Evaluation Dave Mendell Spring 2018 Demographic Context - - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Gifted Program Evaluation

Dave Mendell Spring 2018

Demographic Context - Wallingford Swarthmore School District

The Wallingford-Swarthmore School District is a suburban Philadelphia school district.

• Total student population of approximately 3,600 students.
• 74% are white
• 13% are identified as being economically disadvantaged.
• 10% of the student population is identified as Gifted.
• 15 Charter School students
• 1 High school (9-12), 1 Middle school (6-8), 3 Elementary Schools (K-5)
• Additional information: Total of 6 Gifted Education teachers

○ 1 High School, 2 Middle School, 3 Elementary School (1 per school)

Demographic Context - WSSD Elementary Schools

Nether Providence Elementary

• Total Enrollment: 515
• 66% White
• 14% Asian
• 19% Black, Hispanic and

Multi-Racial

• 20% Economically

disadvantaged

• 7% Gifted

Swarthmore-Rutledge School

• Total Enrollment: 580
• 77% White
• 8% Asian
• 14% Black, Hispanic and

Multi-Racial

• 9% Economically

disadvantaged

• 7% Gifted

Wallingford Elementary School

• Total Enrollment: 460
• 78% white
• 4% Asian
• 18% Black, Hispanic and

Multi-Racial

• 11% Economically

disadvantaged

• 7% Gifted

Source: www.paschoolperformance.org

Wallingford-Swarthmore School District - Context

In examining the demographics of the Wallingford-Swarthmore School District (WSSD), there are several items worthing noting. While the District as a whole has a reported Economically Disadvantaged population of 13%, Nether Providence Elementary School’s (NPE) Economically Disadvantaged population is 20%. At the same time, the percentage of students at NPE who are identified as Gifted is the same as the District’s other 2 elementary schools. Additionally, it is worth noting that the District has dedicated Gifted Support teachers at each school. There is no itinerant gifted support personnel.

Gifted Education - Context

GOAL:

The goal of WSSD’s Gifted Education Services is to provide enriched learning experiences for gifted students that reflect individual differences, equal educational opportunity and desire for the optimal development of each child.

• (source: WSSD Elementary Gifted Program Overview, https://www.wssd.org/Page/6684 )

ELEMENTARY GIFTED PROGRAM DESIGN:

A unique feature of the elementary schools in WSSD is that each school retains its own school culture and

• identity. One way this manifests itself is in the administrative design of the building schedules. As such, the

gifted programs at all 3 schools have different formats in regards to time, yet maintain in common, core elements of providing support in Language Arts, Math and STEM. At two of the schools, Swarthmore-Rutledge and Wallingford, teachers meet students in a “traditional” gifted seminar format once or twice per week. At Nether Providence Elementary, the school uses a “Core-Extension” schedule which enables the Gifted Teacher to meet with students on an almost daily basis. All three Gifted Support teachers are given the autonomy to design a program that supports their particular

• students. At the same time, bi-weekly meetings ensure consistency and promote collaboration among the staff.

Evaluation Purpose

Socio-Emotional Guidance and Counseling- Guiding Principle #4 “A well-defined and implemented affective curriculum scope and sequence containing personal/social awareness and adjustment, academic planning… should be provided to gifted learners.”

• Source:

Aiming for Excellence: Gifted Program Standards, Landrum, Callahan and Shaklee.

Over the past few years of providing Gifted Support, it has become apparent that a significant component contributing to the success of Gifted students is the support and development of “non-academic” skills such as Habits of Mind and Growth

• Mindsets. Ironically, there is little room in a GIEP, as the State of PA, Chp. 16 dictates a GIEP should be academic in nature

with measurable, strengths-based goals. It is worth noting, that the Guiding Principles of: Aiming for Excellence: Gifted Program Standards specifically identify socio-emotional learning as a significant component of a gifted program. Given this, it became important and relevant to determine if the socio-emotional learning needs of students are being met at Nether Providence Elementary School.

Evaluation Question and Purpose

“To what extent are the socio-emotional needs of gifted learners being met at Nether Providence Elementary School.”

Over the past two years, deliberate lessons and strategies have been taught in an effort to help students develop better learning habits and a positive growth mindset. This program evaluation question seeks to collect both qualitative and quantitative data that can be used to help determine the efficacy of the program thus far. Further, depending upon the outcomes, modifications to the program can be made so as to continue improving the socio-emotional learning skills of gifted students. The purpose of this question is to determine the current status of students’ socio-emotional learning skills as well as parents’ perceptions of their children’s skills. Identifying strengths and needs will enable the refinement and improvement of support for students at NPE. Further, data confirming the validity of such a program could be used to support and promote similar programs at the other District Elementary schools.

Evaluation Design

Data Collection and Methodology

• Student Survey - adapted from the Panorama Education - Socio-Emotional Learning Survey

○ Source: https://www.panoramaed.com/social-emotional-learning ○ Panorama Education’s survey has been implemented nationally. National norms are available to provide additional cross referencing of student survey results. ○ STUDENT SURVEY - implemented via Google Forms

• Parent Focus Group - question topics derived from the Panorama survey

○ Parents were chosen for a focus group as they present a different stakeholder view that is still strongly connected to the socio-emotional well-being of the students. Understanding the perceptions of parents is critical to the overall success of the gifted program.

• Parent Survey - Adapted from the Student Survey

○ While the Focus group provided broad topic discussions, a follow-up survey using the same questions as the student survey was implemented so as to make more direct correlations between parent and student responses. ○ PARENT SURVEY - implemented via Google Forms

Evaluation Design - Student Survey

Rationale - Panorama Education was featured in an NPR article and has implemented a Student SEL (Socio-Emotional Learning) survey nationwide, especially in California and

• Arizona. By using the actual survey, there are several possible outcomes. In addition to

analyzing the data to learn about students’ perceptions on their socio-emotional needs, it may also be possible to compare my results with the data collected by Panorama. The ability to compare survey results to national norms would enable me to look beyond results that I may view as “unfavorable” and see them in a greater context. Additionally, using the survey, which is open source, ensures that the questions asked are not written in a manner that has an implicit bias towards creating favorable/unfavorable

• utcomes.

NPR Article - To Measure What Tests Can't, Some Schools Turn To Surveys

• Published December 2015

Evaluation Design - Focus Group

Focus group questions were designed to correlate with the major themes of the Student Survey. Due to time restrictions, only a select number of questions were given adequate time for discussion,. Below are the questions discussed during the focus group as well as the additional questions which were not directly addressed in the time allotted. Questions addressed during the Focus Group:

• Grit - How well is your child able to persevere through setbacks to achieve important long-term goals?

How does your child manage their emotions, thoughts and behaviors in different situations?

• Teacher-Student Relationships – Talk about the social connection between your child and their teachers

within and beyond school.

• Social Awareness - How does your child consider the perspectives of others and empathize with them.
• Classroom Effort – How much effort does your child put into school and learning?

Additional Questions:

• Engagement/Valuing of School – How attentive and invested do you feel your child is in school?

– Do you feel your child finds school interesting, important and useful?

• Sense of Belonging – How do you perceive your child as being a valued member of the school community.

Data Analysis - Rationale

Student Survey - The student survey was divided into 8 common themes: Grit Mindset (Classroom Effort) Self-Management Social Awareness Self-Efficacy Teacher-Student Relationships Sense of Belonging School Safety In order to ensure triangulation of the surveys and focus group, it was determined that the focus of the survey data should correlate to the questions addressed during the focus group. The following analysis pertains to the following questions:

• Grit - How well is your child able to persevere through setbacks to achieve important long-term goals?

How does your child manage their emotions, thoughts and behaviors in different situations?

• Teacher-Student Relationships – Talk about the social connection between your child and their

teachers within and beyond school.

• Social Awareness - How does your child consider the perspectives of others and empathize with them.
• Classroom Effort – How much effort does your child put into school and learning?

Data Analysis - Grit

Analysis - Both students and parents rated Grit questions similarly. In terms of dealing with problems and failure, both groups held a >35% positive rating. It is noteworthy that no parent respondents felt their child was extremely likely to keep working.

STUDENT SURVEY PARENT SURVEY

Data Analysis - Teacher-Student Relationships

Analysis - Students and parents held predominantly convergent views towards Teacher- Student

• relationships. It is

noteworthy that more students felt their teachers really wanted to know how they felt as compared to the parents.

STUDENT SURVEY PARENT SURVEY

Data Analysis - Social Awareness - page 1

STUDENT SURVEY PARENT SURVEY

Data Analysis - Social Awareness - page 2

Analysis - More students felt it was difficult to describe their feelings (35%) as compared to parents (11%). There was contradictory results for the final question regarding a child’s ability to stand up for themself. Students felt much more certain of this (35.9%) than parents (11.1%). This final observation leads one to question students’ general perceptions of this particular skill.

STUDENT SURVEY PARENT SURVEY

Data Analysis - Classroom Effort (Mindset)

Analysis - The most contradictory results stemmed from this line of questions. Across all survey questions, parents indicated a significantly stronger belief in students’ ability to change their level of effort. The implications of this are significant and indicate that additional, explicit teaching of Growth Mindset strategies is warranted.

STUDENT SURVEY PARENT SURVEY

Focus Group - Select responses

Focus Topic Selected Responses

Grit

• “It’s easier (to persevere) when they can see a path forward”
• “Academically challenging work is a threat to their ego.”
• “Can depend on the subject”
• “Extremes - Can go from 0 - 60 and back... as soon as the work gets hard.”
• “It is hard to keep the motivation going while he hits a set-back”

Teacher-Student Relationships

• “This is a big piece - an Umbrella Topic over all of the other topics”
• “A Strong connection to the teacher can impact everything else”
• “Boring work - how classroom teachers deal with the amount of review.”
• “Varies with the teacher. Is eager to establish a connection given a chance to do so.”
• “His teacher's approval and understanding are the utmost importance in his classroom behavior”

Social Awareness

• “Happens more in Enrichment Class than Math Class”
• “In the Regular Classrooms, subjects don’t emphasize the Group Process”

Classroom Effort

• “All of the other topics feed into this.”
• “The kids need to figure out how they learn, so they can deal with having to learn something new

when it doesn’t come easily.”

• “Task Commitment vs. easy to do...”
• “I think this fluctuates. If it is a topic that interests her, she will put in a lot of effort. If it doesn't,

she has a hard time finding things about it to keep her interested.”

Focus Group - Analysis

Themes: Below are the common themes among the participants. While individual differences did exist, all participants were in agreement on the existence of these themes.

• Teacher-Student Relations - This is an “Umbrella Topic” above all of the others. Parents all

believe that it is the teacher that can have the most significant impact on students’ effort, grit, behavior, etc. ○ What the teacher does to make/keep the work and learning interesting is also important.

• Effort and Grit - Both of these discussion topics shared a common theme of “it’s easier when the

kids think/know that they can do the work. Most felt that the students would benefit from more

• pportunities to have to work hard.
• Social Awareness - Not enough collaboration is happening in the regular ed. classrooms.

Triangulation of Findings across Data Sources

THEMES Data Source Convergent Themes:

• Teacher-Student Relations - Evidence collected from all three data sources

indicates that strong student-teacher relations can have a positive impact on students’ socio-emotional learning. SS, PS, FG

• Social Awareness - In regards to students’ abilities to understand the feelings and

emotions of both themselves and others, both parents and students indicated a predominantly positive view (>60% Often or Sometimes). SS, PS Contradictory Themes:

• Grit and Classroom Effort - Parents expressed a view that students’ abilities to

put forth effort and persevere can change and improve. SS, PS, FG Inconsistent Themes:

• Social Awareness - Parents expressed a broadly accepted opinion that there are

not enough opportunities for collaboration in the regular education classrooms. FG

SS = Student Survey; PS = Parent Survey: FG = Focus Group (Parent)

Evaluation Question: Answer

Question: To what extent are the socio-emotional needs of gifted learners being met at Nether Providence Elementary School?

The predominantly positive responses from both students and parents across the different categories indicate that to some degree, the socio-emotional needs are being met. That being said, the data also indicates that there is still room for improvement.

• Teacher-Student Relationships - The focus group served to highlight that the classroom teacher plays a

pivotal role in the socio-emotional development of the students. The teacher is an “umbrella” over all other socio-emotional measures.

• Grit and Classroom Effort - The contradictory views of parents and students indicates that students have a

lower belief in their ability to change. A continued effort in this area would serve to meet a need identified by parents as important and able to be changed.

• Social Awareness - It is worth noting that the student responses to the Social Awareness survey questions

provides grounds to support the Focus Group theme that there is not enough collaboration in the regular education classrooms.

Recommendations

Classroom teachers play a pivotal role in improving socio-emotional learning for gifted students. To further meet the socio-emotional needs of gifted learners, teachers should: 1. Plan and use more collaborative learning strategies and activities in all areas of the curriculum.

• 2. Provide greater differentiation in the classroom by reducing review time

and offering more challenging activities for gifted students.

• 3. Support students as they struggle with more challenging assignments and

tasks.

• 4. Continue with the explicit teaching of Growth Mindsets and Habits of

Mind as strategies to improve students’ ability to persevere and learn.

Bibliography

Boyes, K., & Watts, G. (2009). Developing habits of mind in elementary schools. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Johnsen, S. K. (2012). NAGC pre-K-grade 12 gifted education programming standards: A guide to planning and implementing high-quality services. Waco, TX: Prufrock. Kamenetz, A. (2015, December 02). To Measure What Tests Can't, Some Schools Turn To Surveys. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2015/12/02/457281686/how-schools-are-using-surveys-to-measure-what-tests-can-t Landrum, M. S., Callahan, C. M., & Shaklee, B. D. (2001). Aiming for excellence: Annotations to the NAGC Pre-K-Grade 12 gifted Program Standards. Washington: National Association for Gifted Children. Mathison, S. (1988, March). Why Triangulate? Educational Researcher, 17(2), 13-17. Panorama Education (2018). Social-Emotional Learning Measures. Retrived April 2018 from: https://www.panoramaed.com/social-emotional-learning

Bibliography - continued

Panorama Education (2018). Social-Emotional Learning - User Guide. Retrieved April 2018 from: https://dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/sspw/pdf/seluserguide.pdf Pennsylvania Department of Education (2018). Pennsylvania School Performance Profile: Wallingford-Swarthmore School District. Retrieved April 2018 from: http://www.paschoolperformance.org/Profile/485 Pennsylvania Department of Education (2014). Gifted Education Guidelines. Retrieved April 2018 from: http://www.education.pa.gov/Documents/K-12/Gifted%20Education/Gifted%20Program%20Guidelines.pdf VanTassel-Baska, J., & Feng, A. X. (2004). Designing and utilizing evaluation for gifted program improvement. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. Wallingford-Swarthmore School District (2018). Elementary Gifted Program Overview. Retrieved April 2018 from: https://www.wssd.org/Page/6684