1

Stanford Study of Oakland New Small

Schools Initiative

October 1, 2008

2

Research Goals

To understand how well new small schools and existing schools in OUSD are performing over time, taking into account the students they serve and their process of start-up & development

To understand what factors influence schools’ achievement and their improvement trajectories over time

To recommend policy strategies that can build on current successes and address identified needs and issues

3

Examining School “Productivity”

Productivity is a school’s capacity to add value to students’ learning beyond students’ prior achievement and background characteristics.

Productivity is evaluated by looking at how a school’s students achieve on the CST tests in comparison to those in schools serving similar students. A productive school produces achievement that is significantly higher than this benchmark.

4

Value-Added Analysis is Important Because Student Characteristics Vary Greatly Across Schools

ASCEND KIPP

FRL 86.4% 67.1%

EL 32.2% 4.3%

Highest 1/3

Lowest 1/3Incoming 6th Graders

5

Student Level Factors Explain about 2/3 of Variance in CST Scores

Percent of ELA CST Variance Explained*

Student-Level Factors-- Prior Year's Test Scores, English learner status, Family income, Parent Education, Gender, Ethnicity, Retained in Grade

69.6%

School and Other Factors

30.4%

*CST Math model explained 66% of variance, leaving 34% to be explained by school and other factors

6

Summary of Initial Productivity Analyses

New schools are, on average, more productive than older schools at all levels, and especially at the high school level.

New schools become more effective and productive as they mature.

7

API and Three-Year Average Productivity: Elementary ELA

th_yr_avg0.4000.2000.000-0.200-0.400

AP

I08

1000

800

600

400

NewExisting

Elementary Schools

Three-Year Average Productivity

AP

I 20

08

Mean New Schools = .019Mean “Old” Schools = -.012

Acorn Woodland

mathprod3rs0.400.200.00-0.20-0.40

AP

I08

1000

800

600

400

NewExisting

Elementary

API and Three-Year Average Productivity: Elementary Math

Three-Year Average Productivity

AP

I 20

08

Mean New Schools = .010Mean “Old” Schools = -.013

Esparanza

9

API and Three-Year Average Productivity: Middle School ELA

th_yr_avg0.4000.2000.000-0.200-0.400

AP

I08

1000

800

600

400

NewExisting

Middle Schools

Three-Year Average Productivity

AP

I 20

08

Mean New Schools = .009

Mean “Old” Schools = .009

Elmhurst Community

10

API and Three-Year Average Productivity: High School ELA

th_yr_avg0.4000.2000.000-0.200-0.400

AP

I08

1000

800

600

400

NewExisting

High Schools

AP

I 20

08

Three-Year Average Productivity

Mean New Schools = .008Mean “Old” Schools = -.054

Excel

11

School Design Features Influence Productivity (2007 ELA Productivity* Associated with High School

Characteristics)

12

Staffing Strongly Influences School Productivity(ELA Productivity* (2003-07) Associated with Teacher and School

Characteristics)

13

New Teacher Turnover in New Schools(Percentage of teachers hired in '04-05, '05-06, or '06-07

who were still teaching in OUSD at the start of 08-09)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

55%

New Teacher Turnover* in New Schools

(* Turnover = Percentage of BTSA induction and intern teachers in ’04-05, ’05-06, or ’06-07 who were no longer teaching in OUSD at the start of ’07-08)

OUSD New

Tea

cher

Ave

rage

14

School Case Studies Extend Themes Regarding School Design

ACORN Woodland (ES, 2000) EnCompass Academy (ES, 2004) ASCEND (K-8, 2001) Elmhurst Community Prep (MS, 2006) McClymonds Complex (HS, 2005)

BEST EXCEL

Oakland International (HS,2007)

15

API and Value-Added Productivity (ELA) 2006-07

Productivity 2006-070.4000.2000.000-0.200-0.400

AP

I Gro

wth

200

7

1000

800

600

400

200

NewExisting

ASCEND

Acorn Woodland

Elmhurst Community Prep

EXCEL

BEST

Encompass Academy

AP

I

16

ACORN-Woodland Elementary

Policy Rationale – A Turnaround School Prior Superintendent’s “pilot” small school which

was not succeeding was “re-incubated” by district and is now highly productive

Key Themes District incubator helped establish new instructional

program, school culture, and family partnerships Open Court curriculum was modified and

augmented to improve success with diverse learners

Teacher-lead professional development was enacted through school “culture team”

17

EnCompass Elementary

Policy Rationale High performing ES serving low-income

community Exemplifies commitment to community outreach,

inclusion, and collaboration Key Themes

Culturally-relevant focus on the “whole child” and hands-on, project-based approach

Open Court modified to incorporate reading of leveled books and formative assessments

Intensive school-based selection process developed to improve “fit” for new hires

18

ASCEND (K-8)

Policy Rationale Highly productive “mature” small school

serving high-minority population One of first small schools “co-created and co-

owned” by Community and District Key Themes: Strong School Design Features

Personalization through Looping Interdisciplinary and arts-infused curricula

focused on projects and “expeditions” RBB used to reduce class-size

19

Elmhurst Community Prep (ECP)

Policy Rationale – Middle School Turnaround Dramatic improvement in school culture and academic

achievement “Big school principal” became committed to small school

approach

Key Themes Teachers and students in grade level teams Daily advisory to personalize learning Project-based “expositions” of learning “Co-incubation” benefitted both schools and leaders

sharing same campus RBB used to invest in school leadership & coaching

20

McClymonds Complex

Policy Rationale Conversion high school with somewhat divergent

outcomes in two small schools (BEST & EXCEL) Key Themes

Less change in design and staffing at BEST Discontinuous leadership at BEST has posed challenges

to school-level instructional coherence EXCEL’s stable leadership committed to project and

community-based learning Attention to college-going culture significantly increased

Excel’s A-G enrollment, graduation rate, & college-going

21

Oakland International

Policy Rationale Serves a distinctive student population of ELLs Recent successful start-up reflects current OUSD

supports Key Themes

Flexible budget, staffing, and curriculum enable distinctive school design

Strong district supports (e.g coaching and facilities) Project-based learning and heterogeneous grouping Extensive professional collaboration and PD to support

strong content and language instruction Alternative assessments matched to student needs

22

Cross Case Features of Highly Productive Schools Key School Features

Mission-driven principals who were proactively recruited and mentored

Faculties with experienced as well as new teachers, committed to school mission

Personalization strategies are used extensively Clear and coherent instructional programs focused on

authentic hands-on instruction Analysis of student learning has informed teacher

professional development and school culture Professional collaboration is norm not exception Outreach to parents and community has been strong

23

Mission-Driven Principals

Were selected and mentored by prior principal and/or district leaders

Set high expectations for all students and are driven to serve historically underserved communities

24

Balanced faculties with novice and veteran teachers and focus on instructional development

Top schools attempted to build staffs with diverse and complementary strengths ASCEND’s founding teachers ranged in

experience from 3-23 years When possible, AWE has hired teachers with

10+ year’s experience to balance staff OIS also sought a balanced staff with EL

teaching skills BEST and EXCEL were unable to balance

staffs, which has constrained both schools

25

Coherent, Engaging Instructional Programs

Goals connect to and extend district/state accountability Instructional content aligned to state

standards, but not test-driven

Active Learning Opportunities Project-based learning Career academies/community projects

26

Use of Student Achievement Data

Data used to inform instructional program and professional development Acorn Woodland now supplements Open Court with

more extensive literacy materials and strategies ASCEND restructured Expeditionary Learning

expeditions to improve mathematics performance Performance data used to celebrate student success

and cultivate academic climate EXCEL college-acceptance wall and CST celebration Acorn Woodland’s CST celebrations

27

Personalization Strategies

Looping Home Visits Whole Child Orientation Advisory Block Scheduling

28

Professional & Parent Collaboration

Features of PLC’s are reflected in the schools Teachers plan and lead professional

development Teacher collaboration built into school day

(Two hours per week and common grade level planning time).

Teachers sometimes work together through interdisciplinary courses

Outreach to parents around school mission and student work

29

Key District Policy Supports for Schools

Provide support and flexibility Network Executive Officers serve as thought-partners

rather than compliance officers to school leaders Embrace entrepreneurial ethos of small school

principals; support innovation Coaches go beyond Open Court implementation

toward broader set of effective literacy practices and professional development support more broadly

Incubate new schools and leaders Provide service and support orientation, especially in

Human Resources Streamlined hiring More focus on mentoring and administrative supports

30

OUSD Progress & Policy Recommendations

31

OUSD Progress in Developing More Productive Schools

New school models have been largely successful and have grown in productivity as they mature

Incubation process has supported stronger, more focused school designs

Network coaching has enabled sharing of good practices and greater attention to school needs

Some weak schools have been closed

32

OUSD Progress with Teacher Workforce Development

Strong strategic plan developed with teachers association

Earlier filling of vacancies and eliminated filling with substitutes

Smart decision not to “pink slip” last year Work on developing BTSA induction model

33

Teacher Recruitment Strategies

Continue to move up hiring window to recruit top-quality candidates

Prioritize hiring experienced, qualified teachers wherever possible

Evaluate teacher pipelines in terms of retention and effectiveness and further develop strong pipelines, including “grow your own” models

Identify and recruit strong student teachers

34

Teacher Retention Strategies

Continue to strengthen BTSA model by investing in coaches and their training

Develop incentives for developing / keeping strong teachers and attracting them to high-priority schools

Examine leadership, working conditions, hiring, and mentoring in high-turnover schools

Strengthen coaching support for all new teachers

35

Shaping the District Portfolio of Schools

Consider school productivity and trajectory over time when deciding whether to expand, merge, or phase out schools

Consider academic return on investments and costs of student failure, as well as immediate fiscal costs

Develop and expand successful models by proactively recruiting more students to successful campuses

Beware undefined mergers that merely combine campuses: enable leadership around a specific design