Monitoring

Table of Contents

Correlates of Effectiveness

This factor indicates that systematic procedures exist for measuring student achievement. Such procedures document achievement in specific areas, establish need for instructional improvement and develop priorities for the allocation of resources. Values less than 2.0 show increasingly positive support, while values over 2.0 indicate declining support for an element or correlate.

Analysis of the perception data for the MONITORING correlate indicates that responses of Teachers and Administrators meet the 2.0 level; Parent responses approach effectiveness. The values given to the correlate are:

• Parents: 2.034
• Teachers: 1.906
• Administrators: 1.943

Overall Patterns:

All three groups agree one element of the Monitoring Student Progress correlate is not in place in the district:
B: Learning goals are clear in every subject.

Parents find element G not to be in place:
G: Teachers help students one-on-one throughout the school day.

Teachers identify element A as not being in place:
A: Standards used to measure gains in learning are clear to everyone and stress what students know and what they can do. (Parent and Administrator responses approach effectiveness on this element.)

Administrators identify element D as not in place:
D: Teachers take attendance and contact parents when children are absent.

Areas of Greatest Effectiveness:

All three groups agree express positive perceptions of the following elements, indicated by low mean response scores :
E: Tests are given regularly in all subjects to see how well students are doing.
H: School test scores and other achievement information are shared regularly with parents and others.

Areas of Greatest Concern:

All three groups express concern in the following areas, indicated by high mean response scores:
A: Standards used to measure gains in learning are clear to everyone and stress what students know and what they can do.
B: Learning goals are clear in every subject.

Conclusions:

The strong congruence of perceptions on individual elements of this correlate indicate that constituents are apparently satisfied that student performance is monitored regularly (element E) and they regularly receive information about student achievement (element H). However, all groups surveyed also express concern about the clarity of the standards used to measure gains in learning (element A) and the learning goals in every subject (element B).

These conclusions suggest that district leaders should consider carefully examining state and district goals for learning and measuring improvement, and ensure that curriculum and programming are in line with standards and goals.

Indicators of School Effectiveness: MONITORING STUDENT PROGRESS This factor stipulates that systemic procedures exist for measuring the achievement of students across a wide spectrum of their learning experiences. Such procedures document the change in student achievement in specific areas, curriculum areas in need of improvement, priorities for the allocation of resources, and others.
	Parents	Teachers	Administrators
Mean scores by responding group:	2.034	1.906	1.943
A. Standards used to measure gains in learning are clear to everyone and stress what students know and what they can do.	2.093	2.202	2.050
B. Learning goals are clear in every subject.	2.190	2.162	2.250
C. Schools make sure students are learning by testing their skills and then finding ways to help them improve.	2.036	1.880	2.048
D. Teachers take attendance and contact parents when children are absent.	1.927	1.919	2.222
E. Tests are given regularly in all subjects to see how well students are doing.	1.759	1.650	1.700
F. Special program teachers, teachers in regular classrooms, and counselors talk to each other and work together often.	1.980	1.802	1.650
G. Teachers help students one-on-one throughout the school day.	2.364	1.901	2.000
H. School test scores and other achievement information are shared regularly with parents and others.	1.932	1.743	1.650