Some Long-Struggling Schools That Received Federal Grants Saw Positive Changes, But Doubts about Sustainability of "Turnaround" Linger, AIR Researchers Find

Washington, D.C. — Despite positive changes at low-performing schools that received federal grants to spark dramatic improvement, teachers from a diverse group of case-study schools question whether those changes are sustainable.

That finding is part of a multiyear examination, led by the American Institutes for Research (AIR) for the Institute of Education Sciences, of schools that receive School Improvement Grant (SIG) funds from the U.S. Department of Education. Although the program has been dismantled, the struggle to jump-start long-struggling schools continues. The study offers a detailed look at commonly used strategies and lessons learned from such efforts, but also echoes educators’ widespread fears about the fragility of so-called “school turnaround.”

The case studies—conducted by AIR and its research partner, Mathematica Policy Research—examined 25 SIG-funded schools from 2010-2012 and a smaller subset of 12 schools over the grants’ entire three-year lifespan, ending in 2013.

Most teachers in seven of the 12 schools that the study team followed for all three years reported that their schools had changed in primarily positive ways during the grants’ lifetime. Only two of those same 12 schools appeared likely to sustain their improvements. Six appeared to have mixed prospects, and prospects for the remaining four appeared weak, according to teacher survey responses and site-visit data. Many interviewees expressed fears about their schools’ ability to recruit and retain strong leaders and effective teachers once SIG funding ran out.

“There have been many hypotheses about what variables might lead to sustained improvement, from the amount of the grant to the type of intervention model used,” said Kerstin Le Floch, a managing researcher at AIR and lead author of the report. “But these variables appear to have had little effect on the schools studied. Overwhelmingly, the biggest risk factors were related to human capital. Teachers at these schools expressed fears over losing staff and impending changes in school leadership.”

In seven of the 12 schools, it appeared that efforts to build human capital in a grant’s first two years increased the likelihood of boosting organizational capacity for improvement by the grant’s end.

Staffing issues also weighed heavily in observations of the larger group of 25 schools that received grants during SIGs’ first two years. Notably:

  • Only three schools maintained the same principal for the full three-year grant period. Most (21) of the 25 schools replaced their principal at least once in the year before receiving grant funds or in the first year of funding. By year two of SIG, nine had replaced their principals twice. Of the new principals, half were described as improvements over their predecessors.
  • About half of the schools (12) replaced at least half of their teachers during the three-year period. During SIG’s first two years, most schools added nonteaching positions—most commonly, instructional, technology and data coaches (14 schools), followed by additional school administrators (11 schools). However, the principal and district officials in three-fourths (18) of the schools indicated that recruitment or retention challenges made it hard to build a skilled and motivated staff.
  • Most schools reported receiving support from their districts (all 22 schools with sufficient data) and external support providers (22 of 25 schools), but some said support fell short. Only 10 of 22 schools with sufficient data described their districts’ overall efforts as useful to their schools’ improvement aims.

The report, Case Studies of Schools Receiving School Improvement Grants: Final Report, is available on the U.S. Department of Education website at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20164002/.

Featured

  • Springfield Breaks Ground on $53.7M Pipkin Middle School Rebuild

    Construction is underway on a new, state-of-the-art Pipkin Middle School in Springfield, Mo., a major step in Springfield Public Schools’ (SPS) long-term facility improvement plan, according to local news. The $53.7-million project officially broke ground in early June, following years of planning and community input aimed at modernizing aging infrastructure and addressing student capacity concerns.

  • ProTeam Launches GoFit 6 HEPA Backpack Vacuum

    Technology leader Emerson recently introduced the new ProTeam GoFit 6 HEPA backpack vacuum, according to a news release. The vacuum was designed to capture 99.97% of particulates down to 0.3 microns—including atmospheric hazards like lead dust, mold spores, and other particulates—through an advanced filtration system.

  • California High School Starts Construction on New CTE Building

    Analy High School, part of the West Sonoma County Union High School District (WSCUHSD) in Sebastopol, Calif., recently broke ground on a new Career Technical Education (CTE) Building, according to a news release. The 15,000-square-foot facility will offer specialized facilities for students in engineering, welding, culinary arts, agricultural sciences, and design thinking.

  • modern college building with circuit and brain motifs

    Anthropic Introduces Claude for Education

    Anthropic has launched a version of its Claude AI assistant tailored for higher education institutions. Claude for Education "gives academic institutions secure, reliable AI access for their entire community," the company said, to enable colleges and universities to develop and implement AI-enabled approaches across teaching, learning, and administration.

Digital Edition