Middle Level Education Kyrene School District November 2007

Middle Level Research  Components of Exemplary Middle Schools -Interdisciplinary teaming -Advisory programs -Varied instruction -Exploratory programs -Transition programs

Historical Information  Changed from Junior Highs to Middle Schools in late 1980’s  School specific programs/schedules existed until late 1990’s  Consistent schedule implemented approx  Current schedule approved in March 2005  General reasons for changing the schedule - Need for improved student achievement -Potential Cost Savings -Better preparation for High School

Current Information  Characteristics of Middle School Schedule: -5-period day -68 minute periods -4 daily Core Subjects -Academic Lab -2 Electives, on A/B rotation

Middle School Schedule Research Study  Conducted by Dr. David Garcia, ASU Assistant Professor  Evaluation Phases -Phase 1:Implementation -Phase 2:Maturation -Phase 3:Outcomes

Research Study Details Phase 1 ( ) o On-line survey of Teachers (187 of 305) o One-on-one interviews with randomly selected principals (3 of 6) o 6 focus groups with students (Academic Lab) o 3 focus groups with Exploratory teachers

Phase 1 Findings Language Arts teachers  Reported pressure of teaching all objectives with less time  Less likely to try new methods  Unable to cover same amount of curriculum  Were unclear on what Language Arts objectives were to be integrated and reinforced in other core content areas

Phase 1 Findings (continued) Math, Science & /Soc. Studies teachers o Reported they could cover more material o Indicated they could try new methods o Reported having more individual time w/ students o Reported lack of clarity on what Language Arts objectives they were to integrate and reinforce

Phase 1 Findings (continued) Exploratory teachers:  Reported problems trying new methods  Perceived the model had negative impact on time to teach  Indicated students learn better with daily classes

Phase 1 Findings (continued) Principals  Reported more time in core classes was beneficial.

Phase 1 Findings (continued) Academic Lab teachers:  Almost all teachers reported not being prepared to use Academic Lab productively  Less than half said they received guidance (resulted in large variation in classes) Principals  Described A.L as purely academic and felt teachers were responsible for implementation

Phase 1 Findings (continued) Spanish & Music teachers  Researcher concluded may have been the most negatively impacted

Phase 1 Findings (continued) Teachers  Perceived little impact on reducing discipline referrals.  Of the 47% of all teachers that noticed a change in discipline referrals 77% indicated they thought the number of referrals had increased Principals  Reported campuses to be calmer (less transition time)

Phase 1 Findings (continued) Teacher Professional Satisfaction o Indicated Kyrene was a good place to work (81%) o Validated their observations about the schedule was about the schedule and not dissatisfaction with the District

Phase 1 Findings (continued) Students  Considered Academic Lab as detached from rest of subjects and questioned purpose  Reflected the level of teacher buy-in was related to the quality of the program  Generally did not refer to activities as enrichment or innovative

Research Study Details  Phase 2 ( ) -Teacher focus groups in 3 randomly selected middle schools by grade

Phase 2 Findings - Major findings related to implementation of Academic Lab  More consistency between teacher activities and the purpose of Academic Lab.  Increased evidence of teachers’ ability to differentiate instruction for individual students  Evidence of teachers’ taking advantage of the flexibility provided in Academic Lab.  Increased integration of Exploratory teachers into Academic Lab activities (Academic Lab is staffed by core subject teachers)  Provided a favorable comparison of this year to last year

Phase 2 Findings (continued) Academic Lab is being implemented as intended by the District  Schools have general guidelines they are following which has resulted in more consistency in class time (Examples include academic assistance days, silent reading, Character Counts)  There is variation across teacher teams on a day to day implementation and experience was very team specific (intended)

Phase 2 Findings (continued) Problem with “pull-out” days (exploratory teachers pull groups of students for additional instruction and practice)  Don't know how many students will be in class and who will be in class, so it's challenging to have a structured activity -Students who remain in the classroom on the "pull-out" days may not be involved in an activity consistent with the intent and spirit of Academic Lab (certain schools have worked this out by agreement on days for “pull out” and differentiated plans for students who remain in the Academic Lab).

Phase 2 Findings (continued)  What is working well -Academic assistance for kids -Pre-planned activities  Not enough time to plan for and teach Character Counts (effective schools integrate these concepts into the overall school program)  Students are not staying engaged in some activities due to the fact they recognize no grade is given (some teams have determined how to use assignments in Academic Lab for a grade in a core class)

Phase 3 Design  Increase % of proficient students & reduce % of novice in Reading, Writing & Math.  Reduce variability in academic achievement among schools (% of meeting/exceeding, proficient, novice)  Other Academic Indicators -Increase % from Meets to Exceeds and from Falling Behind to Approaching -Look at high school placement  Data Sources -AIMS and MSS/CASS for 2005/2006, 2006/2007, 2007/2008 -High School transcripts

Phase 3 Design (continued)  Maintain or reduce # of disciplinary referrals. -Data Source: District discipline records for class and passing to class  Maintain high level of teacher professional satisfaction -Data Source: On-line teacher survey (April 2006, April 2008)

Next Steps  Finalize design of phase 3  Begin collecting data  Analyze data and write report (summer 2008)  Present report (fall 2008)

Questions