research spotlight: azrfr impact on schools, teachers & student
Post on 04-Jan-2016
29 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Research Spotlight: AZRfR Impact on Schools,
Teachers & StudentWendy Miedel Barnard, Ph.D.
Sarah A. Polasky, Ph.D.
Hongxia Fu, M.A.
Goals of the AZ Ready for Rigor Grant
1. Increase Teacher and Principal Effectiveness
2. Increase student achievement
3. Retain highly effective educators
4. Eliminate shortages of highly effective teachers/administrators
5. Foster exemplary school culture in the highest-need communities across Arizona
Phases of Implementation
Phase 1
• Wave One Schools (Implementing TAP 2010-2011)
• 10 Schools
Phase 2
• Wave Two Schools (Implementing TAP 2011-2012)
• 34 Schools
Phase 3
• Wave Three Schools (Implementing TAP 2012-2013)
• 15 Schools
TAP Elements of Success
Instructionally Focused
Accountability
MultipleCareer Paths
Performance-Based
Compensation
Ongoing AppliedProfessional
Growth
Teacher Effectiveness
• Increase the percentage of teachers in high-need schools who have a record of effectiveness
• Increase the percentage of principals in high-need schools who have a record of effectiveness
Teacher Skills, Knowledge &
Responsibilities
50%
IndividualStudent
Value-addedAchievement
30%
School-wide Value-added
Student Achievement
20%
Measurement of Effectiveness
50%50%
School –wide, Value-added
Student Achievement
Teacher Skills, Knowledge &
Responsibilities
Increase Teacher Effectiveness
Year 1 (N=469) Year 2 (N=1669) Year 3 (N=2147)0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 69%62% 65%
Percentage of Teachers who Showed a "Record of Effectiveness"
Teacher Effectiveness
Wave 1 (N=333) Wave2 (N=1272) Wave 3 (N=542)0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
88%72%
54%
Percentage of Teachers who Showed a "Record of Effectiveness" in Year Three by Wave
Principal and Assistant Principal Measurement of Effectiveness
• Observation Scores– Leadership Team (Principals)– Post-Conference (Assistant Principals)
• VAL-ED Surveys*• Program Review/Program Fidelity• School-Wide Student Growth/Achievement
*This does not apply to Assistant Principals
Increase Principal Effectiveness
Year 1 (N=25) Year 2 (N=71) Year 3 (N=100)0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
8%
31%
56%
Percentage of Principals and Assistant Principals with a "Record of Effectiveness"
In Year 3, 75% of Wave 1 School Principals and Assistant Principals were “effective”
Increase Retention
Within five years, eliminate the shortage of highly effective teachers and principals in:
– remote and hard-to-staff in participating schools and partner districts,
– hard-to-staff areas/subjects (such as special education, middle/high school math and science)
Retention and Attrition
• 81% of “effective” teachers were retained
• Attrition rate of “highly effective” teachers and principals in hard to staff locations was only 10%
• Attrition rate of “highly effective” teachers in hard to staff subject areas was only 15%
Student Achievement
• Increase school-wide student achievement• Student growth on standardized tests• Median school-wide student growth percentile at or
above 61 = TAP score of “4” or higher
• Increase overall school functioning• AZ Learns A-F Letter Grades
Classroom/Teacher Level SGPs
Group
2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013Number of Teachers
Mean (Standard Deviation)
Number of Teachers
Mean (Standard Deviation)
Number of Teachers
Mean (Standard Deviation)
Wave 1 110 51.11 (14.00)
143 52.95 (13.24)
145 55.74(14.44)
Wave 2 370 47.30(14.67)
465 50.78(15.71)
Wave 3 203 56.14(16.30)
School Level SGPs
Group
2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013
Number of Teachers
Mean (Standard Deviation)
Number of Teachers
Mean (Standard Deviation)
Number of Teachers
Mean (Standard Deviation)
Wave 1 251 50.20 (6.23)
351 52.34 (7.90)
333 55.64 (8.54)
Wave 2 1008 48.91 (8.77)
1261 50.08 (9.11)
Wave 3 542 51.57 (11.65)
AZ Learns Letter GradesLetterGrade
Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3
2010-2011
2011-2012
2012-2013
2013-2014
2011-2012
2012-2013
2013-2014
2012-2013
2013-2014
A 0 20% (N=2)
20% (N=2)
33%(N=3)
0 6% (N=2)
6% (N=2)
13% (N=2)
0
B 50% (N=5)
20% (N=2)
40% (N=4)
33%(N=3)
29% (N=10)
32% (N=11)
24% (N=8)
33% (N=5)
41% (N=7)
C 50% (N=5)
60% (N=6)
40% (N=4)
33%(N=3)
41% (N=14)
35% (N=12)
42% (N=14)
13% (N=2)
35% (N=6)
D 21% (N=7)
27% (N=9)
27% (N=9)
40% (N=6)
24% (N=4)
F 9% (N=3)
Increased Positive School Functioning
• Teachers and principals in the Ready-for-Rigor TAP schools will report increased attitudes towards collaborative activities and performance based pay as measured by the yearly TAP Attitude Survey.
• Participation in Ready-for-Rigor TAP schools will increase teacher yearly reports of positive school culture as measured by the Teacher Working Conditions Survey.
Performance Based Compensation
Example questions: “The annual bonus motivates me to work harder with my current class” and “I feel comfortable with how performance-based compensation bonuses are determined”
• Year 1 69%• Year 2 72%• Year 3 74%
Time
Facili
ties a
nd R
esou
rces
Empowerm
ent
Decisi
on M
akin
g0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
38%
70%56%
21%
56%
87%79%
33%
66%
92% 87%
41%
76%
95%86%
56%
Favorable Ratings for School Environment
2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014
Thank you!For additional information, please contact:
Wendy Barnard
Wendy.barnard@asu.edu
top related