District Effects on Student Achievement

About the Study

The research examines the role of five districts in initiating and sustaining academic improvement across schools and seeks to trace the impact of policies and decisions taken by boards of trustees, superintendents of schools, and central office staff on the work of classrooms and schools. It was conducted by Patrick Maguire in the province of Alberta between January and November 2003.

Four consistently improving Alberta school districts were identified by means of a district improvement index developed by Maguire, through statistical analysis of the 1998 š 2003 assessment data for the province‰s 60 districts. Longitudinal academic performance trend-lines were evaluated on the basis of results in the provincial achievement test (PAT) completed by students in Grades 3, 6 and 9, and the provincial diploma examinations (PDE) which certify student completion of selected Grade 12 courses.

The four districts selected by Maguire were roughly representative of Alberta‰s demographic profile, ranging in size from 3,500 to 35,000 students and located in rural and urban settings. A fifth district considered to be more ëtypical‰ in performance was added to the study, more as a comparison than a control.

The central question posed by the study is whether the four consistently improving districts had certain characteristics that might be associated with their success.

Maguire brought his career experience as an Alberta superintendent of schools and education consultant to the research commissioned by SAEE with the assistance of the Donner Canadian Foundation.

Searching for Reasons

After obtaining the consent of participating districts, researchers embarked on a series of interviews, focus groups and surveys, as well as the collection of planning and results reports, board minutes and other key documents. Guided by the findings of the international literature on features of successful school districts, Maguire interviewed district leaders ranging from superintendents and board chairs, department administrators, teacher association presidents, and selected school council chairs. They were asked to identify the most influential contributors to improved student achievement in their districts.

The views of school administrators and teachers were also probed through focus groups and an Internet survey. In all, 83 individual interviews and 30 focus groups were conducted to gather the data used to generate detailed case studies of these five districts. The case studies provide in-depth descriptions of district operations.

Distinguishing Between Typical and Improving

Analysis of the data revealed that the five districts shared much in common in terms of formal structures and operations, but differences emerged when it came to actual practices. As compared to their ëtypical‰ counterpart, the four improving districts demonstrated the following distinguishing characteristics:
♦ Vision statements that were more sharply focused on student learning and more widely promulgated and internalized at all levels.
♦ More links with community partners and agencies capable of supporting students.
♦A collective culture in which school administrators and teachers took pride in their district because they shared in its planning, decision-making and achievements.
♦ The determination to measure schools against district-level expectations, not the parochial yardsticks of individual principals or teachers.
♦ Greater emphasis on improving the understanding and use of assessment data among school staff.
♦ Successful implementation of a curriculum-based, collaboratively developed and instruction-embedded model of staff development.

Given the descriptive nature of this study, definitively isolating cause-and-effect relationships is problematic. Nonetheless, the evidence clearly identifies district factors that create an environment conducive to system-wide improvements in achievement. Significantly, none of the key success factors was equally evident among all of the four improving districts or entirely absent from the average district. What was most apparent was the unique manner in which the mix was applied in the different jurisdictions.

Lessons Learned

The findings of the Alberta research are generally consistent with the literature (Snipes, Dolittle, and Herlihy, 2002; Massell, 2000; Fullan, 2001; Goodman and Zimmermann, 2000; Elmore and Burney, 1999; Johnson, 1996; Coleman and LaRocque, 1989; Pajack and Glickman, 1987; and others).

Based on his findings in Alberta, Maguire predicts that a ëmodel district‰, one which generates consistent gains in academic achievement, will likely demonstrate the following features:
♦ A powerful concentration by the district‰s administration on improving student achievement, coupled with at least one senior leader whose passion and energy are sufficient to fuel the district‰s vision.
♦ Widespread, top-to-bottom understanding of the district‰s mission and goals.
♦A collaborative culture which values leadership at all levels and employs transparent performance criteria which trigger both celebrations for success and consequences for inadequate performance.
♦ Significant efforts and resources aimed at classroom-embedded teacher development programs.
♦ Identification of principals as the primary instructional leaders in their schools and active contributors to district-level decisions.
♦ Recognition that action-research is essential to improvement and goes hand-in-hand with a program to build instructional capacity and assessment literacy among district staff.

Policy Considerations

[Italic]District Practices and Student Achievement: Lessons from Alberta1[Italic] raises a number of policy issues for decision-makers. Given the critical role of superintendents, provincial governments should consider investing in additional education and leadership development programs for superintendents as a strategy for large-scale improvement.

Similarly, the study recommends that trustee associations evaluate their development programs, particularly in the areas of vision and communication.

Investment in staff development could be much more effectively applied if based on an action research model that is embedded in specific curriculum needs and assessment results.

The evidence highlighted by this research will be of interest to Canadian school district leaders everywhere who seek consistent improvement across their schools, and will invite thoughtful comparison with their own experience.
1 Maguire, Patrick (2003). District Practices and Student Achievement: Lessons from Alberta. SAEE. 151 pp.

♦ Policy Watch ♦ Home