School Survey - Appendix C

OMB#: 1850-0877

Expiration Date:

Charting the Progress of Education Reform:

An Evaluation of the Recovery Act’s Role

School Survey

Spring 2011

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this information collection is 1850-0877. The approximate time required to complete this data collection is estimated to be 45 minutes. If you have any comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimates or suggestions for improving this form, please write to: U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C. 20202-4651. If you have comments or concerns regarding the status of your individual submission of this form, write directly to: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, 555 New Jersey Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20208.

Notice of Confidentiality

Information collected for this study come under the confidentiality and data protection requirements of the Institute of Education Sciences (The Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, Title I, Part E, Section 183).  Information that could identify an individual or institution will be separated from the survey responses submitted, kept in secured locations, and be destroyed as soon as they are no longer required. Survey responses will be used only for research purposes. The reports prepared for the study will summarize survey findings across individuals and institutions and will not associate responses with a specific district, school, or person. We will not provide information that identifies you or your school to anyone outside the study team, except as required by law.

Introduction

This survey and the larger study of which it is a part are supported under a contract from the United States (U.S.) Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences (IES). The overall purposes of the study are to examine (1) ongoing education reform efforts, (2) the uses of funds available under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA or the Recovery Act) to support these reforms, and (3) the challenges associated with the reforms.

• This survey focuses on school reform efforts. The survey includes seven sections and covers the topics listed in the table below. While we expect that the school’s principal will be in the best position to answer the survey, please feel free to have other knowledgeable school personnel complete sections about activities for which they may responsible.

• Your school’s responses are critical to drawing lessons to improve federal efforts to support education reform. In addition, your responses will help inform policy makers, educators and researchers at the local, state, and national levels of reform efforts underway and challenges being encountered.

• All survey results will be presented as aggregate findings and no individual schools will be named or otherwise identified in any study reports or other communications that use survey data.

• The study, including this survey, is being conducted by Westat and its partners, Policy Studies Associates, the University of Wisconsin, and Chesapeake Research Associates. IES is providing technical direction.

• Once your school survey is complete, please provide the following information for the school administrator(s) who assisted with the completion of each section of the survey.

Survey Section	For Each Person(s) Who Responded to a Survey Section
	Position Title	Number of Years in the Position	Estimated total minutes to respond
School staffing
Educator recruitment, hiring, and induction
Practices related to educator performance evaluation and compensation
Strategies related to school organization and improvement
New state standards, curricula, and assessments
Resources purchased or received to support education reform
School reform priorities for 2011-2012

1. School Staffing

1. Counting the 2010-2011 school year, how long has the current principal been the principal at this school?

year(s)

If the answer to item 1 is one year, continue to item 2. Otherwise skip to item 3.

2. Was the principal of this school for the 2009-10 school year replaced for the 2010-11 school year as part of a school reconstitution or turnaround effort?

 Yes

 No

3. Enter the number of the following types of staff in your school for the specified school years.

• If projections for 2011-2012 are not available, mark N/A in the appropriate cell(s).

Number of Staff by Type	2009-2010	2010-2011	2011-2012 (projected)
Teachers of core academic subjects (mathematics, reading/English language arts, history/social studies, science)
Of the teachers of core academic subjects, how many have 3 or fewer years of total teaching experience?
School-based professional development staff (including resource teachers, instructional coaches, and mentors who devote at least half of their time to working with teachers )
Assistant principals
All other staff

II. Educator Recruitment, Hiring, and Induction

4. Indicate whether your school used the practices below to recruit, hire, and induct teachers in the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 school years, or expects to use them in the 2011-2012 school year.

• If the district has a practice that applies to teachers in your school, please check that it is used, even if your school is not responsible for administering the practice.

Recruitment, Hiring, and Induction Practices	Used in 2009-2010 (Enter Yes or No)	Used in 2010-2011 (Enter Yes or No)	Expected to be In Use in 2011-2012 (Enter Yes or No)
Give preference in hiring new teachers (i.e., those in their first year of teaching) from university preparation programs that:
Are aligned with state content standards
Have evidence of the effectiveness of its graduates based on student achievement gains
Have established strong partnerships with your school
Hire teachers from alternative teacher pipelines (e.g., Teach for America, local alternative program)
Hire experienced teachers who can provide evidence of effectiveness based on student learning gains or growth
Provide financial or classroom supports to teachers with provisional or emergency certificates to obtain full certification in STEM or special education
Provide first year teachers with a full year of mentoring and observation, feedback, and demonstrations by assigned mentors and/or skilled teachers
School leaders have the authority to hire qualified transfer candidates without regard to district seniority status
School leaders receive professional development, training, or technical assistance on how to identify, recruit or hire effective teachers*

^*Effective teacher are those whose students achieve acceptable rates (e.g., at least one grade level in an academic year) of student growth.

5. Indicate to what extent, if at all, your school encountered these challenges in carrying out or improving practices to recruit, hire, induct, evaluate and compensate educators during the 2010—2011 school year.

Challenges when recruiting, hiring, and supporting new educators	Extent of Challenge in 2010-2011 (Check one in each row.)
	Not Applicable	Not a Challenge	Minor Challenge	Major Challenge
Insufficient funding to implement or sustain new educator induction programs
Lack of school staff capacity or expertise to:
Identify and recruit effective teachers
Mentor/coach new educators
Restrictions in rules and regulations relating to:
How teachers can be hired
How administrators can be hired
Lack of clear district guidance/support concerning:
Hiring new educators
Implementing teacher induction programs
Shortage of qualified applicants

3. Practices Related to Educator Performance Evaluation and Compensation

6. Indicate whether your school used the performance evaluation practices for educators in your school in the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 school years, or expects to use them in the 2011-2012 school year.

• If the district has a practice that applies to educators in your school, please check that it is used, even if your school is not responsible for administering the practice.

Performance Evaluation Practices	Used in 2009-2010 (Enter Yes or No)	Used in 2010-2011 (Enter Yes or No)	Expected to be In Use in 2011-2012 (Enter Yes or No)
Teacher evaluation practices
Uses a rating scale or rubric that defines three or more performance levels to evaluate classroom instruction or practice
Includes at least two yearly observations of classroom instruction with written feedback
Uses multiple observers (such as master teachers, coaches, or peers as well as school administrators)
Requires evaluators to be trained to conduct reliable and accurate classroom observations
Includes student achievement gains in NCLB grades/subjects in determining individual teacher performance ratings
Uses student achievement gains in non-NCLB grades/subjects in determining individual teacher performance ratings
Provides teachers with specific suggestions for professional development activities designed to help them improve in areas covered by the evaluation
Principal evaluation practices
Uses a rating scale or rubric that defines three or more levels of performance
Includes at least two yearly observations with written feedback
Includes input on performance from sources other than the direct supervisor, such as teachers, parents, and other central office staff
Includes student achievement growth or gains in determining the principal’s performance rating
Provides the principal with specific suggestions for professional development activities designed to help her/him improve in the areas covered by the evaluation

7. For those teacher evaluation practices applied to the teachers in your school in the 2009-2010 school year, were any of the teachers part of a pilot test or phase in of the practices that year?

 Yes

 No

8. For those teacher evaluation practices applied to the teachers in your school in the 2010-2011 school year, were more teachers covered in the 2010-2011 school year than in the 2009-2010 school year?

 Yes

 No

9. Indicate whether the compensation practices below were applied or were available to educators at your school in the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 school years, or are expected to be applied or made available in the 2011-2012 school year.

• If the district has a practice that applies to educators in your school, please check that it is used, even if your school is not responsible for administering the practice.

• A practice applied or was available if educators were eligible for or received the compensation as described.

Educator Compensation Practices	Applied/Was Available in 2009-2010 (Enter Yes or No)	Applied/Was Available in 2010-2011 (Enter Yes or No)	Expected to Apply/be Available in 2011-2012 (Enter Yes or No)
Teacher compensation practices
Base pay increases, add-ons, or stipends to teachers based in part on:
Ratings of classroom observations of teaching practice
Achievement gains of students in individual teachers’ classes
Demonstrating higher levels of instructional skills via National Board certification or a similar state or LEA performance assessment
Serving as master teachers, instructional specialists, or teacher coaches/mentors
One-time bonuses to teachers in addition to base pay for:
Achievement gains of students in individual teachers’ classes
Achievement gains of students served by teacher grade-level or other teams (e.g., same bonus provided to teachers of students in the same grade)
Average achievement gains of students school-wide (e.g., same bonus provided to all teachers in the school)
Higher starting salaries, stipends or bonuses for:
Teachers who move to teach in your school
STEM teachers
Special education teachers
Teachers qualified to teach in other shortage areas
Teachers who move to teach in your schools
Teachers qualified to teach in shortage areas, including STEM or special education
Non-financial incentives (e.g., smaller class size, planning time, reduced classroom hours) to encourage teachers to come to and remain in this school
Principal compensation practices
Performance evaluation ratings used in determining base pay increases
Bonuses for improvements or gains in student achievement

10. Indicate whether the policies below were in place regarding the use of student achievement data in decisions about educator tenure, assignment, and retention in the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 school years, or are expected to be in place in the 2011-2012 school year.

• If the district has a practice that applies to educators in your school, please check that it is in place, even if your school is not responsible for administering the practice.

Policies Regarding the Use of Student Achievement Data for Tenure, Assignment, and Retention	Policy in Place in 2009-2010 (Enter Yes or No)	Policy in Place in 2010-2011 (Enter Yes or No)	Policy Expected to be In Place in 2011-2012 (Enter Yes or No)
Use gains or growth in achievement of teachers’ students in deciding teacher:
Tenure
Dismissal or non-retention with the district
Retention in the school or reassignment to another school
Use gains or growth in the achievement of the students in the school in deciding whether:
The principal is retained as leader of the school or reassigned to another school
The principal ‘s contract is renewed or tenure given

11. Indicate to what extent, if at all, your school encountered these challenges when implementing educator evaluation and compensation systems in the 2010-2011 school year.

Challenges when implementing educator evaluation and compensation systems	Extent of Challenge in 2010-2011 (Check one in each row.)
	Not Applicable	Not a Challenge	Minor Challenge	Major Challenge
Insufficient funding to:
Provide performance-based compensation to all eligible teachers
Provide differential compensation for teachers in high need areas (i.e., STEM subjects)
Lack of school staff capacity or expertise to:
Conduct comprehensive educator performance evaluations
Identify professional development needs of teachers based on performance evaluations
Limited access to technology needed in order to link student test data to individual teachers
Restrictions in rules and regulations on:
How educators can be evaluated
How educators can be compensated
Lack of clear district guidance/support on educator compensation or evaluation system
Concerns or opposition from school staff/staff unions about:
Evaluating educators based, at least in part, on student achievement
Performance based compensation
Difficulty in Measuring student growth for teachers of non-tested subjects

IV. Strategies Related to School Organization and Improvement

12. Indicate whether the features below of school restructuring or reorganizing were introduced in your school in the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 school years, or are expected to be introduced in the 2011-2012 school year.

Features of School Restructuring or Reorganizing	Introduced in 2009-2010 (Enter Yes or No)	Introduced in 2010-2011 (Enter Yes or No)	Expected to be Introduced in 2011-2012 (Enter Yes or No)
Operation by Charter Management Organization (CMO) or Education Management Organization (EMO)
Convert to or continue in charter status
Increased autonomy in staffing and budgeting from the district, CMO, or EMO, compared to before restructuring or reorganizing
Use school improvement experts from outside the school
Replacement of a substantial proportion of teachers
Reassignment of effective teachers to your school from others
Extend regular school day and/or week
Extend regular school year

13. Indicate whether your school used the strategies below to help improve instruction and related student services in the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 school years, or plans to use them in the 2011-2012 school year.

Strategies to Improve Instruction and Related Student Services	Used in 2009-2010 (Enter Yes or No)	Used in 2010-11 (Enter Yes or No)	Expected to be In Use in 2011-2012 (Enter Yes or No)
Complete a comprehensive school needs assessment to identify areas in need of improvement
Submit improvement plans to the district that detail changes in curricula, instructional methods, or staffing
Use a school improvement model developed by an outside partner or a vendor
Use new curriculum or curricular materials that are not part of a school improvement model
Use instructional coaches to support teacher learning
Provide one-on-one or small group instructional sessions for struggling students
Have smaller class sizes than typical for grade
Modify daily schedule to increase the amount of instructional time for reading/English language arts or mathematics
Purchase technology to support instruction (includes computers and software for student use in the classroom)
Schedule common planning time for teachers
Use student assessment data to:
Tailor instruction in the classroom
Identify students for additional support
Implement programs to:
Address students’ social and emotional needs
Encourage family and community involvement
Orient parents to school improvement models
Provide or have teachers take part in professional development opportunities to improve content knowledge in STEM

14. Indicate to what extent, if at all, your school encountered these challenges when working on school organization and improvement in the 2010-2011 school year.

Challenges when supporting school restructuring and improvement	Extent of Challenge in 2010-2011 (Check one in each row.)
	Not Applicable	Not a Challenge	Minor Challenge	Major Challenge
Insufficient funding to:
Make substantial changes to school day/year schedules
Support special programs for students and families
Support school-based experts (outside consultants, instructional specialists/coaches, mentors)
Purchase technology for classroom use
Lack of school staff capacity or expertise to effectively use technology to improve instruction
Insufficient help from local social services and other community-based organizations in providing services to students and their families
Restrictions in rules and regulations on:
Making substantial changes to school day/year schedules
Replacing less effective teachers
Lack of clear district guidance/support focused on:
Implementing a whole-school intervention/turn around model
Staffing or budgeting decisions made at the school level
Concerns or opposition from parents or community groups about reform activities

.

3. New State Standards, Curricula, and Assessments

15. Has your state adopted the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics and/or English Language Arts (ELA)?

 Yes (Skip to Item 17)

 No (Continue to Item 16)

 Do Not Know (Continue to Item 16)

16. Has your state adopted other new or revised content standards in Mathematics, Reading/ELA, Science, and/or Social Studies in the 2009-10 or 2010-2011 school years?

 Yes (Continue to Item 17)

 No (Skip to Item 19)

 Do Not Know (Skip to Item 19)

17. Indicate which practices your school used to implement new or revised state content standards (such as the Common Core State Standards or other new or revised state content standards) by subject in the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 school years, or expect to use in the 2011-2012 school year.

Practices to Implement New or Revised State Content Standards	Used in 2009-2010 (Check all that applied.)			Used in 2010-2011 (Check all that apply.)			Expected to be in Use in 2011-2012 (Check all expected to apply.)
	Math	Reading /ELA	Science and/or Social Studies	Math	Reading /ELA	Science and/or Social Studies	Math	Reading /ELA	Science and/or Social Studies
Teachers receive in-person professional development on the new or revised content standards
School leaders receive in-person professional development on the new or revised content standards
Internet-based professional development on new or revised content standards is made available to educators
Use curriculum frameworks or pacing guides aligned with new or revised standards
Use a curriculum aligned with the new or revised standards
Administer the following assessments aligned with the new or revised standards:
Summative assessments1
Interim assessments2

¹A summative assessment summarizes learning as of a particular point in time and is used for evaluative purposes (e.g., a grade).  Examples of summative assessments include state or district standards-based assessments or an end of course assessment.

² Interim assessments are tests given periodically to check student progress, including standardized and diagnostic assessments but not including teacher-developed tests.

18. Indicate whether teachers in your school received targeted professional development specifically designed to help English language learners and students with disabilities master new or revised state content standards in the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 school years, or whether they are expected to receive this professional development in the 2011-2012 school year.

Targeted Professional Development to Help Certain Students Master New or Revised State Content Standards	Received in 2009-2010 (Enter Yes or No)	Received in 2010-2011 (Enter Yes or No)	Expected to Receive in 2011-2012 (Enter Yes or No)
English language learners
Students with disabilities

19. Indicate to what extent, if at all, your school encountered these challenges when planning or implementing the Common Core State Standards or other new or revised state content standards in the 2010-2011 school year.

Challenges planning or implementing any new or revised state content standards	Extent of Challenge in 2010-2011 (Check one in each row.)
	Not Applicable	Not a Challenge	Minor Challenge	Major Challenge
Insufficient funding to:
Purchase new instructional materials aligned with new standards
Support instructional specialists or coaches to help teachers implement new standards
Lack of school staff capacity or expertise to:
Develop new curricula guides and instructional materials aligned with new standards
Provide guidance about or train educators on using new standards for their instruction
Lack of clear district guidance/support on:
Specific content of new standards
Expectations concerning when and how standards should be implemented
Inadequate quality or availability of state-developed instructional materials aligned with standards
Concerns or opposition focused on new standards from:
School staff/staff unions
Parents or other community groups
Current assessments are not aligned with the new standards

20. Indicate whether your school used the practices below to implement new or existing assessments and use data systems in the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 school years, or planned to use them in the 2011-2012 school year.

• Report on practices related to assessments used in 2009-2010 and 2010-2011, and expected for 2011-2012. These may or may not include new assessments aligned with the Common Core State Standards or other new or revised state content standards.

Practices Related to New or Existing Assessments and Data Systems	Used in 2009-2010 (Enter Yes or No)	Used in 2010-2011 (Enter Yes or No)	Expected to be In Use in 2011-2012 (Enter Yes or No)
Administer standardized summative assessments in:
Non-NCLB tested grades
Non-NCLB tested subjects
Administer interim assessments
Use longitudinal data to track student achievement gains:
For individual teachers
For the school
Teachers have on-line access to individual student results from:
State summative assessments1
District summative assessments1
Interim assessments2
Teachers have on-line access to students’ demographic information, attendance, or discipline data linked to student assessment data
Teachers receive professional development about how to use student assessment results for instructional planning
School administrators receive professional development about how to use student assessment results for improvement planning
Educators have access to key aggregate student and school indicators through report cards, data dashboards, or other feedback and analysis systems

¹A summative assessment summarizes learning as of a particular point in time and is used for evaluative purposes (e.g., a grade).  Examples of summative assessments include state or district standards-based assessments or an end of course assessment.

² Interim assessments are tests given periodically to check student progress, including standardized and diagnostic assessments but not including teacher-developed tests.

21. Indicate to what extent, if at all, your school encountered these challenges when implementing assessments and using data systems for storing, reporting, and using assessment results in the 2010-2011 school year.

Challenges implementing assessments and using data systems	Extent of Challenge in 2010-2011 (Check one in each row.)
	Not applicable	Not a Challenge	Minor Challenge	Major Challenge
Insufficient funding to purchase or sustain data systems that store and provide access to assessment information
Lack of school staff capacity or expertise to:
Train educators on how to administer assessments
Train educators on how to use assessments to improve instruction
Maintain and facilitate educators’ access to assessment data systems
Lack of clear district guidance/support on using state and district assessment data systems
Concerns or opposition from:
Parents or other community groups to additional assessments
School staff about additional assessments
Standardized assessments not available for enough subjects or grades
Delays in transmission of assessment results to school or teachers

VI. Resources Purchased or Received to Support Education Reform

22. Indicate whether your school has purchased or received from your district any of the following resources to support reform efforts listed in other questions in this survey during the 2009-2010 and/or 2010-2011 school years?

Resources Purchased or Received to Support Reforms	2009-2010 (Check all that apply in each row.)			2010-2011 Check all that apply in each row.)
	Purchased	Received	No	Purchased	Received	No
Computers and software for teacher use in accessing and analyzing student data
Computers and software for teacher use in accessing online instructional resources
Computers and software for student use in classroom learning activities
Assistive technology to support special education students’ access to curricula and learning activities aligned with content standards
Consulting services/technical assistance in using new computers and software

VII. School Reform Priorities for 2011-2012

23. We realize that schools may need to make choices about their emphasis on particular reform areas. Indicate the priority level of each school reform area below for the 2011-2012 school year.

• Check one in each row.

• Select only one “highest” priority reform area.

School Reform Priorities for 2011-2012	Level of Priority for 2011-2012 (Check one in each row.)
	Highest Priority	High Priority	Medium Priority	Low Priority
Implementing reforms to increase educator quality:
Improved ways to recruit and hire effective teachers
Improved educator induction programs
Performance evaluation systems that hold educators accountable for improved student outcomes
Performance-based compensation systems for educators
Incentives or programs to attract and retain effective educators*
Implementing school restructuring or reorganization
Implementing reforms to improve instruction:
Strategies for improving instruction or related student services
New or revised state content standards in reading/English/language arts and/or mathematics
New or revised state content standards in other subjects
Administering assessments:
New summative assessments
New interim assessments
Implementing data systems and increasing use of technology:
On-line data systems that provide information on student learning growth or gains
Instructional use of information technology

^*Effective teachers are those whose students achieve acceptable rates (e.g., at least one grade level in an academic year) of student growth. Effective principals are those whose students, overall and for each subgroup, achieve acceptable rates (e.g., at least one grade level in an academic year) of student growth.

Thank You for Your Participation in This Evaluation