The secrets of 'can-do' schools
Louisiana team uncovers traits of high-poverty, high-performing schools
By Joan Richardson
Results, February 2003
Copyright, National Staff Development Council, 2003. All rights reserved.
How to transform high-poverty, low-performing schools into high-performing schools is one of the most vexing questions facing educators today.
The Louisiana Staff Development Council sought an answer to that question by exploring the role that professional development plays in high-poverty, high-performing schools in that state. With a grant from the National Staff Development Council, LSDC investigated 12 schools considered "academically above average" according to the Louisiana Accountability System and that also had at least 80 percent of their students living in poverty. LSDC's investigators--Dale Hair, Betty Kraft, and Amy Allen--visited each school and conducted focus groups of the staffs.
"What surprises you about high-poverty, high-performing schools is the whole positive attitude, the can-do spirit. They're very efficacious. They are human bulldozers. They literally just roll over obstacles and they believe that no obstacle is too great," said Hair.
"When you see this in person, the magnitude of how dramatically different this attitude is from that in high-poverty, low-performing schools really knocks your socks off," she said.
LSDC also learned that "quality professional learning provides the focus and drives the process that ultimately leads to high student achievement - especially for schools with high percentages of children living in poverty."
In every school investigated by LSDC, the principal and teachers were clear that the focus of everything in the school was improving student learning. Hair said the principal was the key to establishing this standard in the schools they visited. "A lot of principals aren't willing to do what all of these principals are willing to do. They take a tough stand on putting kids ahead of everything else. Even the teachers said the principals cared about them but that they would always put the children first," she said.
That focus on student learning was also the guiding point for each school's professional development, beginning with analysis of student data and continuing through their choice of professional learning that would be most likely to lead to improved student learning.
LSDC investigators identified characteristics that were consistently present in each of the 12 schools:
1. Each school used many types of job-embedded staff development-coaching, mentoring, examination and reflection on student work and instructional practices, visitation to other classrooms and other schools, conferences, workshops, serving on curriculum committees, etc. Less common was the use of case studies or action research in a formal sense.
Example: At G.T. Woods Elementary in Jefferson Parish, teachers worked in grade level teams to examine student work and discussed ways to modify instruction to better meet student needs. At South Street Elementary in St. Landry Parish, teachers wrote grants for extensive after-school workshops and classroom follow-up.
2. The principal and staff had a strong sense of efficacy--they believed in the power of teaching and their own ability to ensure that every student learns, regardless of obstacles.
Example: At Barbe Elementary in Calcasieu Parish, a constantly revolving clientele meant only 47% of the students were the same from year to year. Yet teachers said that, regardless of how long they had with each child, he or she would leave Barbe with improved knowledge and skills.
3. In every school, the primary job responsibility of at least one individual (often the principal) was to oversee instruction and know what was going on in classrooms. Although an instructional leader guided the learning process for teachers and provided the necessary resources, each of the 12 schools was a true "community of learners" where faculty collaboration was considered critical to improved practice.
Example: At Ruston Elementary in Lincoln Parish, the principal took faculty to visit both high- and low-performing schools so they could see the factors that made a difference. He then drove them around the community so they would better understand the challenging situations that faced students daily. And he led a study group using Ruby Payne's book A Framework for Understanding Poverty (Aha! Process Inc., 2001). At J.S. Slocum in Rapides Parish, a year-long faculty study involved rotating through the classrooms of one grade level per month to learn and share strategies for successful student learning.
4. Analyzing student data was the first step and the driving force in the professional learning process. The schools analyzed data, especially looking at test results, to identify areas of broad, common needs and each student's specific strengths and weaknesses.
Example: Over the summer, teachers from Mamou Upper Elementary in Evangeline Parish analyzed disaggregated test data to identify weaknesses in grade groups and for each individual child on each teacher's roster for fall. At Carter Junior High in Rapides Parish, a similar analysis resulted in an IEP-type plan for every student.
5. Teachers tried different approaches to meet student needs--grouping and structuring, use of materials, a variety of instructional strategies--always with an eye toward continuous assessment.
Example: Grand Coteau Elementary in St. Landry Parish used technology grants to enhance instruction. The grant enabled teachers to analyze the curriculum and to identify software to cover gaps between information in textbooks and what's required by state standards.
6. Standards-based instruction was pervasive and teachers could readily discuss how the lessons matched content standards.
Examples: Teachers at Sicily Island Elementary in Catahoula Parish, one of the schools with the greatest gains in school performance during the year, document standards addressed in all of their lesson plans weekly. At G.T. Woods, teachers could easily discuss how their daily lessons related to content standards.
7. All schools had excellent schoolwide discipline characterized by a shared sense of responsibility for all students. There was a general understanding that children of poverty often come from homes without a great deal of structure or academic support. Structured classroom procedures and high expectations were considered the foundation for success.
Examples: From the smallest school visited (Pineview Elementary in Claiborne Parish) to the largest (South Street Elementary in St. Landry Parish), students were on-task and well-behaved. Discipline and love were seen as partners for student success.
Investigators cite additional characteristics
The LSDC investigators also identified several other factors present in many (but not all) of the schools visited.
They learned, for example, that the staffs in these schools were generally stable. At eight of the 12 schools, the faculties had changed very little in the past four or five years. The remaining schools had some change, mostly because of school growth. "This factor is interesting because so many high-poverty, low-performing schools point out that they are unable to maintain any faculty stability. Since teachers in the low- performing schools leave for better placement locations as soon as they have 'paid their dues,' this ensures that their faculties are consistently young, fairly inexperienced, and often uncertified. So why do the teachers at equally high-poverty schools stay?" the investigators asked in their report.
Hair said she believes teachers remain in these schools because the working conditions and the environment are so conducive to doing good professional work. "These teachers are in places where exciting things are happening. They feel empowered because they're making things happen in the lives of kids. The bottom line is that that's what makes them feel like staying," she said.
"At a lot of schools, teachers put in their three years and then move on to greener pastures. But, in these schools, the principals say they will help them with anything they need to get the job done and they do it. If they need materials, if they have students who need tutoring, the principals get those resources for them," she said.
|
