and “don’t know/unsure” were combined into a dichotomous measure when differences among schools and subjects were examined. While there was a range of responses among schools and subject areas, the differences were not statistically significant. Among the schools, Burbank teachers had the highest proportion of “yes” responses (88%) and McClatchy has the lowest (50%). Among the subject areas, science teachers had the highest proportion of “yes” responses (80%), followed closely by English (79.5%), with the lowest proportion (62%) of “yes” responses from history/social science teachers (Figures 6 & 7).

The next survey question asked if teachers “were generally satisfied with the overall quality of the professional development teachers had participated in during 2010-11.” The majority (82%) answered “yes” with 7% answering “no” and 11% making some qualifying comments that we categorized as “somewhat.” Again, as Figures 6 & 7 illustrate, there was some variation among the schools, ranging from 72% of Kennedy teachers responding “yes” to 100% of those at Rosemont, and among subject areas (ranging from 76% of history/social science teachers responding with an unqualified “yes” to 91% of both English and math teachers). Due to the small number of “no” or “other” responses, no statistical analyses of these differences could be conducted. In terms of differences among the types of PD teachers received, as Figure 8 illustrates, there were some differences but, again, they were not large enough to accommodate statistical analysis.

Figure 6: Variation among schools regarding impact of PD on student achievement and teachers’ satisfaction with PD

Figure 7: Variation among teachers’ subject areas in PD satisfaction and perceived impact of PD on student achievement

In summary, the majority of teachers appear to have enjoyed their PD experiences and about two-thirds felt that the PD had contributed to improved student achievement at their school. Responses to these two items were significantly correlated (p=.0001) but the strength of relationship is moderate (r=.34). Differences among schools and subject areas are not statistically significant and are difficult to interpret from a practical perspective, given the uneven distribution of respondents across schools and subject areas.

Figure 8: “Were you generally satisfied with the quality of the PD you participated in?" by the number of respondents participating in each type of PD

Improved abilities attributed to PD participation

Teachers were asked five questions under the general prompt of: “The professional development I participated in during this academic year has increased my ability to:”

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 7 a. Provide my students with regular opportunities to think and reason about key concepts and content in the subject area(s) I teach, 85% “strongly agree/agree.” b. Engage my students in learning activities that allow them to deepen their understanding of key concepts and subject matter content, 85% “strongly agree/agree.” c. Support my students with a variety of strategies and tools that scaffold student learning (such as revisiting guiding concepts, use of different problem-solving strategies, use of models), 80% “strongly agree/agree.” d. Encourage my students to learn from each other (through regular participation in debates, discussion, and problem-solving experiences in pairs, small groups, and as a whole class), 71% “strongly agree/agree.” e. Provide my students with multiple opportunities to demonstrate their understanding of concepts, as well as to practice their skills/competencies,” 76% “strongly agree/agree.

Clearly, most teachers agreed with each of these statements. The item with the largest proportion (40%) of “strongly agree” responses was “Supporting my students with a variety of strategies and tools….” (item c above). The item with the highest proportion (29%) of “disagree/strongly disagree” responses was “Encourage my students to learn from each other…. “(item d above).

There are differences among the schools in the strength of agreement on each item with about two- thirds of the 36 teachers from J.F. Kennedy tending to show the lowest levels of agreement and the 12 teachers from C.K. McClatchy tending to show the highest levels of agreement with each statement (Figure 9). While interesting, it would be inappropriate to read too much meaning into these differences due to the differences among the schools in the numbers of respondents and the subject areas they teach.

Figure 9: Percent "Agree/Strongly Agree" by School on "the PD I participated in increased my ability to:"

Examining these same responses by subject area also suggests some variation among the teachers with the 33 math teachers having the highest levels of agreement with each statement, followed by the 43 English teachers. Science (N=25) and history/social studies (N=29) generally had lower levels of agreement (Figure 10). Again, it is difficult to interpret these differences given the different distributions of subject area teachers among the five schools (see Figure 4) and the range in numbers of respondents per subject.

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 8 Figure 10: Percent "Agree/Strongly Agree" by Subject to "The PD I participated in has increased my ability to:"

Responses to open-ended questions

Teachers were asked three open-ended questions: a. Do you have any suggestions regarding what type(s) of professional development might best support your school’s efforts to improve student achievement? b. In your opinion, what is the biggest barrier to student learning at your school site? c. In your opinion, what is the most effective strategy for improving student learning currently taking place at our school site?

The teachers’ responses were examined and coded into general categories for purposes of analysis . A single response might be coded in more than one category – for example, if a teacher had suggestions touching on both specific instructional strategies and technology (for example: “More training on model based reasoning and more access to classroom technology”) their individual response might be coded as a “1” in two different categories. The comments in each general category were then summed for analyses. In examining the results, the reader should keep in mind that categorizing the comments was highly subjective; results should not be considered conclusive in any way but merely suggestive.

Suggestions for professional development Teachers’ suggestions about professional development were coded into nine categories: (1) subject matter content (e.g. “Keep focus on reading and writing”), (2) pedagogy/instructional strategy (e.g. “More help with differentiated instruction”), (3) changes to the PD approach or focus (e.g. “More site- based PD”), (4) assessment (e.g. “school-wide writing assessments to monitor growth”), (5) technology (e.g. “Demonstrate effective use of technology with follow-up”), (6) student engagement/motivation (e.g.” Ways to motivate students”), (7) special education (e.g. “More PD related to teaching student classified as emotionally disturbed”), (8) collaboration (e.g. “More time for inter-disciplinary work with other teachers”), and (9) general negative comments (e.g. “Not that you would listen to”). Figure 11 illustrates how frequently each topic was mentioned by school and Figure 12 shows the same distribution by teachers’ subject matter area.

Figure 11: Suggestions by Topic and School (N of mentions)

Figure 12: Suggestions by Topic and Content Area (N of mentions)

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 9 Due to the uneven distribution of respondents across content areas and schools, it is difficult to reach any conclusions about differences among schools or subject areas from the qualitative analyses of the open-ended suggestions. Overall, it seems clear that teachers are interested in continuing to receive information about instructional approaches and subject matter content (combined, 33% of all suggestions), followed by interest in student engagement strategies (13%) and collaboration (12%). Verbatim responses are available in Appendix A.

Barriers to student achievement Teachers’ responses to the “what is the biggest barrier” question were similarly coded into nine categories: (1) student behavior, attendance, and accountability (e.g. “Student accountability and lack of discipline”), (2) student skills, knowledge, and language (e.g. “Lack of basic vocabulary, reading, and writing skills”), (3) students’ families and community (e.g. “Their home life”), (4) student engagement and motivation (e.g. “Apathy of the students”), (5) school or district administration (e.g. “Lack of administrative support”), (6) school or district policies such as class size and/or emphasis on standardized test scores (e.g. “A full schedule for English teachers should be considered 4 classes”), (7) instructional practices and/or lack of teacher skill or motivation (e.g. “Teacher excuses for why students can’t/won’t learn”), (8) lack of resources or technology (e.g. “Limited budget and space for ideal science learning environment”), and (9) collaboration (e.g. “The opportunity for common planning time is always used for administrative agency – not to plan with department”). Figures 13 and 14 show the distributions of these comments across both schools and subject areas.

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 10 Figure 13: Barriers by Type and School (N of mentions)

Figure 14: Barriers by Type and Content Area (N of mentions)

Again, the distributions of “barriers” across schools and content areas are difficult to interpret due to the non-representative nature of the teachers’ distributions across both categories. However, it is notable that student engagement and motivation appear to be considered the leading barrier to student learning (25% of all barriers identified). It is also interesting that nearly half of the barriers (47%) center on student characteristics largely outside the control of the teachers (e.g. behavior, attendance, skills, language, families, and/or poverty). When combining these student/family “characteristics” with the student engagement barriers, 71.5% of all barriers mentioned center on students. Only 11% of the barriers mentioned center on instructional practice, under the control of the teachers. However, many teachers no doubt also take responsibility for motivating and engaging their students (as evidenced by 13% of respondents’ suggestions for additional PD above).When student engagement barriers are added to instructional practice barriers then 35% of the barriers identified are potentially under teacher control. Only 17.5% of the barriers mentioned were related to issues that the school or district directly controls – e.g. policies, administration, resources, or collaboration time. Appendix B contains the verbatim responses to this question.

Most effective strategies Teachers’ open-ended responses to the “most effective strategy for improving student learning” question were summarized into 10 categories: (1) better/more parental accountability or involvement (e.g. “Good parents”), (2) improve student discipline/accountability (e.g. “Removing behavior problems from campus”), (3) improve student engagement/relevance (e.g. “Providing meaningful, fun, and engaging activities”), (4) student supports such as tutoring or individualized attention (e.g. “One on one counseling”), (5) improve teacher accountability, behavior, or school climate (e.g. “Caring and consistent staff and teachers”), (6) improve instructional practice (e.g. “There are no strategies being used across the board in a majority of classrooms”), (7) improve relationship/professional learning community (e.g. “The department needs to be much more collaborative”), (8) common assessments/pacing guides/focus (e.g. “Common assessment and pacing guide”), (9) change course offerings/scheduling/class size (e.g. “Courses aimed at providing students the skills for 21st century jobs”), (10) improve school or district administration (e.g. “New administration who will support the students”). Again, the reader should note that many comments could be classified in more than one category and that all classifications were based on the evaluator’s interpretation of the verbatim comment from the survey. Figures 15 and 16 illustrate the frequency of mentions in each category broken out by school location and subject area content.

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 11 Clearly, teacher respondents do believe that instructional practices can overcome the barriers mentioned in the previous section – a third of all strategies mentioned focused on improved pedagogy. An additional 14% of the strategies mentioned involve improving the relevance of instructional materials and/ or strategies for improving student motivation. Another 24% of the strategies mentioned also address changes under school and teacher control – improving professional learning communities and/or small learning communities and relationships and modifying class structures, schedules, or size. These patterns do not vary much across schools or subject areas (Figures 15 & 16). Verbatim responses are available in Appendix C.

Figure 15: Strategies by Topic and School (N of mentions)

Figure 16: Strategies by Topic and Content Area (N of mentions)

Summary

Overall, it appears that the majority of teachers who responded to the survey participated in the CSMP professional development offerings during the 2010-11 school year and found their experiences to be satisfying and beneficial for themselves and their students. The extent to which these respondents are representative of their schools or subject areas is unknown.

In response to five specific questions about the extent to which the professional development (PD) contributed to encouraging and supporting their students in certain ways, the majority (85%) agreed that the PD helped them provide their students with opportunities and activities to think, reason, and deepen their knowledge about key concepts and subject matter content. Most (80%) also felt that the PD provided them with strategies to scaffold student learning. Slightly smaller majorities (71-76%) of respondents agreed that the PD provided them with ways to encourage their students to learn from one another and multiple opportunities to demonstrate their understanding of concepts and content and practice their skills.

Open-ended responses indicated that teachers are interested in continuing to receive professional development around pedagogical practice, subject matter content, and ways to engage their students. Student engagement appeared to be a concern for teachers across both schools and subject areas. Improving instructional practice was the most frequently mentioned strategy to improve student learning, following by improving student engagement.

Given that student engagement is a core element in establishing small learning communities (SLCs), it seems that continuing and perhaps increased emphasis on how to make content accessible, relevant, and engaging for the student population at these five high schools is desirable. District efforts to

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 12 reinforce and support the key elements of small learning communities also address goals for strong student engagement and persistence.

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 13 Appendix A: Verbatim responses to “Do you have any suggestions … ?”

Question 9: Do you have any suggestions regarding what type(s) of professional development might best support your school's efforts to improve student achievement?

More development that is content specific not just skill building.

Data Inquiry and Common Core were beneficial. Keep focusing on reading and writing. Always good stuff

We just are not reaching them. Where we are coming from is not meeting them where they live (in general).

More technology- related staff development. How can we use our student's preoccupation with technology to our advantage?

I find the current program useful; however, I am curious about other programs around the country. More time to work as a department No

I really enjoy the CSMP lessons. I hope we continue this collaboration. Juliet, our Davis presenter, is fantastic at modeling how we present the lessons to our students. We have grown closer as a department, too. I think that we are focusing too much on the CST tests. I want my students to learn not regurgitation of answers on a test. I found that the seniors didn't know an answer a question this year that would have been on the junior CST. They learn for the test and forget it.

One that teaches students how to be students.

After participating in UCDMP seminars and CSUSMP Writing essays how to motivate students

More integration of observation into professional development.

More training using model based reasoning.

It would be nice to have time to plan inter disciplinary work with the other teachers

I suggest greater emphasis on Web 2.0 and use of technology in teacher instruction and lesson planning. not that you would actually listen to

What we are doing works for ELA but we need to schedule and compensate professional development so that we get higher participation in these events. We have about 70% but we need as close to 100% as possible.

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 14 Joint PD with the English and Social Science Departments geared toward common writing expectations and rubrics and developing academic language.

Larger emphasis on strategies and improving test scores...the reality we face

Allow dept. to pick PD for their learning level of student None

For next year, I want help with working with larger classes of underprepared 9th grade students. The "fidget factor" is already a major distractor and will only get to be more of one with larger classes.

The Professional Development offered is of tremendous quality, there is just no time to fully develop and implement the strategies learned.

More scaffolding techniques for basic and below basic students. More activity-based lessons.

Teachers work together to create a lesson plan

much, much smaller chunks we only really did one thing because it was so big Need more variety.

Personally, I need the professional development to vary by subject more within the mathematics discipline. It mainly focuses on Algebra, which I do not teach. I liked the five-day training I underwent last summer as well as the meetings throughout the year.

How to redirect unmotivated students early enough so they won't flunk out.

Use of cross-curricular projects for the enhancement of the educational experience. stop teacher orientated programs and start working on student orientated programs

1)How do we motivate students to complete classwork and homework? 2)How can we instill early one that attendance and participation vastly increase that chances of learning and passing classes? Professional development leasing to the revision of the CAPA would be of great benefit.

We need seminars that include more efficient ways to teach writing and assess it in a meaningful manner but more efficiently. Assessing writing can be tremendously labor intensive--yet writing is the area of literacy that most needs improvement for college and beyond. Have none at all

As my site has acquired Lcd and document readers for all dept. membersI would like to see continued support in that area. DaFour Technology integration; Inquiry Science

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 15 The type of professional development might best support the school's effort to improve student achievement is to focus on the content/subject matter not just assessment.

More help on lesson studies and differentiated instruction

The Cohort 8/CSMP PD and NSTA conference were wonderful. Other school-site PD was either non-existant or a waste of time.

I would appreciate having more PD relating to teacing students classified as Emotionally Disturbed. As well, I would like classes that focus on teaching academics to high school aged students who are classifed as emotionally disturbed. Peer observations

It will be necessary to demonstrate effective use of technology with followup. Specific ideas need to be given to teachers who are reluctant to expand their comfort zone. Training for teaching autistic children.

Continued work/development with Pebble Creek. I also REALLY think the Special Education Teachers need/deserve GREATER SUPPORT.

speaker from special fields, field trips

If we are going to have to do proffesional development, it should be specific example. If you are teaching the Invasion of Normandy Have people come in and give you a lesson, and take you through it step by step

Culturally Relevant Curriculum that touches on students Racial Ethnic Identity. Maybe more training on developing writing skills across the curriculum. More site-based professional development Ways to motivate students and keep engagement up.

I think that the History project meetings that included content specific lesson plans that engaged students while requiring critical thinking were extremely useful. The Summer research institutes were great also. I think this would be helpful to focus on actual teaching strategies that could be used across the content (analysis skills, lessons, worksheets) Primary sources

I would like to see a math consultant that we meet with regularly to structure our meetings. Continued support for classroom and school-wide writing assessments to monitor growth strategies for content areas No.

Continue in subject specific topics and emphasize technology that is usedful to us now. Show ways to manage many students and check for understanding. More work with Model Based Reasoning. More A3WP stuff would be cool. need more professional development opportunities that are content and classroom specific. Most of our PD is meeting time, not development time

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 16 No.

Continuing to provide support with the teaching of writing would be extremely helpful; adding reading, and perhpas even speaking and listening, would round out the support of teaching English skills. Strategies for ELs and Special needs students. I would like see more scientists and college professors involved, providing expertise on a higher level.

Trainings on differentiated instruction and conceptual understanding in mathematics are usually the best, and trainings that have participants work collaboratively and share lesson plans are also helpful.

Recommend identify content standard weaknesses and focus on these

I must admit I got more out of the CSUS Math Project seminars than I have from the UCDMP seminars. I like the idea of learning new ways to approach concepts, rather than fiddling with technology which I felt this year's UCDMP focused to much on. I don't. Sorry i'm not sure No Special Education and/ diverse learning styles and how to address them in a practical way. Differentiation Strategies Differentiated learning. How to teach some kids their addition, subtractions, multiplication & division while having others perform the algebraic calculations expected by 9th grade.

I would like to explore inquiry-based lessons and planning as it takes a lot of preparation to execute well.

Lessons that provide social studies material in a problem based learnng structure. Alternate forms of assesment Thematic lesson planning Use of technology in lesson planning Not at this time.

Video biographies - how to use technology in the lower grades to engage them in high school and life. More is needed on ways to engage struggling students in successful structured, formal writing. Also, ways to teach students the fundamentals of research and MLA expectations.

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 17 Appendix B: Verbatim responses to “What is the biggest barrier to student learning….”

Question 10: In your opinion, what is the biggest barrier to student learning at your school site? Attendance and basic skills.

Student accountability and lack of discipline. Administrators don't want to enforce rules because they have to suspend students which costs the school money in the long run. This lack of discipline allows students to misbehave and be disrespectful without consequences and forms the biggest barrier to their own learning. Malaise and ennui on the part of students. Motivation from the student body in general. Inconsistency in instruction specifically

Generational gaps. We do not understand our students, and they do not understand us (in general).

old techniques and old ways of thinking as well as an unwillingness to learn and implement new strategies amongst teaching staff.

1. Lack of basic vocabulary, reading, and writing skills. 2. Lack of interest in learning 3. Disruptive and conflicting administrative mandates. Administration student motivation and lack of supplies Lack of motivation among students and home/parental support.

The biggest barrier to student learning is student attendance. They cannot learn if they miss school.

Attitude, just get the "D" and move on. I have had other barriers in the past but this years sophomores this seems to be the problem. Apathy of the students. Not offering an alternative to Algebra One. A lack of preparation and support at home.

By failing to use the textbook at all, we abandon homework, and potential family tutorial support. In-Class packets do not adequately replace out of class reading and homework.

Motivation, inability to see value in education that will guarantee a profession in the future not having the skills they need to be successful in high school. Low skills/motivation.

Teachers trying to teach every standard vs. teaching select standards so that students actually know them

Low acheiving students losing the ability to reason and problem solve because they are never asked to do so Attendance.

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 18 Student and teacher motivation. student buy in of what we teach is going to be useful to them in the future lack of student skills in language arts, and problem solving. Students are too lazy to work at home for homework or study for tests. There is no opportunity for collaboration between special ed and general ed. This year? An administration that is contemptous of the students.

Early intervention. I believe middle school students need more support to prepare for high school. Poverty

Limited knowledge of current events or prior knowledge of local, national, and international news. lack of student accountability

Lack of order(classroom management issues--disruptive students impeding their own learning and that of the rest of the class).

Some students need to be more motivated to complete all assignments. Resources! An administration that is unsupportive of Small Learning Communities and does not involve staff in the decision making process.

Language and ethnic values The lack of Admin support with teacher classroom procedures. Change of Admin wanting to establish their own agendas.

Behavioral/emotional disfunctions of underprepared and disadvantaged students.

The administration's lack of follow through on programs and decisions, lack of professionalism on the part of administrators and teachers and the inability to recognize that we, as adults, can and should do a better job and be held accountable when we do not.

Bad work ethic. WE have good attendance but in the non-advanced classes, we have too many non-workers. Collaberation among the teachers in our department. Access to computers and lab materials american culture lack of a Budget, and good teachers being laid off, large class size Their attitude towards learning Students' attitude of indifference to their own education. Drive Lack of intrinsic motivation for students. Lack of work ethic for some students. Too many students are unmotivated to learn.

The stress of the CASHEE

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 19 Student motivation and engagement. Support of administration for discipline in the classroom environment. lack of student motivation

1) Poor attendance 2)Lack of motivation/willingness of students to do homework. 3)Limited budget and space for ideal science learning environement (labs!!!)

The biggest barrier to learning at my school site is that some of the cultures serviced by the school do not buy into advanced education, particularly for girls. This problem will need to be addressed, beginning in kindergarten and continuing through high school.

A full schedule for English teachers should be considered 4 classes--just as it is in many districts in the Northeastern United States. Also, they should have either one or two preps of these four classes so that writing composition in high school can be taught in a meaningful way. Administrators rarely consider this when planning the master schedule. Students, of course, would most benefit. Parent non-involvement with student attitudes and behaviour

Students apathy is one. Since so many students have a "is this going to be on the test" orientation one change would be attach CST results to their grades. Another barrier is our delivery on the subject matter. In this high tech age stand and deliver alone is not effective.

lack of student motivation/goals/parental involvement

Our student culture is not up to the high school grade level, and we spend years teaching students how to behave. This type of respect for the classroom has to start and reinforced positively at home. peer pressure

Prevailing cultural attitudes regarding the value of education.

The biggest barrier to student learning at my school site is lack of parent involvement.

Family Issues (Abuse, neglect, lack of motivation, lack of educational background or language skills, lack of parent participation and support of the school/athletics/clubs, different views on behavior and discipline) and Cell phones

Motivation of students and poor differentiation Lack of administrative support. Not enough teacher education through professional development. Troubled family lives A student climate of little effort for a grade. Students do not find math relevant to their lives. Illiteracy in the home low level of reading comprehension, bad study habit / work ethics, wide gap in the mix the parents

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 20 Relevancy of content. Their home life. Lack of prior knowledge and economic status Poverty. Low-expectations. Too much teaching to the test Language. poverty, teacher excuses for why students can't/won't learn home environment, language acquisition Low Socio-economic status of students' families. Large classes. Not enough time. Departments are scattered all over the school instead of where we can confer regularly. Not at grade level. The lowest level of Math students could take is Algebra 1. But we've quite a few students who should be taking pre-Algebra instead.

lack of responsibility by some students in regards to attendance, being punctual, prepared with materials, completing assignments, being respectful to staff and other students

Poor language skills. It's less onerous a task to read a text or do research if you read well. Attendance issues. not doing homework, lack of parent involvement, poor attendance Motivation. Apathy. Second biggest, attendance. Third, behavior (distraction). attendance, large class size. Lack of background knowledge to scaffold from. Low vocabulary skills.

Teachers do not come to the classroom prepared to teach and engage students. Poor campus morale

I think people make excuses for barriers (and make up invisible barriers) that stifle student learning, when really we just need to know how to reach our student population.

Issues within the community that are outside of LBHS' control.

Students don't seem to appreciate the importance of education on their future. A lack of preparation and support at home. The opportunity for common planning time is always used for administrative agenda - not to plan with department. being able to motivate students to try attendance, student's lack of organization less motivation in doing homework Resistance to change

Students learn well in school but do not practice skills independently. Schools should provide study hall.

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 21 The students don't believe that they can learn. In the science department we lack quality technology (computers) and only have very basic experimental equipment. Teachers who don't have the tools and/or the patience to teach the hard-to-reach To much talk...not enough doing at these workshops.

I really don't know the answer to this. Perhaps comparmentalizing...that students don't see, mostly aren't prompted to see the whole education process and how all subjects interelate.

Teachers not doing a good enough job of making their classes worth attending. Kids' self-perception re: learning and capabilities. Juvenile attitudes re: the value of enrichment for its own sake.

attendance

Lack of student motivation to pursue learning for its intrinsic value. "How many points is it worth?" is the most frequently asked question. How can we tap curiosity and a desire to learn as a way to know something new?

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 22 Appendix C. Verbatim responses to “What is the most effective strategy for improving student learning…….”

Question 11: In your opinion, what is the most effective strategy for improving student learning currently taking place at your school site?

Increasing student skills, which takes times. I'm glad we focus on skills however, I also believe we can include prof development that teaches us how to teach our content better as well. You know, a really killer lesson plan on WWI Alliances, Holocaust, etc. Holding students accountable for their work.

Cohort 8 professional development. Data inquiry, somewhat. Haven't really touched motivation Relationship building. hands-on project based activities Consistent use of a comprehensive structure that helps build deficient skills while moving students forward. increasing motivation and relevance to the real world.

Extracurricular activities such as sports/law/ROTC/etc. keep students motivated to work.

Common assessment and pacing guide. However, we were not given enough time to come up with and put together. Some huors should be set aside for this.

For immediate results, the Thompson Magic Lens grammar activities work for all students. it's fun and interactive and unlike the traditional worksheet approach. I think that we have focused too much on the test but I also think that it has worked. I just don't think that it is in the interest of the students. Emphasis on reading Block Algebra One course Cooperation amongst teachers, sharing of great ideas, & peer observations. small class size Pebble Creek curriculum's emphasis on reading and writing Study teams Common planning, common assessments, standard procedures, high expectations.

If the student raises his scores on the CST, then we will change his grade in his present course. Giving students time to practice and demonstrate their skills using white boards, labs, and other hands on activities. Peer tutoring, group works. strong support from administration New administration who will support the students. Students need knowledge about the importance education. Provide greater access to periodicals and technology

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 23 smaller class sizes Magic Lens grammar, and guided text annotation (explicit instruction in text analysis).

1. Common exams and quizzes with immediate feedback to students is very helpful. 2. Connecting with students to show them you care about them. Small Learning Communities

Social Science teachers focusing on academic vocabulary and teaching common writing strategies. Providing multiple strategies to teach each concept There is none Cornell Note-taking system

Better communication between members of each department which has resulted in more common lessons and development of common assesments. Common pacing. There are no strategies being used across the board in a majority of classrooms. Many of the SS teachers use the literacy strategies and CST testing strategies. Tutoring in a one or two to one setting has been very helpful.

Showing students that we (the teachers) care for their well-being and success. Teach students in different modalities good parents

Students need a step by step career plan (blue print) that they can look at each day, each week and each month, so that they can make adjustments and changes the way engineers do as new challenges come up.

common planning time among content area teachers One on one counseling and calls home Regular tutoring being offered. Firm, consistent teacher modeling. Removing behavior problems from campus. More leadership development among the students to bring them in as serious collaborators in high school success dynamics Create meaningful instruction that will encourage students to engage in critical analysis and synthesis for core curriculae. one to one council Providing meaningful, fun, and engaging activities that are provided by energetic and hard working teachers!

The SLC model has made a significant change in both the school climate and the API

We have the ability to offer support classes during period 7 or 0 period due to the grant. This has clearly affected the Graduation rate statistic at C.K. McClatchy High School because the 12th grade teachers have been able to remediate those students not achieving.

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 24 There are no strategies which we could implement at our school site which would be more effective than to get parents off their collective ****** and get their students motivated to get with the program

1. See above about CST tests. 2. Incorporate technology into our classrooms. Our site has just acquired LCD projectors, document readers and video cameras for each department member. Now we need training time. Hopefully staff will be motivated to attend.

courses aimed at providing students the skills for 21st century jobs, more back-up from admin with discipline problems, william DaFour's program

Well defined lesson plans that organize a lesson with clear learning objectives and the structure needed to reach those objectives. Strategies for getting *all* students to actively process the lesson, i.e. whole-class processing.

Healthy Start and Student Outreach Workers...they are amazing and really help the students focus on their goals, which usually shows in the classroom. using technology for error analysis Teachers working together with a core group of students.

Before this school year began, our district had professional development seminars that were held all over the district. Teachers were able to go to any of these meetings and learn new ways to teach their students. This year, the unions switched it all up and we have to do our PD time on our campuses. Quite frankly, my school did not offer appropriate professional development that related to my teaching environment. It was lacking in all areas. Smaller classes The introduction of school-wide technology. Thsi would help if all teachers would use the tech. Literacy development

Make content and activities relevant to student live. In addition, provide students with opportunities to build their social and cultural capital.

Understanding our students and developing curriculum that supports their needs. We also spend a lot of time developing community ties with family and school.

small learning communities and active participation Whole class engagement strategies.

Social Science Department needs to be much more collaborative. The department has dwindled to 5 people attending the meetings. Perhaps they could use some collaborative lessons directed at them as teachers. teacher Involvement outside of the classroom.

Continued development that focuses on student growth in the areas of literacy and writing SLC's, early intervention classes in the "Learning Center", Double blocks of English and Algebra freshmen year A culture that values student engagement.

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 25 Using common curriculum and students having multiple exposures to content and multiple uses of skills. class size reduction. the whole staff: teaching, mentoring and guiding the students. A great staff!

I believe it is the use of model based reasoning to teach science.

Specialized curriculum developed with our students' needs in mind. Effective teaching Engaging students using socially/culturally relevant activities and materials and developing strong relationships with students. Focus on whole class engagement, student driven learning & activities, Pebble creek materials.

Working on vocabulary skills. Project based learning activities where students are engaged Develop a mutually trusting and respectful team effort amongst students, staff, and administration

Collaborative lesson-planning among teachers, and collaborative lessons that engage students with each other and with the teacher

We have improved access to technology, and have included the use of online instruction programs (Rosetta Stone and AVENTA) to help with students who struggle in traditional learning environments. Making learning relevant and fun. Figuring out how to engage students in the material in ways that are new and exciting to them. Allowing time for academic teacher-teacher collaboration, modification of assignments, proposing new ideas/goals for the year. I can't pinpoint one single strategy. i'm not sure technology-assisted lessons/labs Whole staff after school tutoring program

Focusing on courses of study and pacing guides that pare down the curriculum to its most essential components. teaching students to think about a problem in an open ended way. Caring and consistent staff and teachers. The administration has done a good job of creating positive motivation within the staff, unfortunately the district seems intent on tearing it down. accountability (students and teachers) Movement away from standardized testing as the end all. Upgrading the technology The attempt to use data to improve instruction for individual student weaknesses. Frequent writing practice.

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 26 Model, model, model: the way one writes, interacts, and thinks (out loud) Magic Lens grammar

There isn't one in place. Teachers need more supported time to meet with each other in subject area groupings and work on vertical teaming in all subject areas. Teachers need to know what students need to know--not just in the language of standards--as they move through each grade level within a given subject.

SLC teacher survey; Spring 2011 Page 27