What makes a school good?
Study of low-income schools points to some
successful practices

Socioeconomic status clearly plays a role in student performance. But what happens when researchers look at a group of schools serving students of similar socioeconomic status to try to get beyond income’s influence on student performance? A recent study of more than 250 schools in California did just that, and the findings provide a mixture of expected results and surprises.

The study, done by the nonprofit organization EdSource, used surveys of thousands of teachers and principals from what would be considered low-income schools. (In the median school, 78 percent of the students qualified for free or reduced-price lunch, 40 percent were English learners and 32 percent had parents who were not high school graduates.) Yet, on the state’s academic performance index (API), which measures how well students are doing in the state assessment system, schools with similar demographics varied by as much as 250 points on a scale that runs from 200 to 1,000.

The bottom line, says study director Trish Williams of EdSource, is that “scores are highest when the entire team—teachers, principals and district leaders—focus strongly on helping students meet the state’s academic standards. What schools do, and what resources they have for doing it, can have a powerful impact on student achievement.”

Specifically, the researchers identified four practices that strongly correlated with higher API scores:

Prioritizing student achievement. Teachers and principals in successful schools reported that their school had well-defined plans for instructional improvement, measurable goals for improvement achievement, and a focus on meeting both state and federal progress goals.

Implementing a coherent, standards-based curriculum and instruction program. The successful schools had instructional consistency within the same grade, curricula that was aligned from grade to grade, instruction and curriculum materials guided by the state standards, and a district that addressed the instructional needs of English learners.

Using assessment data to improve student achievement and instruction. The district and school administration used student data extensively to improve instruction and student learning. Principals in successful schools said they also used multiple sources to evaluate teaching practices and identify teachers who needed help to improve their instruction.

Ensuring availability of instructional resources. The study not only found a connection between sufficient and up-to-date instructional materials and higher scores, but also showed that schools in which more teachers had regular certification and at least five years of full-time experience were more successful.

The study looked at some other factors commonly associated with successful schools, including parental involvement, teacher collaboration and professional development, and enforcement of high expectations for student behavior. While these factors also correlated with higher scores, the researchers found they didn’t have nearly the impact as the four practices cited above.

The study points out that the four practices are “interrelated” in more-
effective schools, and they also depend on principals who can successfully manage the school-improvement process and district leadership that supports clear expectations and practices that lead to student achievement.

The complete study, “Similar Students, Different Results: Why Do Some Schools Do Better?”, is available online at www.edsource.org.