Issue link: http://digital.copcomm.com/i/22108
s izes , said four th-grade teacher Rebecca Stewart at San Francisco’s Miraloma Elementary, which has an API score of 865. “With 23 students in fourth grade, we actually have enough space to move around, to have di- verse instruction.” Lessons from the classroom At successful John Muir Ele- mentary in Merced (API score 806), QEIA provides vital time for teachers to collaborate and share strategies, educator Teresa Pitta said. “Money matters when it comes to school improvement, ABOVE: Average annual growth in API scores: QEIA-funded schools compared with a group of similar non-QEIA schools. Source: “Lessons from the Classroom: Initial Success for At-Risk Students.” Classroom: Initial Success for At- Risk Students,” went beyond test score gains and included 10 les- sons learned from interviews conducted over four months at 22 QEIA schools by the independent research firm Vital Research of Los Angeles. (See sidebar to the right.) Courtney Malloy of Vital Research reviewed the gains made as a result of QEIA, and dis- cussed what best practices can be shared with other schools, as shown by the ongoing QEIA re- search for CTA. “We wanted to make sure that other QEIA schools — as well as a broader set of schools in the state — could learn from what’s hap- pening in QEIA,” Malloy said. The research report showed the sustained progress being made, measured by the state’s growth on the state’s API. Comparing QEIA schools to similar lower-performing schools, the research found: • Smaller class sizes matter. School implementation plans were largely focused on class • The reforms are working state- wide. Since QEIA funding size reduction, professional development, collaboration time and the adoption of cur- ricular interventions. • Poverty is being overcome. Socioeconomically disadvan- began in 2007, QEIA schools averaged a growth of 62.7 points in API growth, com- pared to 49.3 points in similar, non-QEIA schools. taged students averaged a growth score of 63.6 points versus 50.4 points in non- QEIA schools since 2007. The academic gains at QEIA schools come despite the chal- lenges for these students. And the gains hold promise for closing the student achievement gap. The new CTA research report includes six profiles of successful QEIA schools where principals, teachers and parents comment on how the program is helping stu- dents succeed. “QEIA has made a huge difference” in lowering class and collaboration is critical.” Sacramento’s Fairbanks Ele- mentary in Twin Rivers Unified had a surge of 108 API points in two years to 754. QEIA keeps K-3 class sizes at 20 students or fewer while other schools see them rise, teacher Teri Leo said. “We’re for- tunate to not have 35 students in our classrooms.” And in Santa Ana’s Martin El- ementary (API score 779), where 76 percent of students are English learners, teacher Antonio Maga- ña is grateful QEIA is keeping his fifth-grade classes small. “With smaller classes, I am able to pinpoint those students in need,” Magaña said. What’s next for QEIA? Another round of intensive training is set for CTA site con- tacts at QEIA schools: in Em- eryville on Jan. 31; Santa Ana, Feb. 18; Pasadena, March 1. More training details are coming to this vital statewide network of CTA members stepping up to make the interventions a reality at their schools. In the spring, CTA will be re- leasing a more comprehensive report that covers a broader Continued on next page Ten Lessons Learned Based on interviews at 22 QEIA schools over four months by an independent researcher, these 10 “lessons learned” are education reform insights that all schools might learn from: 1 2 3 4 5 6 School goals for QEIA were consistent with the purpose and intent of the legislation. School implementation plans were largely focused on class size reduction (CSR), professional devel- opment, collaboration time, and the adoption of curricu- lar interventions. Although somewhat chal- lenging to implement and maintain, class size reduc- tion enabled teachers to focus on classroom instruction. Professional development decisions in higher API growth schools were made in collaborative teams with teacher input, leading to greater satisfaction among stakeholders. Higher API growth schools had more focused profes- sional development in core content areas. Higher API growth schools used student data to guide professional development decisions. 7 8 9 Higher API growth schools engaged in more teacher collaboration to develop les- son plans, create common assessments, and analyze student data. School site councils in QEIA schools are approving school budgets; influence on other decisions and stakeholder involvement varies considerably by school. The exemplary administra- tor requirement has not been fully realized in QEIA schools. 10 QEIA has provided valuable resources during the state budget crisis, but schools are still facing financial challenges. DECEMBER 2010 • JANUARY 2011 | www.cta.org 19