'The Year Round Education Program In the Little Rock, Arkansas School District: An Assessment of Educational Effectiveness With a Focus on African American Student Achievement''

James S. Catterall, Professor of Education, UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies
James S. Catterall Professor of Education UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies Los Angeles, CA 90095-1521 This report was commissioned by the Little Rock School district through a contract with the author. The author takes sole responsibility for the contents of this report. Opinions stated in this report are not necessarily shared by personnel or constituents of the LSRD. This report was executed under standards for measurement and program evaluation established by the American Psychological Association and the National Council for Measurement in Education. Professor Catterall is Chair of the National Technical Advisory Panel for Accountability for the Commonwealth of Kentucky and a member of the California Department of Educations Technical Advisory Committee. The Year Round Education Program In the Little Rock, Arkansas School District An Assessment of Educational Effectiveness With a Focus on African American Student Achievement February 6, 2006MK I in II The Extended Year or Year Round Education Program In the Little Rock Arkansas Schools. II An Assessment of Educational Effectiveness With a Focus on African American Student Achievement n n February 6, 2006 RECEIVED \ FEB -9 2006 II n n James S. Catterall Professor UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies Los Angeles, CA 90095-1521 jamesc@gseis.ucla.edu OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING n n Section I. Introduction IB n II This report is submitted under the terms of a Memorandum of Understanding between the Little Rock School District and the studys principal author. This evaluation of the Districts Extended Year Education program (also referred to as the Year Round Education or YRE program) was one of four studies mandated by the United States District Court pursuant to its long-running involvement in monitoring and assessing the quality of educational experiences of African American students in the Little Rock Schools.' These four programs, Compass Learning, Reading Recovery, Smart-Thrive, and Extended Year Education, are attempts to focus resources on the needs of the Districts African American constituents, not through pupil reassignment or other sorts of targeted pullout programs, but rather by improving the effectiveness of whole schools where very high proportions the students are African American. This brief background sets the stage for the analytical framework used in this evaluation. Since more than 90 percent of the students in Extended Year schools were African American over the period of this study, we trained our attention on how entire EY school student populations fared over time as a valid indicator of conditions ' This study was formally mandated in the Memorandum of Opinion by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock Division in Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District No. I, et al., Mrs.Lorene Joshua, et al. and Katherine Knight et al. Interveners. Page 1.111 n II n II involving African American Students. As a check on the validity of this approach, we do show in tables below certain contrasts between the approximately 585 EY students in grades 3, 4, and 5 on the one hand, and the approximately 525 African American students in the same schools and grades on the other hand. It becomes evident that there are simply too few non-African students in EY schools generally for this group to deflect school-level measures of achievement. Nor does the number of white students across these three grade levels, about 30 total, support stable achievement measures for EY school white students generally.^ As go the African American students, so goes the school, is one way of seeing things
or alternatively, As goes the school, so fares the African American student population. \ II n n n Extended Year (or Year Round) Education programs are built on a set of research-supported ideas about connections between the organization of the school calendar and the nature of student achievement. A main idea of extended year education is that an extended school year - and especially one with a shorter summer vacation - would forestall what has come to be known as summer learning loss. This loss is the well documented slide in reading and mathematics achievement levels occurring for many students between summer vacation dismissal and the start-up of school three months later. Cooper (et al.), 1996^, found in their meta-review of available studies that retrogression in grade-level measures over the summer for children at risk was typically in the 2-3 month range, corresponding to the time out of school. n II A second idea supporting extended year education is the benefit of more frequent shorter vacation periods throughout the school year. Not only might short breaks avert problems of learning loss, but also the breaks themselves can become opportunities for additional instructional programming - effectively adding to the number of instructional days over a school year. n II II EY schools in Little Rock. Little Rock built its EYE program directly upon these main ideas. The intent of EYE was to offer all students a better education, regardless of their ethnic background, social status, or academic performance. EY schools in Little Rock reorganized their school calendars so that the standard instructional period was distributed throughout the year with breaks or vacations interspersed. Educational instruction and vacations were organized into smaller segments and spaced throughout 2 The issue of stable measures is well illustrated in the case of the 30 white students in grades 3-5 in EY schools. One critical measure used in this report is the d* grade Benchmark test in literacy and mathematics. This test is attractive because it was built around Arkansas academic performance standards and has been repeated annually. But only 10 or so white students take this 4* grade test each year in the EY schools. How white students do on this measure from year to year (which we might wish to contrast with African American test results) would be expected to influenced heavily by differences across the annual 10-student cohorts, much more so than by some systematic changes in their instructional environment. 3 Cooper, H., Nye, B., Charlton, K. Lindsay, J., & Greathouse. (1966). The effects of summer vacation on achievement test scores: A nanative and meta-analytic review. Review of Educational Research, 66,227- 268. Page 1.2II II II II n the year for more continuous learning and more frequent breaks. Little Rocks design is a single track 45-10 calendar where all students and teachers in the school are in class or on vacation at the same time. The 45-10 refers to 45 days in a quarter then 10 days of intersession/vacation. Formal intersession programs operate for five-days within an intersession break, and student attendance is voluntary. Mabelvale, Stephens, and Woodruff elementary schools have operated on a YRE calendar since school year 2000- 2001, with Cloverdale and Mitchell beginning EYE in 2002-2003. The Cloverdale and Mitchell experience with Year Round Education, with Cloverdale Elementary closing during the 2004-2005 school year because of crumbling facility issues and low student enrollment and Mitchell closing for the same reasons in 2003. \ n The 2005-2006 LRSD YRE school calendar appears at the end of this introduction. n n Organization of the report. The main question of this evaluation study is the following: n I Have the Year-Round Education (YRE) Programs been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of Afncan American students? II As we suggest above, this question is tantamount to asking - are the EY schools themselves instructionally effective? Is there evidence that the success of their students has improved over time? u I We address questions of school effectiveness in Section III and Section IV of this report. The principal analyses are: a. I Comparisons of school level student proficiency between 2000 and 2005, for EY schools, for a set of matched comparison schools, and for all LRSD elementary schools. The data for this analysis includes mainly the grade 4 Benchmark test results for the five-year period. (Presented in Section III.) b. A comparative longitudinal analysis of changes in the percentages of African American students scoring proficient or above on the Benchmark tests. The data used in analysis (a) also supported this analysis. (Presented in Section IV.) c. An analysis of student proficiency trends through 2005 that compensates for a significant tightening of standards and lowering of Benchmark test Page 1.3 LII n II scores across the board in 2005. This analysis builds a predictive model for 2005 test scores and identifies schools that outpace their expected scores. (As explained in Section III, statisticians call this an analysis of residuals.) II d. Contrasting EYE, comparison, and all schools on other indicators of school effectiveness, using data on student attendance, mobility, and behavior over five years leading up to 2004-2005. (Section fV.) II A second principal question for this evaluation is the following: II What are the quality and level of implementation of intersession instructional strategies? | II We rest our assessment of the effectiveness of intersession programs on comparative assessments of student achievement - distinguishing primarily between students who participated in Intersessions and those who did not. a. I One analysis in Section V. displays literacy and mathematics proficiency levels for intersession attendees and non-attendees, for all students and for African American students. This analysis also discusses participation rates by group. b. A second analysis in Section V, explores mathematical correlations between participation in Intersessions and non-participation. We used data from the LSRD student database of analyses (a) and (b). hl c. Section VI. turns to our surveys of parents, student, and teachers and to III our parent interviews. These surveys, and especially the comments written by respondents, are sources of insight about the quality and implementation of the Intersessions. A third cluster of questions concern constituent perception
What are the perceptions of YRE parents, students, and teachers regarding program impacts, strengths and weaknesses?________________________________________ Page 1.4 n n n n \ kII in a. II We used written surveys of parents, students, and teachers as well as telephone interviews of a purposeful sample of parents (those with experience in both EYE and non EYE schools) to gather data about constituent perceptions. in b. in Consolidations of three years of parent, student, and teacher survey data are presented in Section VI. This section also contains a presentation of our extensive parent interview data. An appendix shows survey data from parents, students, and teachers for each of the five EYE schools individually. \ in c. In October 2005 we conducted a small focus group to help clarify questions that emerged in the conduct of data collection and analyses, and especially the surveys. in Additional Introductory Notes II I More detailed information about the context, purposes, and methods of our assessments of the effectiveness of the LRSDs Extended Year schools is presented at the start of each of the reports main sections. Sections III through Section VI. II Since we reached conclusions in each of these analyses, we bring these conclusions forward Section II so that readers will have ready access to the outcomes of this report. II II District personnel providing data for this report. Our contract calls for specifying all district personnel providing data for this report. District teachers and administrators provided data in the following numbers
LSRD data sources n II Teachers in Pre-K Teachers in K Teachers in 1st Teachers in 2nd Teachers in 3rd Teachers in 4th Teachers in 5*' Self-contained 10 9 8 9 8 7 7 3 Principal, elementary District office 1 3 Page 1.5 k11 n Table 1.1 11 Little Rock School District 2005 - 2006 Extended Year Calendar in in n nn n II I n I I This calendar applies only to Cloverdale, Mabelvale, Stephens and Woodruff elementary schools. Please see regular year calendar for all other LRSD schools. July 27-28, 2005 August 1,2005 August 8, 2005 September 5, 2005 September 13, 2005 September 26, 2005 September 27, 2005 Qctober 6, 2005 October 7, 2005 October 10-14, 2005 October 17-21,2005 November 3-4, 2005 November 23-25, 2005 December 19, 2005 January 2, 2006 January 12, 2006 January 13, 2006 January 16, 2006 Jan. 30 - Feb. 3, 2006 February 6-10, 2006 February 20, 2006 February 21,2006 March 24, 2006 March 27-31,2006 April 14, 2006 May 15-19, 2006 May 29, 2006 June 28, 2006 June 29, 2006 "Check-In for Parents and Students at Schools First Day for Teachers First Day for Students Labor Day Holiday (Schools Closed) Open House - Elementary Schools Parent Conferences (Students Out) Staff Development (Students Out) End of V Quarter (41 Days) Staff Development (Students Out) Intersession Vacation Staff Development (Students Out) Thanksgiving Holiday (Schools Closed) Winter Vacation Begins (Schools Closed) Classes Resume End of 2" Quarter (44 Days) Teachers Record Day (Students Out
/a Day for Teachers) M.L. King, Jr. Holiday (Schools Closed) Intersession Vacation Parent Conference Day (Students Out) Staff Development (Students Out) Staff Development (Students Out) Spring Break (Schools Closed) End of 3' Quarter (46 Days) Intersession Memorial Day Holiday (Schools Closed) Last Day for Students/End of 4* Quarter (47 Days) Teachers Record Day/Last Day for Teachers (Vi \ Day) Total Student Days: 178 Page 1.6 h II li Section IL Conclusions and Implications. II n This section brings forward the conclusions reached in the analyses presented in Sections III, IV, V, and VI. In addition, we present our recommendations for programs modifications, including rationales for these recommendations, and our expectations for what these program modifications would achieve. n Conclusions \ n The following are the conclusions presented in Sections III through VI. n II n Conclusion III.l. The Extended Year schools outperformed the Comparison schools with respect to percentages of students proficient in literacy and mathematics over a five year time span leading up to spring 2005, an advantage measured in percentage changes in scores over the base year as well as in absolute percentage proficient point gains over the same time period. II II Conclusion IIL2. Based on analyses of test score residuals, Extended Year schools very modestly outperformed comparison schools on the 2005 Grade 4 Benchmark literacy test and significantly outperformed comparison schools on the 2005 Grade 4 Benchmark mathematics test. This result means that EY schools generally performed higher than would be expected from past performance and student demographics and that comparison schools generally fell short of predicted scores, particularly in mathematics. II n II Conclusion IV.l. Extended year schools show significantly more progress between 2000 and 2005 than Comparison schools in five important indicators
student mobility, disciplinary referrals, short-term suspensions, and African American student proficiency in both mathematics and literacy. Two indicators of attendance rates showed no meaningful change for either group of schools. The magnitude of these changes for EY schools and their consistent outpacing of changes in Comparison schools is a significant indication of positive developments in Extended Year schools. L Conclusion V.l. Two different analyses point to small performance advantages for students who attend Extended Year school Intersessions in comparison to smdents who do not attend. Direct comparisons of the percentages of students proficient on the 2005 Benchmark tests point to this conclusion. And our analysis of conelations between Intersession attendance and academic indicators comes to the same conclusion. Academic performance may be boosted by Intersession attendance
alternatively or in some combined way, the observed differences may reflect just which students choose to attend Page n.lII IE Intersessions and which students do not. Under either circumstance, a sound argument for attending Intersessions can be made. IE II n II Conclusion VI. 1. The parent, student, and teacher surveys accumulated over three years provide an overall appraisal of comparative achievement conditions in EY versus regular calendar schools. The result is that when reporting academic advantages or on conditions that might contribute to academic advantages, about 60-65 percent of parents and students report higher achievement in EY schools. Teachers report better conditions for learning, but fewer, only about 35 percent, report actual academic achievement differences favoring EY schools when asked this question directly. \ n II These survey results are wholly consistent with our data based achievement assessments presented in sections III, IV, and V. The general characterization gained in these analyses was that there are small but statistically significant differences in literacy and mathematics achievement favoring EY students. This applies both for 2005 Benchmark tests and also as we tracked performance trends over the past five years. What the parents, students, and teachers reported supports this result. n Implications: Recommended Program Modifications II II 11 Institute academic enrichment and student tutoring offerings as Intersession opportunities. This evaluation study sought evidence of the influence of participation in YRE schools on academic achievement, particularly as reflected in student test scores. The most prominent difference between a YRE school experience and a non-YRE school experience is the opportunity to attend as many as 4 week-long intersessions during the course of the school year. As presently constituted, intersessions are mainly recreational, craft, or special interest/ hobby focused. Few if any intersessions aim at academic skills. The intersession could be the site of voluntary or urged academic assistance. n II Take steps to increase the numbers of students who participate in intersessions. Since the intersession in particular, and YRE education in general show positive impacts on student achievement, it makes sense to help the intersession program reach more students. About 36 percent of all students in grades 3, 4, and 5 across YRE schools had not ever attended an intersession as of spring 2005. Potentially effective steps to boost participation are improved communications between teachers and parents (we did not find inadequacies in this area), providing family assistance that might foster attendance (such as childcare for very young siblings, and added incentives for teachers to create and offer attractive intersession opportunities. Take steps to boost African American student participation in intersessions. Page 11.211 d 11 d While about 36 percent of all students have not taken up intersession opportunities, fully 41 percent of African American students have not participated in intersessions. Given the large share of YRE students generally who are African American, these statistics imply that participation rates among the few white and other background students are extremely high. As with our assessments of how YRE schools generally fare for African American students, attempts to recruit students for intersessions will largely be greeted by an African American audience. d Retain the YRE structure of four evenly spaced terms punctuated by the 2-week intersession and vacation periods. d II Expectations of Program Modifications M n II The modification of intersessions to include academic opportunities would increase instructional time for students and effectively shorten breaks between academic terms for participating students. This change would add academic continuity to the pattern of overall in-school continuity established by the short breaks between terms. A direct expectation is higher academic achievement levels for participating students. An indirect benefit is that teachers newly drawn to intersession teaching because of academic interests would get to know more students, or current students in different ways, thus improving teacher student relationships for some teachers and students. II n n II Increasing the numbers of students participating in intersessions would extend intersession academic benefits to a larger proportion of YRE school students. Larger enrollments might permit additional intersession course offerings. Both of these changes would bring benefits in the form of higher student achievement for new participants, for higher shares of participants, and perhaps more widely if the intersession schedule in general is enriched. An indirect benefit similar to one cited above is that teachers newly drawn to intersession teaching because of an expanded intersession program would get to know added students, or current students in different ways, thus improving teacher student relationships for some teachers and students. Boosting intersession enrollments of African American students would bring more benefits of intersessions, as they stand or as they may increase with certain modifications discussed above, to African American students. A critical benefit cited in the evaluation study is increased academic success. Retaining the present YRE calendar, or a schedule much like the present one, would sustain a benefit of YRE that most parents and teachers cite - namely that students maintain their engagement in school over the short breaks and avoid the possible learning loss and re-engagement costs associated with longer vacation di Page 11.3II Ii II breaks during the school year. This feature may account for some of the general achievement advantages of YRE schools reported in this study, and thus retention of the basic YRE schedule would help sustain those advantages. II II II II II Ml Page II.4 n H H n n u M \n H Section III. Educational Effectiveness of EY Schools - Basic Test Scores II Question: II What do Arkansas standards test measures suggest about the effectiveness of EY schools? Methods: II II II The Benchmark tests. For this question, we focus on the annual Grade 4 Benchmark tests in literacy and mathematics as our main indicator of elementary school effectiveness. Our interest in this Grade 4 test stems from two factors - first its qualities as a standards-based test and second its consistent use in prior years allowing estimates of achievement change over time. The Benchmark tests are based on academic performance standards developed by the state of Arkansas. Unlike standardized norm- referenced tests, such as the ITBS or SAT9 which rank student performance according to national percentiles, the Benchmark tests are scored to rate student performance against a set of state-level proficiency standards and thus to provide objective measures of student learning. IB II n The Arkansas Benchmark test classifies students as advanced, proficient, basic, or below basic in both literacy and mathematics according to criteria established for each performance level. If standards are consistent from year to year, as they are designed to be, the Benchmark test can detect changes in levels of achievement from year to year for both individual students and for school grade levels and entire schools. Its the power of these standards-based tests to appraise student and school effectiveness that places them at the center of state school accountability programs nationwide. II n State and national goals for learners are expressed formally as the percentage of students performing at the proficient level or higher. The Federal No Child Left Behind Act requires states to set annual performance targets that imply growth of student proficiency rates over time - with a goal of 100 percent of students performing at the proficient level by 2014. We use the percentage of students performing at the proficient or higher level as the key criterion in our assessment of test scores. II Our comparative frameworks. Assessing school performance is customarily assisted by comparisons. One comparison frame is cunent performance versus past performance - i.e. has the school improved over time? Another comparison is how well a school is doing in comparison to other schools. Appraising either absolute performance levels or performance trends across schools demands identifying like- situated schools as a basis for comparison. This is because schools do not operate from equal starting points - nor do they necessarily work with equally prepared children. Schools across a state serve differing economic, racial, and cultural populations. Schools serving more formally educated and higher income families tend to show relatively higher student achievement measures across the board than schools serving poor populations. Page III. 1a d n li A task for our evaluation team was to select an appropriate group of schools to compare with the five Extended Year schools of central interest to this study. Because of the overriding importance of the education of African American children driving this evaluation, we used the percentage of African American student attendance as the principal criterion for comparison group construction. The five EY schools are highlighted in Table III. 1 on the following page. Table III. 1 anays schools according to African American school attendance and also indicates a measure of student family economic disadvantage - the percent of students qualifying for free and reduced price lunches. H d d d For comparison (or control) schools, we selected a group of schools that suitably bracketed the five EY schools on the basis of African American attendance. These are also shown in Table III. 1. The average AA attendance for the EY schools is 87.8 percent. The average AA attendance for the control schools is 84.9 percent. The percentages of economically disadvantaged students are 87.8 (EY) and 90.0 (control) respectively. Among demographic predictors of student achievement, SES or student family disadvantage is considered by far the most important, apart from non- or limited English speaking status. (This latter factor is important in some states and urban areas that have high populations of immigrant families, especially Hispanics. This is not a systematic factor in the Little Rock schools.) \ H The analyses. In this Section III we assess school performance with two separate analyses. n II A. The first analysis presents the percentages of students scoring proficient or better in literacy and mathematics respectively. Contrasts are drawn among an early two year period (2001 and 2002), a later two year period (2003 and 2004), and finally for the most recent year, the 2005 proficiency test scores.^ These statistics are reported for EY schools, all control schools, and all LRSD elementary schools combined. n II B. The second analysis reports an assessment of 2005 school performance - EY schools versus Control schools - that accommodates a change in standards implemented by LSRD for the 2005 Benchmark tests. This standards adjustment event is described and the resulting procedures outlined as the analysis is presented. ' These percentages are the simple averages of the school-level percentages listed. Taking school enrollment into account, the EY student population is about 90.2 percent African American. Control schools are about 88 percent African American. 2 For this and a subsequent set of analyses, we aggregated indicators from 01 and 02, and again from 03 dl and 04 in order to provide stable indications of performance (in other words, measures not subject to the random forces bearing on one-year statistics.) This procedure provides a bigger picture of whats going on in the data. Page III.2d d d TABLE III.l II n II c c c Little Rock School School District Extended Year (EY) and Comparison Schools, Selected Characteristics SCHOOL EY Percent AA Percent Disadv. d d d d n II II II c c c c c c c c c c c Rightsell Franklin Watson Mitchell Stephens Woodruff Wilson Geyer Sprs. Bale Baseline [Mablevale Western His. Wakefield Brady Meadowclf. [Cloverdale Romine Washington *** *** *** *** *** 100.0% 96.0% 96.0% 96.0% 95.0% 91.0% 89.0% 88.0% 82.0% 81.0% 80.0% 79.0% 78.0% 78.0% 78.0% 77.0% 76.0% 76.0% 87.0% 95.0% 94.0% 93.0% 92.0% 87.0% 94.0% 80.0% 89.0% 88.0% 88.0% [ 74.0% 92.0% 82.0% 85.0% 90.0% 77.0% 81.0% \ [indicates Extended Year Schools Indicates Comparison or Control Schools Percent AA Percent Disadv. - ] Percent African American Enrollment Percent Qualified Free and Red. Price Lunch n B B fl fl TABLE III.2 fl II n IB II II II II II PERCENT OF AFRICAN AMERICAN STUDENTS PROFICIENT BY SUBJECT, GROUP, AND SELECTED TIME PERIODS ALL EY SCHOOLS 2000-2002 2002-2004 2005 LITERACY MATH PCT. PROF. PCT. PROF. 15.7% 12.8% 40.0% 35.5% 21.5% 22.1% ALL COMPARISON SCHOOLS LITERACY MATH PCT. PROF. PCT. PROF. 23.0% 15.6% 46.0% 31.6% 26.3% 23.8% ALL ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS LITERACY MATH PCT. PROF. PCT. PROF. 37.5% 30.4% 59.5% 47.0% 39.5% 35.5% I a fi n II A. How have EY vs. Comparison Schools performed over time? Table III.2 (immediately following Table III.l) displays student proficiency statistics for EY and Control schools over five testing years. As described in footnote 2, the early data represent school years 2000 and 2001 combined, the later data combine school years 2003 and 2004, and the final statistics are for the latest full school year, 2004-2005. n n n 18 II II H n H Three patterns stand out in this table. One is that the proficiency percentages on the Grade 4 Benchmark tests are considerably higher for the schools overall than for either the EY or Comparison schools. This is expected, since the EY schools, and thus the comparison schools, were chosen because they represented schools with very high levels of economic disadvantage and high African American attendance. The second pattern is that schools in all three groups moved in a generally lockstep fashion over time. There were sizeable increases in student proficiency between the earliest biennium and the second more than doubling for the EY and Comparison schools with about 50 percent gains statewide. This of course heralded good news for many Little Rock schools over this four-year period. The third pattern is a significant downturn of proficiency rates in the 2005 school year for all three groups. There is an imposed reason for this downturn, the resetting of test performance standards, which precipitates our second score analysis just below. Extended Year vs. Comparison School performance. As far as appraising the fortunes of EY versus Comparison schools. Table III.2 shows comparable results for the two groups of schools over time, with an edge favoring the Extended Year schools. This edge comes in the larger advances between the 2000-02 biennium and 2005 for the EY schools. EY literacy scores are 37 percent higher in 2005 than 2002. EY math scores are 73 percent higher over the same time period. The comparable indices for the Comparison schools are 14 percent growth in literacy and 53 percent in mathematics. Interpretive note: differences are smaller than they seem. It is important to place these score changes in perspective. For example, the 37 percent increase in literacy scores for EY schools reported above does not signify a 37 percent increase in overall student performance. It represents movement from 15.7 percent of students proficient in the early biennium to 21.5 percent of students proficient in 2005. This is an absolute gain of 5.8 percentage points. The comparison school gain is 3.6 percentage points over the same time period. \ Conclusion III.l. The Extended Year schools outperformed the Comparison schools with respect to percentages of students proficient in literacy and mathematics over a five year time span leading up to spring 2005, an advantage measured in percentage changes in scores over the base year as well as in absolute percentage proficient point gains over the same time period.________________________________________________________ 0 Page III.3 MII I! II II H n n n IB IB IB II II II B B. Comparing EY versus Control school performance given the 2005 change in the Arkansas Benchmark test score standards. Standards shift. The scores in Table IIL2 derived from a playing field that was the same for both EY and Comparison schools. So head to head comparisons between the two groups of schools are meaningful and were discussed above. However, the dramatic downturn of scores for 2005 for all schools, including the EY and comparison schools, was in part, and probably in large part, due to the fact that the Arkansas Department of Education revised the scoring standards for the 2005 Benchmark tests. Periodic standards resetting is common to state standards testing systems. Arkansas made their standards of performance stricter for the 2005 test The result of this standards shift was that, for example, some ample range of 2005 student test scores that would have warranted proficient ratings in 2004 and earlier test years was now classified as basic. Similar downshifts occurred across the spectrum. Therefore it is difficult to interpret the absolute levels of the 2005 scores in the context of the earlier scores. Without some sort of a translation guide that we have not seen, we cannot determine that a given student scoring in, say, the basic range might in fact be performing at the same level as the prior year - a year in which the student was classified as proficient. In short, we dont fully know what to make of the lower percentages of students rated as proficient on the Benchmark tests in 2005 other than to say that the game changed and the tougher standards took their toll. Appraising test scores when standards change. All state testing systems face needs to change standards from time to time - typically on the order of every five or six years. The meaning of proficient and other levels of performance needs occasional review in the context of state educational, economic, and cultural circumstances. Federal education policy directives or climate can also propel standards reviews and adjustments. One way that state systems have managed to maintain continuity between testing years where scores shift dramatically because of standards changes is to create a predictive model for the new scores. This model uses underlying numerical scores available for all Benchmark tests - statistics called a scale scores for each student which can be averaged for each school. Scale scores are typically used to derive student proficiency level statistics and are designed to provide comparability of tests from year to year. The model incorporates factors that would reasonably predict average school scale scores from year to year. The most important factors predicting school test scores are the schools test scores from prior years. In addition, controlling for student family economic status renders predictions across schools more fair. A common linear regression procedure then links the predictive factors and scores across all schools mathematically. What results is an equation that uses a school's previous average student \ I Bi Page III.4H H II n test scale score in a subject such as literacy along with its economic status to predict its current average scale score in the same subject. A simple model or equation for predicting test scores can be created from the information described. Then when actual data for each school are placed into the equation, a predicted test score is generated for each school. In our case, if we know a schools 2003 average literacy score, its 2004 average literacy score, and its economic disadvantage index, a unique 2005 score can be predicted. The equations we derived for literacy and math score prediction are shown at the bottom of Table III.B.l (and I.a) and Table III.B.2 (and 2.a) respectively on the following four pages. \ II H n IS II n II II n States wanting to create sound indicators of whether or not schools are making annual progress build such models and derive predicted school scores. Then each schools actual score is compared to its predicted score. To the extent that a schools actual score exceeds its predicted score, the school is considered to have made progress through the current year. Schools whose actual test scores fall short of their predicted scores are considered to have fallen back and to not have made progress. The individual school statistic describing the difference between its predicted and its actual score is formally called a residual. Positive residual numbers indicate progress. Negative residual numbers indicate slippage i.e. the actual scores fell short of predicted scores. Larger numbers or more negative numbers indicate larger degrees of progress or slippage respectively. Table III.B. 1 on the following page shows the results of our residual analyses of school level 2005 Benchmark literacy tests scores. Here is what is involved in the presentation: All LRSD elementary schools are listed. The literacy residual score is listed for each school. Pulaski for example scored 2.35 points lower than its predicted score. Dodd scored 11.44 points higher than its predicted score. Deviations from predicted scores of more than about 3.4 points (or about two standard enors) would be considered statistically significant and meaningful. Table III.B. 1 .a is a graphic version of the previous table. A residual score is listed for each school the five EY schools, the 12 EY comparison schools, and the other schools. How do EY schools fare in literacy? (Tables III.B.l and III.B. La) Three of the Extended Year schools have positive literacy score residuals, two of which are statistically significant. The basic meaning of this is that for at least two of these schools, these schools did better than average based on their performance in the two prior years (and controlling for SES). One EY school shows a significant negative residual. The average literacy residual score for EY schools is a positive 2.8. How do Control Schools fare in literacy? Four of the twelve comparison schools show small positive literacy score residuals - none considered statistically 0 Page III.5a I H n a n H n H II n al II II TABLE III.B.l Schooi Lit Resid 2005 BENCHMARK LITERACY RESIDUALS FROM PREDICTED SCORES PULASKI WILLIAMS TERRY BOOKER FULBRIGT OTTER McDERMT CARVER DODD ROCKFLER WAKFIELD WASHING MABEL BASELINE WESTERN KING FAIRPARK FRANKLIN ROMINE WOODRUFF RIHTSELL GEYER BALE MITCHELL CLOVER MEADOW CHICOT WILSON BRADY STEPHENS WATSON Regression: 19.55 20.37 14.6 9.76 19.83 10.01 2.94 10.39 4.05 2.35 -2.94 -2.25 -1.5 -3.73 -0.52 2.07 -1.16 -6.28 -3.13 -5.34 -5.97 -3.58 -6.9 -3.5 -6.03 -7.28 -7.33 -10.65 -8.64 -12.07 -17.13 Average Resid. Benchmark Literacy Residual Controls PRED.LIT.05= 100.1 + (-24.1)SES04 + (.185)LIT03 + (.385)LIT04 R-Square Mean Scale Score St.Dev. SEM Minimum Maximum 0.66 198.28 9.54 1.71 198.29 218.66 -2.94 -2.25 Benchmark Literacy Residual EY schools -3.73 -0.52 -6.28 -3.13 -5.97 -3.58 -7.28 -10.65 -8.64 -17.13 -6.01 LIT03=AV.2003.SCH.LIT. SCALE SCORE LIT04=AV.2004.SCH.LIT. SCALE SCORE SES=PERCENT FREE AND REDUCED LNCH. page -1.5 -5.34 -3.5 -6.03 -12.07 -5.69 \ 0 0 I I II II n IB IB IB IB Bl II n Table in. B.l.a Benchmark Literacy 2005 Average School Residuals from Predictive Model STEPHENS I aSsSESBBBBBSSSSH MABEL MITCHELL WOODRUFF h jnBMnnHBi VSBBSSSSSBai WBBBHB %S3SBHS ^SBXS&&BJUUU4X3 MHBSSBBS VCSTSOUC o o JuX {/} -20 -15 -10 iniyR babBSS PULAggag BOOKa MEADOW BRADY GEYER BALE FULBRIGT WASHING CHICOT WILSON OTTER McDERMT I CTSh KWWWWB. MWWSi BSBBgfe QaSBSSSSESSXLBUKUUBmBBSkSB 'BaaaBsasi FAIRPARK N@9BBSB9i HBSSSI^ DODD -5 0 5 10 15 20 Residual from Predictive Model k A H n II II II II n II II II n n M Table III.B.2 School PULASKI WILLIAMS TERRY BOOKER FULBRIGT OTTER McDERMT CARVER DODD ROCKFLER WAKFIELD WASHING MABEL BASELINE WESTERN KING FAIRPARK FRANKLIN ROMINE WOODRUFF RIHTSELL GEYER BALE MITCHELL CLOVER MEADOW CHICOT WILSON BRADY STEPHENS WATSON 2005 BENCHMARK MATH RESIDUALS FROM PREDICTED SCORES Math Resid Control Schoo EY School Residuals Residuals 55.53 54.1 28.74 22.42 39.39 12.54 14.56 27.75 9.46 -3.8 -0.72 -3.89 12.7 10.58 -11.41 3.87 -9.28 -26.55 -1.21 -21.94 -12.59 13.76 -30.08 -18.22 31.93 -27.29 -3.92 -30.81 -41.48 -39.92 -52.73 -0.72 -3.89 10.58 -11.41 -26.55 -1.21 -12.59 13.76 -27.29 -30.81 -41.48 -52.73 12.7 -21.94 -18.22 31.93 -39.92 Averages -15.36 -7.09 Regression: Predicted 2005 Math Scale Score = 59.1-(11.85*SES)-i-.293*Math03+.492Math04 R-Square Mean Maximum Minimum St. Dev Std. Error 0.47 197.6 276.2 126.9 37.64 6.76 MATH03=A\/.2003.SCH.MATH. SCALE SCORE MATHO4=AV.2OO4.SCH.MATH. SCALE SCORE SES=PERCENT FREE AND REDUCED LNCH. page \ I I 0 table ni.B.2.a Benchmark Mathematics, 2005 Average School Residuals from Predictive Model n BSSSBSSSBBliB STEPHENS i MITCHELL V MABEL WOODRUFF BBBBBSXSSEXSSSEBBSiMMSJUJUBMWBSaSBMNflUlMKiB BasBSflHHHBHEBEEEBBHflBBBSBRSBSBlBSfe n n n IE II II II II o o x: BSS9BBEB9BMBCG9EGDE9 XSagSSSSSSSSSSSBBBBgESBSdCuSaEEB Illi mil I III IffMEI \XUJnaX2mJUBiUUUIMHMIiMi iwwiwriafTMittlMflasB "SESB&SSSB^BIBBSDBMaKiSSM QS99BB6@ BMSSBffiBHBBB ^UlUUUICSUalBaiUliiUlMMiiUB WASBHWSTS Fl II RHW ROCKFLERi FAIRPARK ROMINE PULASKI OTTER BALE CARVER WATSON MEADOW WILSON ft Mb B ymBft MWWft aHBHi HHIBBi CHICOT n TERRY DODD GEYER McDERMT T -60 -40 , -20 20 40 60 0 Residual from Predicted Score 0II H significant. Among the remaining eight schools, six have significant negative literacy score residuals. The average residual for the EY comparison schools is negative, -3.72. li H Without sifting this information with too fine a comb, the data suggest that the Extended Year schools modestly outperformed their comparison schools on the 2005 Grade 4 Benchmark literacy tests when test performance in 2003 and 2004 as well as economic status are taken into account. II n n How do EY schools fare in mathematics? Tables III.B.2 and III.B.2.a present the results of our residual analyses of Benchmark mathematics test scores. A glaring difference between these data and the literacy residual scores is that the numbers are much larger - large positive and large negative numbers show up frequently. The reason for this is that there is a much wider range of scores in mathematics than in literacy, with larger variation throughout the distribution. (The minimum and maximum predicted scale scores, along with standard deviations, are shown at the bottom of each table.) In plain terms, math performance varies much more widely across Little Rock elementary schools than does literacy performance. \ n n As shown in the mathematics residual table, three of the EY schools have positive mathematics score residuals, all of which are statistically significant. The basic meaning of this is that these three schools did better than average based on their performance in the two prior years (and controlling for SES). Two EY schools show significant negative residuals. The average mathematics residual score for EY schools is a positive 11.8. n II II How do Control Schools fare in mathematics? Five of the twelve comparison schools show positive mathematics score residuals - all considered statistically significant. All of the remaining seven control schools have significant negative mathematics score residuals. The average residual for the EY comparison schools is negative, -10.3. n These data suggest that the Extended Year schools significantly outperformed their comparison schools on the 2005 Grade 4 Benchmark mathematics tests when test performance in 2003 and 2004 as well as economic status are taken into account. n General caveat. It is important to remember that outperforming in the residual analyses does not necessarily mean that schools attained higher 2005 Benchmark test scores than others. It that means that schools did better than predicted based on past performance and student family economic status. Conclusion HI.2 Based on analyses of test score residuals. Extended Year schools very modestly outperformed comparison schools on the 2005 Grade 4 Benchmark literacy test and significantly outperformed comparison schools on the 2005 Grade 4 Benchmark mathematics test. This result means that EY schools generally performed at a higher level than would be expected from past performance and student demographics and that comparison schools generally fell short of predicted scores. I Page III.6n H Section IV. Effectiveness of Extended Year versus Comparison Schools LRSD Portfolio of Data II II II In the fall of 2005, the Little Rock School District published a draft report titled Portfolio of Data for the Little Rock School District. This is a rich document that presents statistics related to most of the issues commonly tracked for schools. The report contains detailed displays of data each school, for each grade level, and for each of five school years, 2001 to 2005. Topics range across issues of attendance, student behavior, student mobility, and student achievement. For many topics, separate tables are presented for African American students. This last feature was attractive to our team, given our mission and the subjects of the litigation. H \ n H This Portfolio of Data is a valuable resource for anyone wanting to do analyses of individual schools or groups of schools as well as wanting to conduct comparative analyses - across years or across schools. As we read the document, we identified seven mini-studies that the data would support. Each afforded opportunities to compare Extended Year schools with our Comparison schools - and to set these against data for all district elementary schools combined. II We chose to explore all topics in the Portfolio of Data that would commonly be regarded as indicators of the performance or effectiveness of an elementary school. This was the resulting inventory: II II a. b. c. d. e. f. g- Student mobility. Student attendance. African American student attendance. Student disciplinary referrals. Short-term student suspensions. African American student performance on Benchmark math tests. African American student performance on Benchmark literacy tests. n ) I n n Approach to the analyses. We used the same methods to pursue all seven analyses as follows: We assessed students in grades 3, 4, and 5 together. This selection reflected our interest in assessing students who potentially had enrolled for multiple years in the same school in order to benefit from whatever the school had to offer. And combining the grade levels supports indicators of whole school performance. We sought indications of performance-change over the past five years, from the earliest year to the latest year that data were reported. The EY school programs were launched during this time period and their effects stood to show up as changes in the Portfolios indicators, early to present. fl Page IV. 1 HH n on Our assessment of progress or change in each of the seven areas was based average performance in the two most recent years (2003-04 and 2004-05) with II the average performance in the first two years reported (2000-01 and 2001-02). This involved averaging the scores for each two year time period. When looking for trends in multi-year school data, change based on two year starting and ending points is less influenced by fluctuations in the statistics from one year to the next, which can mask patterns of change. II II We report growth as percentage changes in indicators for each of the seven areas. This choice reflects out interest in comparing these areas of performance in a common metric. li Table fV. 1 on the following page shows the results of all seven analyses, and for each of the three groups of schools - all EY schools. Comparison schools, and all district elementary schools. n n II Results. Positive advantages, i.e. higher percentage growth in measures, show for Extended Year schools than for control schools in all seven areas. In two areas, all student attendance and African American student attendance, the reported changes for all three groups are negligible and differences between school groups even smaller. In each of the five remaining areas, EY schools show quite favorably when contrasted with Comparison schools. We discuss each, starting from the leftmost column of Table fV.l. II n Student mobility. EY schools showed a decline in student mobility of about 19 percent over the five years. This means that their students tended to stay longer in the same school as the years progressed. Comparison school student mobility remained unchanged over the five years, and the mobility of students across all elementary schools combined decreased by about 11 percent. n n Student disciplinary referrals. As shown in the fourth column of Table IV. 1, student disciplinary referrals in Extended Year schools declined by about 14 percent between 2000 and 2005. In contrast, student disciplinary referrals increased by 85 percent in Comparison schools and by 44 percent in all schools combined. s Short-term suspensions. Change patterns in student suspensions paralleled change patterns in disciplinary referrals for the three groups of schools. Extended Year schools experienced a nearly 25 percent decline in short-term suspensions, while suspensions grew in Comparison schools by two-thirds and in all schools by about 34 percent between 2000 and 2005. African American student math proficiency. The percentage of Extended Year school African American students rated as proficient on the Grade 4 Benchmark mathematics test rose considerably in Extended Year schools Page IV.2II Table IV.l Percentage Change In Selected Indicators from 2001 to 2005, Extended Year Schools, Matched Comparison Schools, and All Elementary Schools Student Mobility Average Student Attendance Days African American Student Attendance Student Disciplinary Referrals Short-term Suspensions Share of African American Students Proficient, Benchmark Math Tests Share of African American Students Proficient, Benchmark Literacy Tests Growth (- decline) in percentage terms EY Schools Comparison Schs. All Elem Schools Notes: -19.10% 0.13% -11.36% Sig.Diff. 1.63% 1.59% 2.26% 1.96% 1.31% 2.01% No significant differences -13.86% f 84.98% 43.54% -24.38% I 178.43% | 154,78^ 66.67% 34.14% 102.46% 98.02% 54.61% 58.67% EY Schools Comparison Schs. All Elem Schools Significant differences (Significant difference refers to Extended Year Schools vs. Comparison Schools.) I 1. Data Source: LSRD: Portfolio of Data for the Little Rock School District, 2005 2. Benchmark Test proficiency comparisons are 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 (averaged to establish a a baseline) versus 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 (averaged to establish outcome years). 3. The remaining five comparisons compare 2004 and 2005 data to 2000 and 2001 data. 4. Combining two early and two late years respectively for pre- and post- measures provides more stable estimates than single school years, for which values tend to fluctuate due to random influences. page B It It Bl between 2000 and 2004' - by 178 percent. The percentages of African American students scoring at proficient levels in Comparison schools and in all schools also increase but by lower margins
102 percent and 55 percent respectively. It It African American student literacy proficiency. The percentage of Extended Year school African American students rated as proficient on the Grade 4 Benchmark literacy test also rose considerably between 2000 and 2004 - by 155 percent. The percentages of African American students scoring at proficient levels in Comparison schools and in all schools also grew again by less than the growth attained for the EY schools: 98 percent and 59 percent respectively. \ It It Summing up It It The statistics presented in Table IV.l comparing patterns of change across seven performance indicators uniformly favor Extended Year schools over Comparison schools, in five areas substantially so. While it may ultimately prove difficult to link each of these indicators to conditions brought to the schools by virtue of participation in the Extended Year program, the uniformity of the trends reported suggests that some thing or things in common have been productively at work in the Extended Year schools. It II II II Conclusion IV.l. Extended year schools show significantly more progress between 2000 and 2005 than Comparison schools in five important indicators: student mobility, disciplinary referrals, short-term suspensions, and Afncan American student proficiency in both mathematics and literacy. Two indicators of attendance rates showed no meaningful change for either group of schools. The magnitude of these changes for EY schools and their consistent outpacing of changes in Comparison schools is a significant indication of positive developments in Extended Year schools. II M The Portfolio of Data presents Benchmark test proficiency statistics for only four schools years - up through 2003-2004. The changes reported here are for the time span 2000 through 2004. We noted earlier that Benchmark proficiency scores declined systematically between 2004 and 2005, and declined for all schools because of standards resetting. This change for 2005 is not accommodated in this analysis. Page IV.3II II Section V. Assessing Extended Year School Intersessions II II A core component of the Extended Year school is the Intersession (IS). These are one or two week special study units that serve to extend the school year by as much as four weeks - into late June each year. The intersession programs vary a great deal - mainly offering special interest topics. They are not designed as academic remediation opportunities. Many regular school teachers take the opportunity to diversify their teaching and to earn extra compensation for conducting Intersession classes. n M ni About sixty percent of enrolled students in the Extended Year schools as of spring 2005 had participated in between 1 and 3 Intersessions. As shown in Table V.2 below, about 65 percent of all students in the Extended Year schools and 59 percent of African American students were IS participants. Because the number of non African American students in EY schools amounts account for only about 10 percent of students, these different participation rates imply that the approximately 60 non-African American students participate in Intersessions at very high rates. \ M II M II In this section of our report, we display two ways of assessing the academic importance of intersession attendance. We must begin with the caution that because the Intersessions themselves are generally not devoted specific to mathematics or literacy skills, we would not expect strong influences on test scores due to the nature of Intersession instruction. Yet all Intersessions involve the use of the English language in a variety of ways. And they most probably incorporate language that is more aligned with school reading, writing, and spoken word than with out-of-school language. Moreover, Intersessions cause students to remain in school and school-like environments over more of the school year that what students experiences in regular calendar schools. II Intersessions also keep children in something of an in-school frame of mind for a longer school year than what children experience in non Extended Year schools. II Our inquiry results are consistent with an Intersession program with the qualities described above. As we soon present. Intersession attendance within EY schools is associated with small but meaningful academic advantages. n Intersessions and proficiency scores basic comparisons. Table V. 1 on the following page presents an overview of Intersession participation and the differences in student performance between Intersession attendees (lAs) and non-attendees (NAs). The following are the most important perspectives shown on these issues
Of the 589 grade 3, 4, and 5 EY school students, 342 had attended one or more Intersessions and 244 had not. The student SES (economic disadvantage) percentages differ by only one point for the two groups. Page V. 1fl fl m Table V.l II M fl fl fl fl fl fl fl fl fl fl All EY Schools, Intercession Participants vs. Non-participants, by selected groups and performance outcomes. Grades 3, 4, and 5
N = 589 N students (Grades 3-5) Percent Econ. Disadvantaged /o Proficient /o Proficient Race/Ethnic Distr: African American White Hispanic Asian, Pacific Is N of students 244 90 121 132 0 LR District 5630 64.0% Literacy 39.5% Math 35.5% 68.5% 22.3% 4.1% 5.0% All 5 Extended year (EY) schools: Attended Intercession Did Not Attend I.S. 342 244 82.0% 26.0% 25.1% 92.7% 4.1% 2.0% 1.2% 83.0% 19.7% 22.2% 88.0% 4.0% 4.4% 3.6% \ N of sessions 0 1 2 3 4 pagen M la Proficiency scores, using for our purposes the percentage of students scoring at the proficient level in the 2005 Benchmark tests, are higher for lAs than for NAs. In literacy, the advantage for IS attendees is 26 percent proficient versus just under 20 percent proficient for non-attendees. The difference in mathematics is smaller - about 25 percent proficient versus 22 percent. M n While these differences and distinctions are small, they are consistent with some sort of language effect of Intersession attendance involved with language in various ways but not generally involved with mathematics instruction or math-related experiences. n M Table V.l also shows the racial/ethnic breakdown of both the LA and NA groups - the attending group was nearly 93 percent African American, while the non-attending group was a smaller 88 percent African American. Also shown in Table V.l are the number of Intersessions taken by children in the attendee group - 132 had taken 3 sessions, 121 had taken 2 sessions, and 90 attendees had taken 1 Intersession among the 2005 students in EY schools. IB M Table V.2 shows contrasts between Intersession attendees and NAs in finer detail than Table V. 1, while also showing statistics specifically for African American students as well some baseline comparisons statistics for all LRSD students. II II In general, similar academic performance advantages for Intersession attendees show for both African American and for all students. This makes sense given that about 90 percent of the EY school students are African American. Raw test scores (number of items correct on the 2005 literacy and math Benchmark tests) are shown along with test scale scores and the patterns in these scores parallel those reported for student proficiency. II n The message in the test comparisons, no matter which scores are used, is the small performance advantage shown for Intersession attendees over non-attendees. While the difference is very small and statistically insignificant, the advantages accruing to Intersession attendance appear to be a little smaller for African American students than for all students combined. After the next analysis which gets at the same questions in a different way, we comment further on the small differences between lAs and NAs shown in Table V.2 data. II Correlations of Intersession attendance with achievement indicators. Another way to explore the implications of Intersession attendance is a straightforward look at correlations between attendance (versus non-attendance) on the one hand and available performance indicators on the other hand. This analysis asks the question, does Intersession attendance associate with (or conelate with) higher individual literacy or math scores? For this analysis we assigned a 1 to each student who had attended one or more Intersessions and a 0 to non-attendees. We then incorporated more differentiated scales of literacy and mathematics than just proficiency versus non-proficiency. We used literacy and mathematics performance levels scaled 1 through 4 to capture the below basic to advanced range in student performance. We also explored literacy and math test raw scores (numbers of items correct) as alternative indicators of performance. Since the basic M Page V.2I I I B B B Table V.2 N Percent attending or not: Percent econ Disadv. % Proficient % Proficient Average Raw score, 2005 Average Raw score, 2005 Grade 4 Ave scale score Grade 4 Ave scale score Literacy Math Literacy Math Literacy Math Student performance In EY schools by participation in Intercessions
All students and All African American Students, Grades 3, 4, and 5. 2005 For reference: Alt Little Rock Students, Grade 3-5 All students in Extended Year Schools (N = 595): All African American Students in Extended Year Schools (N=:539) 5664 NA 63.8 39.5 55.5 (sd) (sd) (sd) (sd) 56.5 18.1 36 16.6 203 32.6 207.8 95.5 Attended Intercession Did Not Attend I.S. Attended Intercession Did Not Attend I.S. 343 249 318 219 35.5% 59.2% 40.8% 80.3% 84.3% 81.3% 28.1% 19.7% 24.6% 19.1% 29.5% 22.2% 23.3% 21.0% (sd) indicates standard deviation 50.7 19.2 45.8 20 50 18.1 45.5 19.8 33 17.7 29.7 17.2 30.7 16.1 29.2 16.7 189.1 38.4 188.3 0.28 189.7 33.1 187.8 27.6 190.8 108 183.9 108.6 180.2 100.3 179.24. 108.2 page B B B B B B B MHII II II concerns surrounding academic achievement are focused on standards and the requirements of No Child Left Behind, the performance level indicators should he considered more important than the raw score indicators. II II Table V.3 on the following page displays a standard correlation matrix showing relationships among five different variables, including literacy and mathematics performance indicators as well as Intersession attendance. The boxes contain data describing correlations between the scores in each row (labeled on the left side of the matrix), and the scores displayed respectively across the tops of the columns. n II M (The top number in each cell shows the correlation coefficient (Pearson's r), the center number is a standard indicator of statistical significance - any number less than .050 implies a significant correlation, and the bottom number is the number of students involved in the analysis. Note: the asterisks attaching to the correlation coefficients also conform to standard statistical reporting. Correlation coefficients with one asterisk are significant at the 95 percent confidence level. Two asterisks indicate a 99 percent confidence level. Ninety-five percent and higher confidence levels signify that the correlations show real positive relationships between the two scores as opposed to chance or spurious associations.) \ n II Correlations show as the number 1 in a diagonal row of boxes result when an indicator is correlated with itself - perfect conelation. As another example of reading from this matrix, literacy performance levels correlate very highly with literacy raw scores: the correlation coefficient is .895 and this correlation is significant at the 99 percent confidence level. I II II n The main display of interest in the Table V.3 matrix is the bottom row. Reading across, this shows correlations between Intersession attendance and four respective performance indicators: literacy performance level, literacy raw scores, math performance levels and math raw scores. All of these performance indicators derive from the 2005 Benchmark standards tests. Intersession attendance would have occurred largely in spring 2004 and spring 2003. A few sessions would go back as far as spring 2002 for these students. n M What is shown is fairly straightforward. Intersession attendance correlates positively and significantly with both literacy indicators, and with the mathematics test raw scores. The correlation between Intersession attendance and mathematics performance level warrants about a 0.91 confidence level - approaching statistical significance. I I I 01 While there are positive conelations between Intersession attendance and the literacy and mathematics performance indicators, the correlations are small - all are in the 0.10 range. These small conelations are entirely consistent with the contrasts in proficiency levels between Intersession attendees and non-attendees reported in the previous analysis and shown in Table V.l. Bi Page V.3n n TABLE V.3 n INTERSESSION CORRELATIONS WITH PERFORMANCE ALL GRADE 3,4 and 5 EY STUDENTS, 2005 n n Cbrrebtions n HI n n n LhwlEV UTRW MAPBRFLV MA.THRAW intersession yes no UTPFlfV Pearson Corre btion Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Corre btion Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Corre iation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Cctc Iation Sig. tailed) N Pearson Corre iation Sig. ^-tailed) N 1 589 .895* .000 589 .686* .000 589 .733* .000 589 .101* .032 454 LTIRAW .895* .000 589 1 595 .679* .000 589 .756* .000 595 .124* .008 460 MAPKFLV .686* .000 589 .679* .000 589 1 589 .932* .000 589 .080 .089 454 M^JHRAW .733* .000 589 .756* .000 595 .932* .000 589 1 595 .093* .046 460 intersession yes no .101* .032 454 .124* .008 460 .080 .089 454 .093* .046 460 1 460 n Goirelation is significant at the 0.01 level (2- tailed). *. GorrelMion is significant at the0.05 level (2-tailed). n n n n LITPFLEV LITRAW MAPERFLV MATHRAW Literacy performance level Literacy raw Score (N items correct) Mathematics performance level Mathematics raw score (N items conect) Intersession Yes/NO Contrasts students who have taken one or more EY intersessions with those who have not participated.q q q Interpretative note. The performance advantages shown in Table V.l and Table V.2 are statistically significant, but the differences are small. The differences are real, but there is no certain way of answering an important underlying question. This is whether the differences result from intersession attendance, or whether they simply reflect differences between students who choose to attend Intersessions and those who do not. In typical appraisals of this sort of quandary, the larger are the differences the greater is the importance of the question. So this is not a crucial question facing this evaluation. q q q There is some reason to not be too concerned about the genesis of performance differences shown in this section for Intersession attendees. Under either circumstance, we would be inclined to recommend that students attend Intersessions. As one possibility, the experience would provide a boost to achievement. As another possibility, students who choose to attend Intersessions give themselves an opportunity to associate and work with students who, on average, are doing somewhat better in school. This alternative possibility might also bring advantages to Intersession attendees. \ q q q q Conclusion V.l. Two different analyses point to small performance advantages for students who attend Extended Year school Intersessions in comparison to students who do not attend. Direct comparisons of the percentages of students proficient on the 2005 Benchmark tests point to this conclusion. And our analysis of correlations between Intersession attendance and academic indicators comes to the same conclusion. Academic performance may be boosted by Intersession attendance
alternatively or in some combined way, the observed differences may reflect just which students choose to attend Intersessions and which students do not. Under either circumstance, a sound argument for attending Intersessions can be made. q q q q q a a Page V,4m II Section VI. Surveys of Parents, Students, and Teachers Specialized Parent Interviews II II II This section reports the results of surveys of Extended Year school parents, students, and teachers in all five EY schools. We also conducted a set of in-depth telephone interviews with EY school parents who had parent experience in both EY and regular calendar schools. Some of the children of interviewed parents had transfened schools, some parents had students in both types of schools, and some parents had experienced the conversion of their school from a regular calendar to Extended Year. In all of these instances, parents were in a position to point out differences between the two sorts of school experiences. II II ii Survey methods. LRSD research and evaluation staff began surveys of EY school parents, students, and teachers in 2002-2003. The questions in these surveys focused on academic achievement issues as well as on qualities of the EY experience. For this evaluation, we replicated verbatim the multiple-choice questions from past year surveys. The multiple choice questions from these surveys can be seen in Tables VI.l.G, yi.2.G, and VI. 3. G below where we consolidate the responses of all five schools and display the results for parent, student, and teacher surveys respectively. Each of these tables shows all of the survey questions along with distributions of responses. II We also invited parents, students, and teachers to respond in writing to open questions related to differences between EY school and regular calendar school experiences. These open-response questions focused on achievement issues and offered opportunities for respondents to suggest ways to improve EY schools. These open questions were composed with consultation from the LRSD PRE staff who in turn consulted with individual EY school personnel as these questions were written. These questions were concerned mainly with differences between Extended Year schools and traditional calendar schools. The surveys were finalized in late summer of 2005. The surveys were administered to students in grades 3, 4, and 5 by LRSD PRE staff who coordinated administration efforts in the five EY schools. Schools sent parent surveys home and collected completed surveys. And EY school teachers completed our surveys directly. In total, we amassed 525 individual parent surveys, 636 student surveys, and 157 teacher surveys. The teacher survey response rate was close to 100 percent. Parent and student survey returns rates were about 30 percent overall. Page VI. 1 n n n n n \11 II Organization of the interview data II The following 26 pages display a great many statistics and much information generated from our parent student and teacher surveys. We also append to this report 30 pages of survey data showing results for EY schools individually. II Here is a guide to what is included, in order: II From Parent Surveys II Table VLl.F Table VL2.F.2 Table VI.1.G Parent written response table Parent comparisons of schools Consolidated parent survey data for eight multiple choice questions 1 page 2 pages 3 pages II From Student Surveys il Table VL2.F Table VL2.G il Student written response table Consolidated student survey data for 11 multiple choice questions From Teacher Surveys Table VI.3.F Table VL3.G 1 page 3 pages II Teacher written response table Consolidated teacher survey data for 12 multiple choice questions 1 page 3 pages II From Parent Interviews Detailed displays of quotes and response distributions for 8 questions 12 pages II Appendix: Individual school results from parent, student and teacher surveys 30 pages n n \ For this section of the report, we focus on the core issue of student achievement and the differences that the Extended Year calendar may bring to students. We draw on observations and assessments from each table. All contrasts reported are between Extended Year and regular calendar year schools. Page VI.2II II Notes from survey and interview tables II From Parent Surveys DI Table VI.l.F Parent written response table 1 page II About two-thirds of parents report that EY schools are better when it comes to student academic success. The largest cluster of reasons for this is that shorter breaks cause students to forget less and that staying in school longer helps keep student minds fresh. \ n II Parent suggestions for improvement of the EY program are spread across several ideas, although more than half claim there is no need for improvement. Suggestions include more educational opportunities (e.g. as opposed to recreational or hobby-focused Intersessions), more tutoring, better parent information, and better childcare to boost after school and Intersession opportunities. n Table VI.2.F.2 il Parent survey quotes 2 pages This table contains the raw quotes that support the analysis of parent survey comments presented in the previous table. Table VI. 1 .F Table VLl.G Consolidated parent survey data 3 pages n n II This table displays distributions of parent answers to multiple-choice questions on the parent survey. Fall 2005 parent survey responses from all five YRE schools are consolidated for this presentation. n n The most important observations regarding student achievement from this table include: Just over half of all parents cite higher achievement in EY schools and over 60 percent would prefer that their children continue in EY schools. A large majority of parents believe that children are more interested in school when in EY schools. Half of the parents support the expansion of the EY model to other schools. From Student Surveys Table VI.2.F Student yvritten response table. 1 page The student quotes reveal mixed feelings on the part of students about whether or not students do better academically in EY schools. Positive answers center on having more time in school and having a greater variety of school experiences. Negative answers are spread out, but concentrate somewhat on the fact that some EY students have Page VI,3m m siblings in regular schools and that the clash of two different annual school calendars can be disruptive. m Table VI.2.G Consolidated student survey data 3 pages II m Students report more interest in school in EY schools (84 percent) and that the EY school teachers are more patient and helpful (89 percent). These two questions gained more consensus than other questions across all surveys. Most (79 percent) feel that they have more time to secure extra help when its needed in EY schools. \ I. m About 56 percent of students claim that they learn more in the EY structure than in regular schools. Students do not favor shorter vacation periods, however. IH II From Teacher Surveys TaWg VL3.F Teacher written response table 1 page n II As with parents and student, teachers offered comments indicating that students achieve at higher levels in EY schools than in regular calendar schools. The teachers who feel this way report three main reasons: students forget less with shorter summers, the whole schedule produces less stress and less burnout than regular calendars, and it is easier for students to catch up in EY schools if they get behind. I IR n Among teachers feeling that EY schools do not present academic advantages, many report that there is essentially no difference between the two types of calendars when it comes to academic achievement
others cite attendance problems at Intersessions in the EY schools as holding back what could be higher student performance. n n Teacher suggestions for improving EY schools include adding professional development opportunities for EY school teachers, extending all schools to the EY model to bring benefits to all and to make school calendars consistent for all children. A prominent suggestion for improvement was adjusting the calendar to have a shorter break in February and a longer break before Intersessions in May. TaWe VL3.G Consolidated teacher survey data 3 pages Teachers are less positive than parents or students about the relative academic benefits of Extended Year schooling. Just over one-third of teachers feel that EY schools boost academic achievement. (Teacher survey responses were less sanguine on EY school student achievement advantages than were their transcribed comments from the interviews. Teachers tend to agree that EY schools bring a wider variety of educational Page VI.4II II II experiences to their students and two thirds believe that students benefit from the Intersessions. A majority believes that EY schools offer more academic continuity. About half of teachers find EY schools less stressful. A large majority of teachers report that they benefit from opportunities to earn stipends for optional Intersession employment. n Rounding up the surveys \ II n There are many questions worth exploring in the survey data we collected. The constituents involved, especially parents and teachers, will probably take interest in the results for their respective school communities. Discussions of the surveys may lead to further insights and suggestions for Extended Year. We venture a global survey-based conclusion at this point regarding our most important subject, student achievement. II n K n n n n Conclusion VLl. The parent, student, and teacher surveys accumulated across all five EY schools provide an overall appraisal of comparative achievement conditions in EY versus regular calendar schools. The result is that when reporting academic advantages or on conditions that might contribute to academic advantages, about 60-65 percent of parents and 80 percent of students report higher achievement in EY schools. Teachers report better conditions for learning, but fewer, only about 35 percent, report actual academic achievement differences favoring EY schools when asked this question directly. These survey results are wholly consistent with our data based achievement assessments presented in sections III, IV, and V. The general characterization gained in these analyses was that there are small but statistically significant differences in literacy and mathematics achievement favoring EY students. This applies both for 2005 Benchmark tests and also as we tracked performance trends over the past five years. What the parents, students, and teachers reported supports this result. Parent Interviews The final entry in Section VI of this report is our report of our parent interviews. The responses to parent interviews should be set against insights reported by parents, students, and teachers from surveys in this report. The parent interviews, having been conducted in fall of 2005, also serve as a contemporary check on conditions in EY schools from the parents perspectives. Page VI.5m n m Immediately following the consolidated parent, student, and teacher surveys, and before the Appendix containing individual school survey results, is a report of our fall 2005 parent interviews. Parents from all five EY schools were sampled for this report. We developed our sample with the assistance of personnel at the LRSD central office. We generated a list of all families who had had a child enrolled in an EY school for at least two years AND had also had a child enrolled in a non-year round school for two years. Thus we sought parents who had a valid basis for drawing comparisons between the two school calendars. \ m n Out of an initial sample of 104 families who met these criteria, we could reach only 41 families for interviews. Parent phone contact lists contained many numbers that had been disconnected and some numbers that did not reach the designated family. The families we managed to contact fully cooperated with the effort. I' n n The parent interview report is organized according to the eight questions on the interview protocol. For each of questions 1-6, we recorded parent responses and then classified them into the categories used to depict response patterns. We also include the essence of all parent statements in their responses to questions 1-6. n n How did you come to be a parent with experience in both EY and non-EY schools? As can be seen in the display for Question 1, nearly 70 percent of the parents met the two-school criterion because their childs school had converted to the EY calendar. Thirty percent had transferred their child(ren) from a regular calendar to an EY calendar school. As can be seen from the quotes on page 1 of the parent interview display, the reasons for switching schools and opinions about school conversions are extremely diverse. n n Main differences, EY versus regular calendar. Parents cited two main differences between the two school calendars. About 39 percent cited better learning in EY schools. The same percentage cited the schedule as the main difference, as neither a plus nor a minus as far as achievement was concerned. The reasons cited for achievement differences were largely the longer school year. t n Focus on learning differences. After letting the parent come up with his or her own perceptions of differences between the EY and regular calendars, in Question 3 we asked specifically about learning differences. The response to this question was a strong vote in favor of EY schools. Just over eighty percent of parents reported EY schools to generally be better, with more learning. As they talked about this observation, about 31 percent attributed reduced learning loss as the reason children performed better in EY schools. Why learning advantages in EY schools? The 80 percent of parents who thought learning was better in EY schools offered a number of reasons for this in responding to Question 4. Less learning loss was claimed by 30 percent of parents. Page VI.6n m Fourteen parents cited a companion reason - shorter breaks and vacations in EY schools. About 1 in 8 parents said the teachers were better and another 1 in 8 claimed that the Intersessions helped the students learn more. m Do children feel differently about themselves in EY schools (Question 5)? Parents generally interpreted this question to mean, does your child like being in the EY school better. The answer to this question is no for nearly two-thirds of the parents - they feel the same or question the model - especially the calendar in which they feel they go to school longer. This is pronounced in early June, as regular school start vacations and EY schools are still in session or starting Intersessions. IH q Do children talk about being in an EY school (Question 6)? The responses to this question parallel those offered regarding the previous question. A majority of responses reflect children asking about/ or complaining about the schedule differences - usually with their eyes on vacation schedules. Some children adjust and like the EY schedule. n n Does your child receive any specialized education services (Question 7)? About 16 percent of the students in our EY parent sample were participating in the gifted and talented program. Only about 3 percent mentioned resources classes and 3 percent cited music as a special service. n Does your family utilize before or after school childcare programs (Question 8)? Eleven percent of families participate in childcare. Eighty-nine percent do not. n What stands out in the parent interviews? n n n Parent responses about perceived better learning are one highlight of the interview responses - this was offered spontaneously but about 40 percent of parents and by about 80 percent of parents when asked to report on any learning differences. The main reasons for reported learning differences center on the EY schedule - more focus on school and less learning loss. The Intersessions are generally not cited as a contributor to added learning - not academic learning anyway. According to their parents, more children complain about the EY school situation than praise it. Children tend to focus on the shorter vacations and being in school at times when others are out. It is not clear from the responses whether or not achievement levels are impacted for the children who have issues with the EY calendar. Page VI.7m K m Appendix II Detailed reports of all survey data by school are shown in the appendix to this report which follows. These data were the building blocks for the consolidated interview data we have focused on for this draft report. These individual school charts may inspire feedback from constituents at specific schools as we proceed to our final report. II \ II II n n n II n n n Page VI.8TABLE VI.l.F Parent Discussion Questions 2005 l.Do you think Year Round Education is better than regular school for helping students succeed? Why do you feel this way? Yes, Because: Keeps students' minds fresh/they forget less during breaks More time for education/less distractions Keeps them focused on school They learn more My student likes it Gives students who are behind more time to catch up Student gets more vacation time #this answer 26 21 21 17 3 7 6 total who answered 138 138 138 138 138 138 138 %this answer 19% 15% 15% 12% 2% 5% 4% No, Because: Student is left out from summer activites and family vacations Student gets burned out Kids in the family are on different schedules Childcare problems for working parent 14 6 6 11 138 138 138 138 10% 4% 4% 8% 2. How can we improve Year Round Education Schools? More educational activities and field trips More tutoring Childcare for working parents during after school and intersessions More favorable teacher/student ratio Keep parents more informed Good as is/No improvements needed 14 17 15 3 12 26 87 87 87 87 87 87 16% 20% 17% 3% 14% 30% page s s sn TABLE VL1.F.2 V m Question 1: Do you think Year Round Education is better than regular school for helping students succeed? Why do you feel this way? m ii II II n n n n Because it provides a continuous learning environment and a safe place to be. I feel that Year Round Education has kept my childrens minds active and they retain more of what they learn. Educators spend more time teaching rather than re-teaching skills that have been displaced due to long gaps within the summer. I feel that the short breaks within the school year give the parents, teachers, and students much needed time away from school activities, such as homework, etc., and when school resumes everyone comes back replenished. I dont like YRE because the program takes away summer vacation from the children and their family. I think they have more time to know the concept of study in the YRE school. Its not the length of time at school, its the quality and caring of the teachers and assistants. The staff are more attentive with students. Intersessions give students the opportunity to do extra educational activities during school hours. I think the year round school molds kids into loving school and I think it will help a lot of children in the long run because I think the longer you work at something the more things you can accomplish. Year round schools interfere with our family vacations in the summer. We cannot plan our family activities now as we did before because we knew the months the kids were out of school. Students should have their summer available to stay away from regular academic studies for fun and refreshment. My kids are fed up with the year round program and are starting to dislike school. The YRE school has not been beneficial to my child due to the fact that she was never included in the intersessions. She is not performing to the best of her abilities and could have used the extra help. I am very disappointed in the YRE. We were never notified of the intersession in time to sign up. Its good because the student doesnt have a long period between breaks. This allows the student to remember previous information. My daughter aint learning nothing anyway. Her teacher is just giving her grades to pass her to the next grade. My daughter is a first grader and she cant read she dont know small words like was, come, is, words like that. There is no difference. The students spend the same amount of time in school, just different time spans. \ TABLE VL1.F.2 m Question 2: How Can we improve Year Round Education Schools? IV IV IV IV IV iV II IV n Making their summer vacation a little longer and start their summer with regular school. By making intersession available for every child who wishes to attend. I think they need to have tutors. Like hire students from high school. They help the little ones and they can have some cash. Have more meetings and have the parents come in and see what the parents are doing in class. Make conferences with the teachers and parents. Keep the parents excited about the program and let them know how important it is that parents are visible so our children can develop in a more positive academic manner. I think they need more teachers and less students in the classrooms because some students struggle more than others and need more attention. They need to have teachers who just work with struggling students, so it wont effect the students who are where they need to be. Teachers need more time with kids and really teach them what they know. Ive come across a lot of teachers who are not happy doing what they do and its just sad because I get scared that it will make school a bad experience for my daughter. I think they should stop being so mean and let the children talk at lunch and on the playground. Revamp the curriculum to coincide with testing. Make sure your students are working on their educational level. Some students are more advanced than others. They need to be taught on that level any other will stifle what they are learning and they become bored. \ IV nn n TABLE VI.l.G CONSOLIDATED PARENT COMPARISONS, EY VS. REGULAR SCHOOL SCHED. n My children show a greater interest in their educational program. II Number N = Percent n Agree Disagree No Opinion total 395 55 75 525 525 525 525 75% 10% 14% 100% \ IB My children like having a number of short vacation periods. Number N = Percent IB Agree Disagree No Opinion total 306 153 64 523 523 523 523 59% 29% 12% 100% n A wider variety of educational programs has been provided for my children. Number N= Percent SB II Agree Disagree No Opinion total 313 115 102 530 530 530 530 59% 22% 19% 100% II My children have achieved at a higher level than in their previous 9-month school. Number N= Percent II Agree Disagree No Opinion total 282 120 130 532 532 532 532 0 53% 23% 24% #DIV/0! n Our personal family life activities such as church, scouts, clubs, etc, have not been affected. n Number N= Percent II Agree Disagree No Opinion total 405 75 43 523 523 523 523 77% 14% 8% 100% My children have attended one or more intersessions this year. Number N= Percent Agree Disagree No Opinion total 383 92 65 540 540 540 540 71% 17% 12% 100% n m CONSOLIDATED PARENT COMPARISONS, EY VS. REGULAR SCHOOL SCHED. CONT'D n This program should be expanded to other schools in this district on an optional basis. II Number Percent Agree Disagree No Opinion total 278 118 145 541 541 541 541 51% 22% 27% n 100% N = \ n I want my children to continue in this program. Number N = Percent n Agree Disagree No Opinion total 337 111 89 537 537 537 537 63% 21% 17% 100% nn Gender Male Female Total II n Ethnicity Black White Other Total 100 430 530 0 0 429 29 53 511 nn Number of children in a YRE school 8 16 24 n 235 183 97 21 536 Number of children enrolled in regular schools before they were enrolled in a YRE school. 0123 4+ total 147 168 124 37 23 499 mn li CONSOLIDATED PARENT COMPARISONS, EY VS. REGULAR SCHOOL SCHED. CONT'D Children attending school on a regular May-August calendar li Elementary Middle school senior high 124 81 58 \ n Grade level of children nn Total n nnnnn K 12 34 5 15 148 153 119 120 143 698 n TABLE VI.l.F n YRE Schools: Collected Student Quotes II Question 1: Do you think Year Round Education is better than regular school for helping students succeed? Why do you feel this wav? II Year round school help us learn for a long time because we go longer. My year round school is better because we got a computer lab. II Yes. No. No. Yes. / feel this way because I like being out of school. I think that because when I cousin is out I be still going to school. I feel very good at the regular school and I study more every day there. It helps your education and we get caught up more on fourth grade work. II II II I say yes because you can learn more. Also you can get more education. Also get better at things. Yes. Because you are starting to talk in English and get friends you will know better. No, the reason why is because we 're always out and we 're hardly learning. Yes. I think it does because you can learn more things about school and learn to do different kinds of work. Yes. Why I pick yes because I like doing work. No. Ifeel this way because all the other schools are out and we are still in. I like all yearround because you be out for a month. And plus you get to spend time with your family you get to stay up and night until you feel sleepy. Yes. I feel this way because you stay in school you learn more. No. My brother is out of school while I am in school. No. My other school was more advanced and if we have short period vacations I forget stuff and lose discipline. Yes. Because we can go for recess one in the morning in second recess you can get pizza and candy. Yes. Because you get a lot of education in your life. nn \ II Question 2: How can we improve Year Round Education? II nn We need new teachers to help us learn new stuff. We could improve with a new playground. We have to improve by building a new school. They should have a new playground and new restrooms. New playground. Urgent. Go on more field trips. And new restroom. They can let us stay in until June T' because then I can get out with my cousins. I think they are fine and the year round schools can stay like they are. They need to improve because my friends they are telling me school information that I have not heard about they are smarter than me. By getting teachers to help us understand our work. They got to make new playground. We can improve them by letting someone help you. I will make a list: Nice teachers some are mean, Kill these bugs, put a new lock on the school lit is looking like a dump. More intercessions. You can start by telling everyone in this school about it and start having calendars about year round. We can even send a letter home about it. It will make it better if they change it like regular schools. By not having short vacations and having better classrooms, better technology, and better lunches. By letting us play, be out of uniform, and do fun things. Get a bigger TY. page n n TABLE VI.2.G STUDENT SURVEYS CONSOLIDATED n I have been more interested in my education this year. Number II n Agree Disagree No Opinion total N= 524 50 62 636 Percent n II II II n II II II n 636 636 636 0 84% 3% 13% 100% \ I like having a shorter number of vacation periods. Agree Disagree No Opinion total Number N= 243 346 53 642 Percent 642 642 642 0 39% 49% 11% 100% I think I have learned more on the extended year calendar than I did on the regular 9-month calendar. Agree Disagree No Opinion total Number N= 370 150 108 628 Percent 628 628 628 0 56% 10% 34% 100% The Year Round Education program should be offered to all Little Rock School District Students. Agree Disagree No Opinion total Number N= 329 242 76 647 Percent 647 647 647 0 50% 38% 12% 100% My teachers have been more patient and helpful. Number Agree Disagree No Opinion total N= 525 59 60 644 Percent 644 644 644 0 89% 4% 7% 100%n II II STUDENT SURVEYS CONSOLIDATED CONT'D II I have had more time to learn and time to get extra help when I've needed it. n Number N= Percent n Agree Disagree No Opinion total 493 85 75 653 653 653 653 0 79% 10% 11% 100% n I look forward to coming to school. II Number II Agree Disagree No Opinion total N= 474 99 78 651 Percent II I have liked the intersessions. Number n n Agree Disagree No Opinion total N= 408 124 119 651 il II 651 651 651 0 651 651 651 0 84% 8% 8% 100% Percent 71% 13% 16% 100% My parents like the extended-year program. Number Agree Disagree No Opinion total N= 368 138 140 646 Percent 646 646 646 0 60% 15% 26% 100% I want my school to continue with this program. Percent Agree Disagree No Opinion total 286 275 73 634 634 634 634 0 53% 24% 24% 100%II II II II STUDENT SURVEYS CONSOLIDATED CONT'D n Intersession has helped me be a better student. Percent n n Agree Disagree No Opinion total 357 100 120 577 577 577 577 0 62% 20% 18% 100% n n Gender Male Female Total 291 353 644 n n Ethnicity Black White Other Total 562 20 54 636 II n Grade Level 3rd 4th 5th Total 236 234 232 504 n Last grade spent in regular school Never K 1 2 3 4 5 Total 8 7 6 10 9 4 3 47B B B B B B B B B B BW B B TABLE VI.S.F Teacher discussion questions 2005 l.Do you think Year Round Education is better than regular school for helping students succeed? Why do you feel this way? Yes, Because: N total Percent Less time reteaching/kids don't forget as much over break More extracurricular activites and enrichment Easier for kids who are behind to catch up Less stressful/less burnout for kids and teachers Like the extra time in school Kids need structure during the summer this answer: responses: this answer: 22 4 9 12 2 1 50 50 50 50 50 50 44% 8% 18% 24% 4% 2% No, Because: Both are the sameschedule does not matter Students' attendance is low at YREs/Students leave in the summer Childcare is difficult for parents during breaks Too many breaks create MORE need to re-teach More burnout for teachers and students 11 11 3 7 7 39 39 39 39 39 28% 28% 8% 18% 18% 2. How can we improve Year Round Education Schools? Better schedule/Shorter February break longer May break Open intercession to all students Schedule Trainings and In-Service days for YRE teachers Teachers need more input on the curriculum and calendar Extend YRE to all schools/make all schools the same Change testing dates 15 5 17 9 12 5 63 63 63 63 63 63 24% 8% 27% 14% 19% 8% pageH II TABLE VI.3.G Teacher Surveys Consolidated Bl My students show a greater interest in their educational program. Number II II Agree Disagree No Opinion total N = 66 45 50 161 161 161 161 Percent 41% 28% 31% 100% n My students like having a number of short vacation periods. Number N = II Agree Disagree No Opinion total 104 19 29 152 152 152 152 Percent 68% 13% 19% 100% n n A wider variety of educational programs has been provided for my students. Number n II Agree Disagree No Opinion total N = 99 37 20 156 156 156 156 Percent 63% 24% 13% 100% n My students have achieved at a higher level than they would have in their previous 9-month school calendar. Number n II Agree Disagree No Opinion total N = 56 52 52 160 160 160 160 Percent 35% 33% 33% 100% Parents are more involved in their childrens' education on the Year Round Education schedule. Number Agree Disagree No Opinion total N = 24 87 47 158 158 158 158 Percent 15% 55% 30% 100%n n II TABLE VI.3.G Teacher Surveys Consolidated CONT'D II This program should be expanded to other scohols in this district n on an optional basis. Number II Agree Disagree No Opinion total N= 82 50 25 157 157 157 157 Percent 52% 32% 16% 100% \ II I want my school to continue with this program. Number II n Agree Disagree No Opinion total N = 77 54 26 157 157 157 157 Percent 49% 34% 17% 100% II My students benefit from their intersession(s). Number N= n n Agree Disagree No Opinion total 102 21 33 156 156 156 156 Percent 65% 13% 21% 100% n The Year Round Education schedule provides continuity in academic instruction and more time on task. II Number Agree Disagree No Opinion total N= 87 39 32 158 158 158 158 Percent 55% 25% 20% 100% The extended-year education schedule has been better for my attitude and stress reduction. Agree Disagree Number N= 85 55 159 159 Percent 53% 35%n n No Opinion total 19 159 159 12% 100% II II TABLE VI.3.G Teacher Surveys Consolidated CONT'D II The absence of a long summer break reduces the need to reteach skills and rules. Number II II Agree Disagree No Opinion total N= 69 57 27 153 153 153 153 Percent 45% 37% 18% 100% \ II Teachers benefit from the opportunity to earn stipends during optional intersession employment. 11 II Agree Disagree No Opinion total Number 129 16 14 159 N = 159 159 159 Percent 81% 10% 9% 100% n n Male Female Total 15 132 147 n n Ethnicity Black White Other Total 67 72 2 141II n II n n n II II II II Little Rock, Arkansas Family Inten/iews Year-round - vs - 9-month Schools n II II n Ii n LITTLE ROCK INTERVIEWS, 2005 YEAR-ROUND -VS- 9-MONTH SCHOOLS Question 1: What was the reason your child(ren) changed from 9-month to EY calendar? n \ Description Percentage of Responses The school changed from 9-month to EY. 69% My child transferred from a 9-monlh school to an EY school. 25% II Multiple children. Both reasons apply. 6% II II Free Responses: II "We were already in the area." (18 responses) "We moved into the district. (4 responses) "1 don't know why the school changed. I guess they were just trying something new." "They've been going for so long, I don't even remember when things changed or why." "The school changed and we were not happy about it at all." I don't really know why the school changed.' II "Cloverdale is a much better school than where they were going. The one we were at was pretty awful." "I had one school that one his home school, but my other one was here, so I got him transferred because it's easier for me for dropping them off." 'I'm in the neighborhood. I just adopted them, and Fiasco Heights didn't have enough room for them.' They were having problems at Forest Park, and I decided to put them in a black school. There was a larger black student population at Woodruff." n n "It was in the neighborhood, and I liked the school." "We moved closer to this school, so 1 moved my younger son here, but I still have another child at our old school.' REASONS FOR CHANCING TO YEAR-ROUND SCHOOL n g LITTLE ROCK INTERVIEWS, 2005 YEAR-ROUND -VS- 9-MONTH SCHOOLS g Question 2: g What are the main differences you see between EY and 9-month schools? n \ B Description Percentage of Responses Schedule difference, neither plus nor minus 38.9% fl fl fl Childcare a problem with EY Don't know or no difference No difference Better learning with EY
EY better 11.1% 16.87% 5.6% 38.9% Less learning loss in EY 8.3% fl Intersession noted as difference 8.3% fl II Free Responses: Schedule difference, neither plus nor minus II '7hey go longer than the regular school and the summer is much shorter." "Well, actually the only difference I've noticed is that they seem to be out more than everyone else." They have more vacations. That's about it.' II "The difference is that it seemed like they were out a little more often.' "What 1 noticed is that they are out more than the public school is." "Naturally they go a little longer and they start earlier." "I actually liked it a lot. It seems like the kids are in school a lot longer. I know it just seems that way, but I liked it." "Well, obviously they don't have the long summer break." Childcare a problem with EY "The only differences I noticed were that they don't get as long a vacation during the summer, and it's also tough to find a babysitter for the days when they are out. The days that she was out was difficult." (free responses continued on next page) DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EY AND 9-MONTH SCHOOLS 2II n LITTLE ROCK INTERVIEWS, 2005 YEAR-ROUND -VS- 9-MONTH SCHOOLS "What are the main differences," continued from previous page. II Childcare a problem with EY II HI "They have less time out, and they have an extra week called Intercession where they do special things. The only thing that is really different is that if you have a middle school kid, it really throws off the balance in the family when they are out for two weeks and you don't have anybody to watch them." "The year round school is so different. I don't like it. Period. It's important to have their summer open so that you can take family trips. Also, the year round school is really hard for working parents. With the 9-month calendar it is easier to restructure the family schedule." "It makes it very difficult for us to do family vacations, do trips, or plan anything together because our oldest was in high school and II they weren't on a year-round calendar.' "Academically, I'm a big fan of that school anyway. At the time I wasn't crazy about it because I was working and it was hard to find childcare." \ n Don't know or no difference II "I really can't say." "I don't really know." "All the work seems to be about the same. Maybe a little more of it since they are in school more. I don't really know." II No difference "No. I didn't notice anything." "Well, it seems to be doing the same thing. He does his homework
he studies. I haven't noticed any differences." n Better learning with EY
EY better II II '7he kids learned more. My sixth grader is in the seventh grade now and they are on a regular calendar, and it's the first time he's ever gotten an F in his whole life. He was always on the honor roil before." "Yes. It seems like they get farther ahead. He seems like he has really learned a lot "I love that school. My kids loved it. I wish they could still go there. I just liked everything about it. They learned better, the Resource classes were good, and they really liked the Inter-sessions. They whole school was really, really good." I really liked Stephens. They were more attentive to the students. They learned more.' II "It seems, well, it's a little a little different. This school has a little more strict rules, which is good. And they go year-round." "In the year-round school I think they were learning more." "The teachers seemed to be more concerned about them there." "It was easier for them to catch up on everything." "I really like it, and I think they do, too. They seem like they learn better." "Well, I really think it's good. My kids are really doing better now than before. The teachers really seem to help them a lot more." n Less learning loss in EY "I've seen some good things and some bad things. I don't think the year-round school is such a bad thing. There are some good things to it. I've noticed they don't seem to forget as much because they aren't out for as long a time." "They seem like they remember a little bit more I think." Intersession noted as difference Ihe only really different is the Intersession part and being in school a little bit longer.' Ihey've got all the Inter-sessions and all that. I like the school and I think they do, too." DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EY AND 9-MONTH SCHOOLS 3 LITTLE ROCK INTERVIEWS, 2005 YEAR-ROUND -VS- 9-MONTH SCHOOLS Question 3: Let's focus particularly on how different schools help kids learn. What do you see as the main differences in student learning in EY vs. 9-month schools? Description Percentage of Responses Do not see a difference 13.9% EY generally better/more learning 80.6% Less learning loss 30.6% II Intersession 2.8% II Free Responses
II Do not see a difference nn m "No. I don't really think there is a difference." "1 don't really know if there is a difference. I mean, he always seems to do okay." My kids are extremely smart, so it's hard to tell if there's a difference. They always made the honor roll and they still do." "1 n 'No, there is no difference in the way that my kids learn. The school work is the same, and they are getting it done." "I didn't see no great improvement in my kids' grades being in a year-round school versus a regular school." n EY generally better/more learning "Well, actually it's the school that they are attending. I had better results over at Mabelville Elementary, and it's a year-round. But actually, with the year round, of my kids is in gifted and talented, and I think they are educated a little more in the year round." "Actually, she got more into her studies in the year round than I feel like she would have done in the 9-month." "Yes, I think they are constantly learning, so it keeps all the information fresh." "Yes. They are more advanced." "Actually, I think it is difficult because it's year-round, but I do think it's a good idea." "1 really don't have a good answer. I have a pretty sharp son. I don't know if it's because he's smart or if it's because of the school." "It seems like they do more work, but I don't really know. Maybe it just seems that way since they are in school more." "My son did learn well when he was there, but he's at Washington now and he's doing okay there, too." (free responses continued on next page) STUDENT LEARNING DIFFERENCES D B n LITTLE ROCK INTERVIEWS, 2005 YEAR-ROUND -VS- 9-MONTH SCHOOLS "Student learning differences," continued from previous page. EY generally better/more learning "I'I think they learn a little bit more." fl "Well, I think it helps the kids that they are there more. I think they get a lot more advanced. That has been the case with Cameron.' "I think they are doing just the same. I do think there are more programs for the kids. Like the Resource program and that." "Everything about it' fl fl "I think they are better at getting down on the kids if they don't do their work." "In the regular school, they got more off days then days in school. In the all-around school they were just teaching them more." "Yes. I just personally think it has a lot to do with the teachers. I think they are more motivated to help that child." "They have more time to do the work because they are going all the time." "The teachers are really good. I mean if they don't do their work, the teachers get after them. 1 think that makes a big difference." Less learning loss \ fl n "I guess they learned more because they went year-round. They weren't out for a long summer break when they might lose or forget what they had learned." "They seem to remember more." "They don't have a chance to forget as much, I think." "They just seem to remember more. Not having that long summer break, I think, makes it much better." "1'I don't think there's really much difference. They don't forget as much, I guess." II n "It seems like they know more, the remember more having the shorter breaks." "It helps them not forget as much. Instead of having that long summer break, they don't have as much of a chance to forget as much." "Well, I think it teaches them a little more. What I mean by that is that they still have the learning going on, and they don't loose it as quick." "I think the main difference is just that they are in school more. They don't have a chance to forget as much and they learn more." fl Intersession n "I think it's the Inter-sessions that are good." "I guess when they are doing the Intersession. That's different." "The Intersession program helps them pick up where they left off. It helps them catch up and not forget things. My three did really well with it" n fl STUDENT LEARNING DIFFERENCES B B 5 B 9 LITTLE ROCK INTERVIEWS, 2005 YEAR-ROUND -VS- 9-MONTH SCHCXJLS Question 4: Are there things about the EY calendar that help kids learn better? Description Percentage of Responses Kids are in school more. 70/0 Shorter breaks/vacations. 140/0 Kids forget less academic content. 29% Shorter gaps in teaching. 3% Kids remember better how to behave in school. 30/0 Inter-sessions help kids learn more. 12% Teachers 12% No difference noted 20 % Free Responses
"I really don't see a difference. If you had said a magnet school, I might have been able to elaborate a little more." '7hey don't forget as much." I can't say, but they should explain the take home lessons more to the students so that we can help more - but that may be on her. Let's not lay the blame on the school. We'll split it" No, academically, my kids are smart enough that they will achieve. There is nothing about the year-round school that is better. I don't like it "That's a tough question. What can I say? All I know is that he is a good boy and has good grades so far." "They are just in more, so they don't forget as much and they have more time to learn new information." I do think that only being out for five weeks in the summer helps them get back into the swing of things faster." "The kids learn a lot more for the next grade." "I know when I was in elementary school I would come back to school half-way clueless after the summer. I don't think so. I don't think they really do anything differently. It's the longer time that makes the difference.' Summer is not so long, so he seems to remember things better." (free responses continued on next page) fy SCHOOi LEARNING EFFECTIVENESS nnnnnnnn \ 6 LITTLE ROCK INTERVIEWS, 2005 YEAR-ROUND -VS- 9-MONTH SCHOOtS "Student learning differences," continued from previous page. "She doesn't seem to forget as much." "He doesn't seem to forget as much. He seems to have a short attention span sometimes, so I think it tends to help kids like him.' 7hey seem like they remember better.'n 'The intersession program. We really liked that." "I don't know why. It seems like the teachers pay a little bit more attention to them." "The inter-sessions are good.' "They are learning all the time, so they just don't have chance to forget.' "The shorter breaks are better." "I like the fact that there are more short breaks rather than one long break." "Special programs like the inter-sessions and resource classes are really good.' "Well, the kids are in school more, and I think that helps." "The shorter breaks.' n I liked the inter-sessions." "The teachers, I guess. They just stay on the kids more.' m hi "The shorter break, I think, makes the biggest difference for my kids." "The teachers just have more time to teach them more. 'The teachers are really good." 'They are in school more, it seems. 1 think it's actually about the same number of days, but it seems like they are in more. I like it much better." "They just remember more." I think the teachers are much better here. They listen, and they really work with the kids." m "They don't forget everything over summer. It's easier on them, in my opinion.' EY SCHOOL LEARNING EFFECTIVENESS 8 01 LITTLE ROCK INTERVIEWS, 2005 YEAR-ROUND -VS- 9-MONTH SCHOOLS Question 5: II In comparing EY to 9-month schools, do you think that children feel differently about school or about themselves in one type versus another? \ II Description Percentage of Responses II Yes, a lot 25% Yes, a little. 12% No. 63% II Free Responses (note: only parents who answered "yes" are recorded.): "'II think she enjoyed going, but when the other kids were out, she hated going, and it shorted our vacation time, too.' '7hey don't like it when other families get to go on vacations in the summer and we cannot. We don't like it at all. Period.' II II "The only difference that I noticed is that they were upset because they had to stay longer - everyone else being on break and them being in school." "From my house, in a one mile radius, 1 can hit three elementary schools with a stone. On my street alone, there are kids that go to all three. So for my boys, it's a real problem when they are on break because no one else is. They are all alone. That sucks." "He likes to be out when the other children are out." "When they switched over, the girls were in a lower grade and they enjoyed this more because there are bigger breaks spread out over the year.' "At first it bothered her when she had friends that were on summer vacation and she wasn't. But now, 1 think she likes have more breaks during the year.' "This is his last year, and now it seems to bother him that other kids are out and he isn't. But he likes school." "My second grader does not even like school any more, and that is not good at all. She did really well in year-round school, and now she is in a regular calendar and she isn't doing well at all." "They complain a little about, you know, that other kids are out and they aren't." "They do complain. "Why do we have to go so long?' They don't like that too much." "My oldest loves school, and when they are out of school she doesn't really like it. She's an A student, she is.' "I'll tell you, they didn't particularly like it, but it worked well for me." "My baby has been in it the whole time, ever since they started, so he doesn't know anything different.' "He does complain when my other is out for summer, but I think he really, in general, likes it a lot." STUDENT FEELINGS ABOUT EY VERSUS 9-MONTH SCHOOL nnn n 0 8 I n LITTLE ROCK INTERVIEWS, 2005 YEAR-ROUND -VS- 9-MONTH SCHOOLS II Question 6 (note: only asked of parents who answered "yes" to question 5.): II Does your child/children talk about the fact that they are in an EY school? If yes, what kinds of things do they say? II II Free Responses: II II "No, not that I can say." They complain about it all the time! "No. He's a quiet kid." "Yes. A couple of my kids in the past year got to go to some of the things they have during Intersections, and they really liked that." "He didn't like it because he had to sit inside grandma's house all day. In the end, I think they ought to put all elementary schools in or take them all out." "Yes. 'Why am I still in school and they are out'.' "All the time. They didn't like the year-round school at first, but they are adjusting." "Not really. I guess it's just fine." "1 think they like it. They seemed to like school more when they were at Mabelville." "Yes. They wanted to stay. They asked why they couldnt stay.' II "When there are other kids out in the summer, they complain about that" "You know, I have eight kids, and most of them go to regular schools, so my two that are in year-round, you know, they complain when the others are out. But, like now, they are out for two weeks and the others are jealous." II "No, not that I can say.' They complain about it all the time!" "'INo. He's a quiet kid." II il "Yes. A couple of my kids in the past year got to go to some of the things they have during Intersections, and they really liked that "He didn't like it because he had to sit inside grandma's house all day. In the end, I think they ought to put all elementary schools in or take them all out" "Yes. "Why am I still in school and they are out." "All the time. They didn't like the year-round school at first, but they are adjusting." "Not really. I guess it's just fine." "I think they like it. They seemed to like school more when they were at Mabelville." "Yes. They wanted to stay. They asked why they couldn't stay." "When there are other kids out in the summer, they complain about that." "You know, 1 have eight kids, and most of them go to regular schools, so my two that are in year-round, you know, they complain when the others are out. But, like now, they are out for two weeks and the others are jealous." n m \ STUDENT FEELINGS ABOUT EY VERSUS 9-MONTH SCHOOL 9 0 II El LITTLE ROCK INTERVIEWS, 2005 YEAR-ROUND -VS- 9-MONTH SCHOOLS II Question 7: II Does your child/children receive any specialized education services (gifted programs, ESL classes, remedial classes)? n \ II Description Percentage of Responses Gifted and talented 16.2% n Music 2.7% II Resource classes No. 2.7% 78.4% II II II n n n I STUDENT FEELINGS ABOUT EY VERSUS 9-MONTH SCHOOL 10II El LITTLE ROCK INTERVIEWS, 2005 YEAR-ROUND -VS- 9-MONTH SCHOOLS II Question 8: II Does your family utilize before or afterschool childcare programs? II \ II Description Percentage of Responses Yes. 10.8% II No. 89.2 % II II II n n II n II STUDENT FEELINGS ABOUT EY VERSUS 9-MONTH SCHOOL nla APPENDICES n il m II II 0IM TABLE VI.1 .A Cloverdale Parent Survey Results BM My children show a greater interest in Iheir educational program. Number N = Percent IM Agree Disagree No Opinion total 95 23 30 148 148 148 148 64% 16% 20% 100% Id My children like having a number of short vacation periods. Number N= Percent US Agree Disagree No Opinion total 81 49 18 148 148 146 748 55% 33% 12% 100% \ Id A wider variety of educational programs has been provided for my children. Number N= Percent Id Agree Disagree No Opinion total 63 50 38 151 151 151 151 42% 33% 25% 100% Id My children have achieved at a higher level than in their previous 9-month school. Number N= Percent Id Agree Disagree No Opinion total 58 53 41 7w 152 152 152 38% 35% 27% 100% Id Our personal family life activities such as church, scouts, clubs, etc, have not been affected. Number N= Percent Id Agree Disagree No Opinirjn total 105, 30 11 146 146 146 146 72% 21% 8% 100% Id My children have attended one or more intersessions this year. Number N= Percent Id \giee Disagree No Opinion total 87 40 28 155 155 155 155 56% 26% 18% 100% Id This program should be expanded to other schools in this district on an optional basis Number N= Percent Id Agree Disagree No Opinion total 69 45 42 156 156 156 156 44% 29% 27% 100% I want my children to continue in this program. Number Percent Agree Disagree No Opinion total 80 44 "30 154 154 154 154 52% 29% 19% 100% I fl fl fl Gender Male Female Total 32 119 151 fl Ethnicity Black While Other Total 113 5 25 143 fl Number of children in a YRE school u 1 2 3 fl 4 + total 70 50 24 6 150 fl fl Number of children enrolled in regular schools before they were enrolled in a YRE school. 0 1 fl 2 3 29 52 39 11 4* total 8 139 fl fl Children attending school on a regular May-August calendar fl Elementary Middle schoo senior high 40 21 18 fl Grade level of children K 1 2 3 fl 4 5 Total 35 51 35 28 36 13 198 fl M TABLE VI.2.A Cloverdale Student Survey Results fl I have been more interested in my education this year Number N = Percent fl fl fl fl M fl fl fl fl fl fl fl fl fl fl Agree Disagree No Opinion total 85, 8 2 95 95 95 95 89% 8% 2% 100% I like having a shorter number of vacation periods Agree Disagree No Opinion total Number N= Percent 47 48 4 99 99 99 99 47% 48% 4% 100% \ I think I have learned more on the extended year calendar than I did on the regular 9-month calendar. Agree Disagree No Opinion tola! Number N= Percent 55 22 IT 98 98 98 98 56% 22% 21% 100% The Year Round Education program should be offered to all Little Rock School District Students. Agree Disagree No Opinion total Number N= Percent 55 33 9 97 97 97 97 57% 34% 9% 100% My teachers have been more patient and helpful. Agree_______ Disagree No Opinion total Number N = Percent 83 11 4 98 98 98 98 85% 11% 4% 100% I have had more lime to learn and time to gel extra help when I ve needed it. Agree Disagree No Opinion total Number N= Percent 84 5 99 99 99 99 85% 5% 10% 100% I look forward to coming to school. Agree Disagree No Opinion total Number N= Percent 82 10 "T 99 I have liked the intersessions Agree Disagree No Opinion total Number N= 99 99 99 83% 10% 7% 100% Percent 66 18 15 99 99 99 67% 18% 15% 100% IN IN My parents like the extended-year program. Number N = Percent IN IN IN IN IN IN IN IN IN IN IN IN IN Agree Disagree No Opinion total 51 33 16 100 100 100 wo 51% 33% 16% 100% 1 want my school to continue with this program. Number N = Percent Agree_______ Disagree No Opinion total 41 47 T 97 97 97 97 42% 48% 9% 100% Intersession has helped me be a better student. Agree Disagree No Opinion total Gender Male Female Total Ethnicity Black While Other Total Number N = 65 12 11 88 46 49 96 72 4 20 96 Percent Grade Level 3rd 4th 5lh Total 27 31 27 85 88 88 88 74% 14% 13% 100% Last grade spent in regular school Never K 1 2 3 4 6 17 2 20 27 17 Total 8 5 96 II TABLE VI.2.B Mabelvale Student Survey Results II I have been more interesled in my education this year. Number N = Percent II Agree Disagree No Opinion total 25 4 "T 34 34 34 34 74% 12% 15% 100% II I like having a shorter number ol vacation periods. Number N= Percent II Agree Disagree No Opinion total 17 13 3 33 33 33 33 52% 39% 9% 100% n I think I have learned more on the extended year calendar than I did on the regular 9-month calendar. Number N = Percent n Agree Disagree No Opinion total 25 9 1 35 35 35 35 71% 26% 3% 100% II The Year Round Education program should be oHered to all Little Rock School District Students Number N= Percent II Agree Disagree No Opinion total 19 11 ~5 35 35 35 35 54% 31% 14% 100% II My teachers have been more patient and helpful. Nu
This project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.

<dcterms_creator>Catterall, James S.</dcterms_creator>