School Improvement Programs
Winter 2004
The capacity of teachers and schools to produce high-quality instruction is integral to school reforms. Because the demands to increase student achievement fall largely on the shoulders of teachers and principals, knowing how schools actually improve and investing in this capacity is now our most urgent task (Elmore, 2003).
Building School Capacity
The capacity challenge is most acute in schools serving large populations of disadvantaged and harder to educate students (Creemers, 1999; Sammons, 1996; Fullan, 2001; Kovacs, 1998; and others). High-needs schools willing to engage in action research to improve academic outcomes often require support to achieve their goals. The evidence suggests this should include training in using assessment data for instructional decisions, classroom-embedded professional development, external support in documenting changes in practice and outcomes, and the ability to network with other schools facing similar challenges.
Although details vary and only some focus on high-needs schools, there are many programs in Canada providing targeted support for school-wide improvement efforts. A few examples include:
♦ The Manitoba School Improvement Program (MSIP) has supported 30 secondary schools with multi-year grants since its inception in 1991 ( http://www.msip.ca/)
♦ The Alberta Initiative for School Improvement (AISI) has provided $204 million for action research to improve learning. (http://www.learning.gov.ab.ca/k_12/special/aisi/)
♦ The Quebec School Improvement Network (QSIN) has provided schools with resources to develop a process of continuous evaluation and improvement.
♦ Schools in Need of Extra Help . The Ontario government provides $5 million annually for additional expertise, learning resources, and training for selected schools whose Grade 3 provincial assessment results have been consistently low. Since 2001, 43 schools have been involved in the program.
♦ The School Leadership Centre at UBC awards $3,000 grants to support promising school improvement projects. This new program funded by the BC Ministry of Education will assist 60 schools this year, selected through an application process. (http://www.slc.educ.ubc.ca)
♦ The Network of Performance Based Schools . An action research network that includes about 100 schools in 31 BC Districts. School teams develop a question to focus their annual school improvement work. They commit to collecting baseline data while working on their key question, assessing students using the BC performance standards, and sharing their results. (http://www.npbs.ca/)
School Improvement Grants Program
One program in BC to support efforts to improve literacy and math skills in high-needs public schools provides $25,000 in planning and implementation grants for each participating school over two years. This SAEE project began in 2001 with funding assistance from the Donner Canadian Foundation, the Hecht Memorial Foundation, the Canadian Language and Literacy Research Network (CLLRNet), and the Royal Bank Foundation.
Seven elementary schools are in the second year of their interventions, and 10 schools have been awarded planning grants to prepare for entry into Cycle 2 of the program in September 04. All have been identified as high-needs schools serving challenging populations. Literacy and math achievement on provincial and district assessments is consistently below expectations.
Qualifying schools may apply for $5,000 grants to develop detailed implementation plans for intervention projects designed to measurably improve literacy or numeracy achievement. They must be research-based, developed in consultation with all partners, and involve 50% or more of the school. Schools selected on the basis of their detailed proposals receive $9,000 to implement Year 1of their program. A satisfactory interim progress report from the school and the external research team triggers a $9,000 grant for Year 2. Each school receives a further $2,000 upon submission of their final report documenting overall results.
Early Learnings
Drs. Thomas Fleming and Helen Raptis are assisting the schools to document their interventions and will produce a composite report on the case studies. Some early positive effects they have identified include:
♦ improved school relationships
♦ invigorated school purposes
♦ strengthened school-community relationships
♦ increased teacher planning and collaborative instructional strategies.
Their observations concerning social and professional effects were made well ahead of attempts to examine effects on student performance. Indeed, as the large-scale School Innovations project in Australia (Cuttance, 2001) discovered, teacher learning and changes in practice may be the most significant outcome of school improvement initiatives.
Challenges
Most schools encountered a fairly steep learning curve during their first year. Organizing project resources took considerable amounts of time, as did professional development to learn new instructional methods. Such expenditures of time were necessary to establish platforms upon which to measure student development and performance more precisely in Year Two. Most of the projects were characterized by a lack of pre-intervention measures and stable control groups and some by multiple interventions, leading to problems in delineating which interventions prompted particular outcomes. As a result, some projects have experienced a lack of clarity in reporting.
Most staffs were somewhat uncomfortable in defining educational outcomes precisely and quantifying the evidence they collect, and the most important challenge faced by the evaluators was to assist them in overcoming their fears about research methods. (Fleming & Raptis, 2003)
To help address this challenge, with the assistance of CLLRNet, a research partner will be provided to each Cycle 2 school.
Implications for Policy
The learnings from projects such as this suggest some actions to support school improvement on a larger scale:
Many schools have difficulty setting targets and gathering measurable evidence of progress. Districts could leverage school efforts by investing in school-level training in data analysis.
Research leadership can be rewarding for teachers and yield dividends in school capacity. Universities could contribute by teaching the rudiments of data-driven action research in teacher preparation programs.
Schools engaged in action research and innovation need a research network for support. There must also be structures for systematic sharing of new research to change isolated successes to large-scale progress in teaching and learning.
♦ Policy Watch ♦ Home | 
