DOCUMENT RESUME ED 339 095 EA 023 465 AUTHOR Christner, Catherine; And Others TITLE Priority Schools: The FoUrth Year. Evaluation Findings, 1990-91. INSTITUTION Austin Independent School District, Tex. Office of Research and Evaluation. REPORT NO AISD-Pub-No-90.04 PUB DATE 91 NOTE 180p.; Print in some of the attachments may not reproduce adequately in paper copy. PUB TYPE Reports - Evaluative/Feasibility (142) -- Statistical Data (110) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC08 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Apademic Achievement; *Disadvantaged Schools; Ecbnomically Disadvantaged; *Educational Improvement; Elementary Secondary Education; *Neighborhood Schools; *Outcomes of Education; Program Evaluation; School Statistics; Urban Schools IDENTIFIERS *Austin Independent School District TX ABSTRACT In 1986-87, the school board of the Austin Independent School District approved an assignment plan that returned most elementary students to their neighborhood schools and created 16 predominantly minority schools with many students from low-income families. To assure that these students received a quality education, a 5-year Plan for Educational Excellence was implemented. The 4th-year results of the plan in each of the schools is summarized in this report. Methodology involved analysis of reports and student test scores and surveys of principals, staff, and parents. Findings indicate that the district provided full-day prekindergarten classes, innovative funds, and extra support staff, and lowered thie pupil/teacher ratio. Test scores showed improvement in priority school students' academic achievement. Other indicators of success included increased teacher attendance, favorable parent and staff attitudes, increased parent and community involvement, and implementation of a multicultural education program. Fifty-two figures are included. Attachments include a school climate/effectiveness survey, school standards reports, priority schools summaries, recommendations for student placement, discipline incidents, Adopt-A-School data, and parent survey results. A one-page executive summary precedes the text.(10 references) (LMI) *w*****A*?V************************************************************* Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the bes.,: that can be made from the original document. ***************************************************x***A*************** Priority Schools: laThe Fourth Year ca FECTIVE SCHOOL STANDARDS REPORT AUSTIN INDIPRIDINT SCN001 DISTRICT 1990-91 011ARTMINT Of MUMMY INPOSMATION MONTY SCHOOL SUMMARY OFFICI Of ROSIASCH AND IVALUMION 1 A Studont &or emit of timulates 96. 4EMPAIrrtur'irT77:"'"YEE 2 Aver number of Washer sbeeneue 4.3 5 or Power Soya YES NO rES 3 TAAS. Porcent Masterv MathNewlin.Writing ENGLISH 99% or 'greater NO NO NO ALL(N1595) 39% 63% 6% Sore(N.721) 60% 311% 99% Omerenos TS or Girls(Ns 1174) SO% 67% 72% loos by: Low Incomo(N.1312) ST% 62% 63% Sex rES NO NO Non-Low income(N. 263) 67% 70% 72% Encore NO NO NO Black(No 6961 34% 60% 61% Hispanic(N. 6611 61% 64% 69% Ethnicity NO NO NO Other(N0 75% 76% 74% MathNeedingWitting SPANISH ALL(N. 120) 90% 61% 66% ES% or groator YES rES NO Boys (018 66) 119% 79% 63% Girls(N. 32) 92% 113% 69% Low Income(N. 115 ) 91% 61% 66% Non-Low Income Ot forma, 711 or (tio 3) -% - % % less by: Sob YEs YES Imam 4.ITU Composite Achievement Percent in bottom quartile 37% roar then 10% Mahan Percentile:ALL (N. 4464) 36 SO or orester Boys (N. 2162) 34 Girls Omorenoe711iles (N. 2302) 39 or loss by: LOw Income (N. 3766) 33 Non-Low Income (N.676) 46 Sox Black (N. 1667) 34 Inca= Hispanic (N. 2606) 36 th thnicit 5.Parent Evaluation My child's school is in efrective (excellent) school. Don't Strongly Strongly Know/Not 79%or more Aron Agra, Apr,* Neutral Disagree Disagree Aoplieable or Strongly Agree YES yEs YES YES 43% At% U E. D(PARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and improvement -PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS IS TIIIS SCHOOL AN EDUCATIONAL lIESOJRCES INFORMATION MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY CENTER IERIC) tfor<h7sdocument nes been reproduced as tecetved bom the person or orgenization 0.# ortutnatinu tt r t' Minor Change% nave been made to improve reproduction Quality Points ol view Or Opinions stated in thiSdOCu 0011$ THIS SCHOOL I men) rto nOt mooing/y.1y represent official TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES OE RI position or policy Ur THIS SCHOOL AN k INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)." censaai BEST COPY AVAILABLE 90.04 '" X.s.,, ..; ; ,....:: ...,,,::,.:..ss ;.1.1,4:. ,:. ns\ ''',.-k,'.. *S..`.i0 ,W7^`*''''''Ez'. 054' t!,,4,.-,?,,:t 5 ...t. ..., 4. ::'-,,..;'-:;tzt.x.t b , I t '' ' - I ' . i ) .:,t.:::::.'',::;ttt;1.;, \'' ,"T'';...,.:, :, , :, , On* . 'I )i , Z.:gU.Z,k:.`,.WWitS.':.< \ 1,01IMUs: tz,..t.,.....45,,,,::,..t.,:t.,,,..::,,t...,,:- tt, t .4 5 , 'ft IS..' Program Description Major Findings In April of 1986-87, the School 1. Student Achievement: Priority School students arenow Board approved the current stu- achieving at higher levels than before the implementation of A Plan for Educational Excellence. dent assignment plan which re- As a grow\ the Priority Schools TAAS mastery levels were lower than AISD's turned most elementary students mastery levels across grades and subtests. Individual campuses made higher gains, to their neighbc rhood schools and in many cases. In looking at grade 3 mathematics, for example, Metz hada 96% created 16 predominantly mi- mastery level, Campbell had a 94% mastery level, Ortega had a 93% mastery level, nority schools with many students and Becker had an 89% mastery level. from low-income families. To assure that students in these 16 Iowa Tests of Basic Skills (ITBS). When the Priority Schools' 1991 ITBS averages are compared to past years: schools receive a quality educa- - 83% are higher than in 1987. tion, the Division of Elementary - 58% are higher than in 1990. Education developed A Plan for Educational Excellence with the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test--Revised (PPVT-RI. Full day prekindergarten advice of a committee of teach- students posted higher gains in vocabulary than is average for four-year-oldsacross ers, principals, and other admin- the nation. istrators. The five-year plan was 2. implemented in each of these 16 Other Indicators of Success: Student Attendance. Priority School student attendance rates decreased slightly Priority Schools. This report from 95.6% in 1989-90 to 94.5% in 1990-91. The overall elementaryaverage summarizes the results in each of during the same time period went from 95.9% to 95.8%. these 16 Priority Schools. The summary of the results of the Teacher Attendance. Priority School teachers were in their classroomsan average fourth year of implementation of .7 days more last year than other elementary teachers. Excluding extended focuses on outcome variables. leave, the average Priority School teacher was absent 4.5 days in 1990-91zom- pared to 5.2 days for other elementary school teachers. Parent Opinion. Priority School parents (84%) agreed that their children's schools were effective (excellent) schools and that their children learned a lot this school Implementation year (91%). For the four,h year, the District met Staffpginion. Almost all the teachers in Priority Schools (95%) had high itsc,. mmitment to the Priority expectations for student success. Schools by providing: Teacher Transfer Requests. Priority School teachers requested transfersto other full-day prekindergarten schools more often than did other elementary teachers. Teacher transferrequest classes at all campuses rates dropped somewhat in other elementary schools (10% in 1989-90 to 8% in 1990-91), but increased slightly in the Priority Schools (11%to 12%). a lowered pupil-teacher Parent Involvement, All 16 schools reported a wide variety of activities ratio across all grade levels (fundraisers, volunteer programs, training, recognition ceremonies) that successfully involved parents at their schools, notably the MegaSkillsprogram. innovative funds, extra support staff including Community Involvement, Principals and Priority Schools MonitoringCommittee parent training specialists, members reported an increased involvement with the whole schoolcommunity full-time helping teachers, this year. A wide variety of mentoringprograms, Adopt-A-School, and counselor, and clerks fundraisers, all helped to increase community involvement with theschools. Multicultural Education. Each Priority School hada wide variety of activities to extra support and direc- recognize the cultural heritages of African Americans and Hispanics.Fifteen of the tives from the central 16 Priority Schools had exchange programs,or other activities pith non-priority office (including the school campuses. Additional cultureswere recognized through social studies units. Language Arts Mastery Program) Fcopy of the full !sport for which this is the Executive Summary is availa1;171 as Publication Number 90.04 from: Austin Independent School District Office of Research and Evaluation 1111 West 6th Street Austiajsms 78703 90.04 INTRODUCTION In the spring of 1986-87, when the Board of Trustees approved a new student assignment plan which returned most Oementary students to their neighborhood schools, 16 predominantly minority schools with many students from low-income families were created. The return to neighborhood schools raised concerns on the part of many that the quality of educational opportunity would be lower in these schools. In order to assure that students received a quality education, the Division of Elementary Education developed It Plan for Educational Excellence with the advice of a committee