Search

High school graduation is a critical milestone for students as it has implications for future opportunity and success on both individual and societal levels. In Puerto Rico recent changes in how high school graduation rates are calculated have drawn closer attention to the issue of high school graduation and thus a growing interest in understanding the relationship between Puerto Rico's high school characteristics and graduation rates. This report presents findings from a correlational study of high school characteristics and high school graduation in Puerto Rico. Using data from the Puerto Rico Department of Education and publicly available data about the cohort of grade 10 students who entered Puerto Rico high schools during the 2010/11 school year, the study analyzed the correlation between graduation rates and two types of variables. The two types of variables are school-level student composition variables and school characteristic variables. School-level student composition variables refer to characteristics that are not amenable to intervention by educators (for example, the percentage of students who are male), and school characteristic variables refer to characteristics that can be changed or, in other words, that are amenable to intervention (for example, the student-teacher ratio). The study then estimated the conditional association between these characteristics and on-time graduation (within three years) using regression analyses to control for other factors. The key findings associated with school characteristics--those amenable to intervention--are: (1) Puerto Rico high schools with a higher percentage of students who were proficient in Spanish language arts had higher graduation rates overall and for all students subgroups examined (male students, female students, students living in poverty, and students in special education). These relationships were also found after other school characteristics were controlled for; (2) High schools with higher percentages of students who were proficient in math had higher graduation rates for all students and for all student subgroups except female students. However, the relationships were not apparent after other school characteristics were controlled for; (3) High schools with lower student-teacher ratios had higher rates of graduation overall and for all subgroups. After other school characteristics were controlled for, the relationships were still found for male students, students living in poverty, and students in special education but not for all students or for female students; and (4) Contrary to the expectation that having more qualified teachers in a school would result in higher graduation rates, this study found that high schools with lower percentages of highly qualified teachers--teachers who attain full state (regular) certification in the subject taught--had higher graduation rates for all students and for all subgroups except male students. After other school characteristics were controlled for, schools with fewer highly qualified teachers still had higher graduation rates overall and for male students, students living in poverty, and students in special education. These findings provide a starting point for Puerto Rico stakeholders interested in data-driven decision-making to address the low rates of graduation in their high schools and communities. Two strategies that might be helpful in raising graduation rates are: (1) Implementing interventions to increase the percentage of students who score at the proficient level in assessments of Spanish language arts; and (2) Lowering the student-teacher ratio for students living in poverty and students in special education. The findings of this study may also be useful for educators and researchers interested in understanding on-time high school graduation rates in U.S. territories, such as Puerto Rico, where research has been limited and information on graduation trends remains scarce. A section on Data and Methodology is appended.

There is growing interest in the ability of improvement science--the systematic study of improvement strategies to identify promising practices for addressing issues in complex systems (Improvement Science Research Network, 2016)--to spur innovation and address complex problems. In education this methodology is often implemented through collaborative research partnerships in which researchers and practitioners work together to systematically test and refine theories of change in real-world settings. A networked improvement community is a collaborative research partnership that uses the principles of improvement science within networks of organizations to learn from varied implementation of new ideas across contexts. While the central work of a networked improvement community is to identify a specific and actionable problem and collectively address it through an iterative process of designing, implementing, testing, and redesigning promising new practices, the learning from these iterative cycles can be brought back and applied to the local contexts of the networked improvement community participants (such as classrooms, districts, and states), potentially affecting education practices more widely. Although there is practical guidance for how networked improvement communities should structure this work, few published accounts describe the process of forming a networked improvement community. This report describes the process of forming networked improvement communities in Michigan and Minnesota after state education agency leaders requested assistance from Regional Educational Laboratory (REL) Midwest to support state-led efforts to use improvement science to raise student achievement and narrow achievement gaps in schools with the widest achievement gaps (focus schools). The resulting collaborations led to the establishment of two networked improvement communities during the 2015/16 school year, one in Michigan and one in Minnesota, focused on improvement in schools identified as needing support under their accountability systems. The REL Midwest project team used guidance from the literature and other improvement science efforts (for example, Bryk, Gomez, Grunow, & LeMahieu, 2015) to direct its activities. Each networked improvement community has a slightly different history and emphasis. The Michigan Focus Networked Improvement Community works across five focus schools --schools with the largest achievement gaps--in two districts to address disparities in student achievement within schools. The two districts are each part of an intermediate school district, a regional education service agency that provides consolidated support services to districts in an assigned service area and thereby plays an important role in providing professional development and supporting pilot programs in districts. Participants in the Michigan Focus Networked Improvement Community include state education agency representatives, intermediate school district administrators, district representatives, and focus school principals. The Minnesota Statewide System of Support Networked Improvement Community seeks to improve state supports to six Regional Centers of Excellence that serve focus schools. In Minnesota, the Cross-agency Implementation Team oversees the implementation of the statewide system of support. Its members include leadership and content specialists from both the Minnesota Department of Education and the Regional Centers of Excellence; they also serve as participants in the networked improvement community. The goal of establishing both networked improvement communities was twofold: to expose the state education agencies to a process that could be used to scale initiatives and to engage agencies at a level that would leave them able to use the process with other initiatives. Networked improvement community participants are now focusing on sustainability, using what they learned in the first year as the foundation for maintaining key processes and functions. This report aims to guide other researchers, state education agency leaders, and district leaders as they establish networked improvement communities in different contexts. The following are appended: (1) Sample activities to define the problem and identify root causes; and (2) Frequently asked questions about networked improvement communities.

Prior research has classified strategies to facilitate adult learners' transitions to postsecondary opportunities into five broad categories: advising, General Educational Development-plus (GED-plus), English as a second language, career pathways, and college preparatory (Zafft, Kallenbach, & Spohn, 2006). This two-part study relied on interviews with directors of state- and local-level adult education programs and existing data sources to explore how states facilitate adult learners' transition to postsecondary education. One part of the study used data from interviews conducted in 2014 with adult education directors in six Regional Educational Laboratory Midwest Region states. The study found that states use different combinations of strategies within and across these five categories to facilitate transition. The second part of the study used data from the National Reporting System for Adult Education Programs and found large variation across states in adult learners' postsecondary participation. Part of this variation may reflect inconsistencies in reporting across states. This report suggests areas for future research that can build on the findings described here. [This report was written in collaboration with the Midwest College and Career Success Research Alliance.]

This policy analysis explains the need for a system approach to educator talent management. The report analyzes how state policies in the Midwest support the development of effective teachers and leaders throughout their career. The report focuses on state policies in teacher preparation including certification and licensure, recruitment and hiring, induction and mentoring, professional development, compensation and other financial incentives, working conditions, and performance management. This analysis posits that the creation of a systemic approach to educator talent management falls under the purview of states and must be developed by state leadership across agencies and sectors. It offers five recommendations for policymakers to move toward a more systemic educator talent management system. These recommendations are: (1) Assess the status quo of your educator quality policies; (2) Create a cross-organizational team to develop a unified vision and strategic plan for educator quality in your state; (3) Identify all stakeholder groups and partners and specify the level of engagement for each group at every stage of the policy development process; (4) Focus on the development of school leaders as well as teachers; and (5) Ensure that all initiatives to improve educator quality will be assessed on how well they meet the intended goal. (Contains 7 tables.)

The central goals of federal education policy are to achieve equity of educational opportunity and proficiency in educational outcomes for all students--regardless of gender, ethnicity, income, language of origin, disability, or geography. The means to achieve these goals rely in part on the ability of states and districts to provide every student with an effective teacher in every subject. It is becoming unmistakably clear, however, that this task can be accomplished only if states and districts also provide every school with an effective leader. School leaders--specifically principals--can cultivate or impede the conditions for effective teaching. This Research & Policy Brief focuses on what it takes to attract talented and experienced individuals to the principalship. It describes what inspires some people to start on this path, what gives them pause, and what deters others entirely. Using the research literature and results from four focus groups of aspiring principals in three major cities, this brief describes the steps along the pathway to the principalship as well as the characteristics of the individuals taking the journey. Based on these sources, it provides some suggestions for influencing changes in policy and practice to increase the supply of high-quality school leaders. Appended are: (1) Focus Group Methodology; and (2) Focus Group Participants. (Contains 1 table.)

There is growing concern that it is too difficult or costly to substantially improve the academic skills of children who are behind in school once they reach adolescence. But perhaps what we have tried in the past relies on the wrong interventions, failing to account for challenges like the increased variability in academic needs during adolescence, or heightened difficulty of classroom management. This study tests the effects of one intervention that tries to solve both problems by simplifying the teaching task: individualized, intensive, in-school tutoring. A key innovation by the non-profit we study (Saga Education) is to identify how to deliver "high-impact tutoring" at relatively low cost ($3,500 to $4,300 per participant per year). Our first randomized controlled trial (RCT) of Saga's tutoring model with 2,633 9th and 10th grade students in Chicago public schools found participation increased math test scores by 0.16 standard deviations (SDs) and increased grades in math and non-math courses. We replicated these results in a separate RCT with 2,710 students and found even larger math test score impacts--0.37 SD--and similar grade impacts. These effects persist into future years, although estimates for high school graduation are imprecise. The treatment effects do not appear to be the result of a generic "mentoring effect" or of changes in social-emotional skills, but instead seem to be caused by changes in the instructional "technology" that students received. The estimated benefit-cost ratio is comparable to many successful model early-childhood programs. [This working paper was sponsored by numerous organizations. Refer to the direct link for the complete list.]