Webinar:
Meeting Students’ Needs through
Increased Learning Time
September 18, 2014
WebEx Instructions
2
WebEx instructions
Attendees can
provide nonverbal
feedback to
presenters
utilizing the
Feedback tool.
3
WebEx instructions
Feedback
options:
4
WebEx instructions
Responses to poll
questions can be entered
in the Polling Panel.
Remember to click
“Submit” once you have
selected your answer(s).
5
WebEx instructions
Attendees should utilize the “Q&A”
feature to pose questions to the
speaker, panelists, and/or host.
The host will hold all questions
directed toward the speaker or
panelists, and they will be answered
during a Q&A session at the end of
each discussion.
6
Welcome and Overview
Dr. Lydotta Taylor
Task 2 Lead
REL Appalachia
What is a REL?
• A REL is a Regional Educational Laboratory.
• There are 10 RELs across the country.
• The REL program is administered by the U.S. Department of Education,
Institute of Education Sciences (IES).
• A REL serves the education needs of a designated region.
• The REL works in partnership with the region’s school districts, state
departments of education, and others to use data and research to
improve academic outcomes for students.
8
What is a REL?
9
REL Appalachia’s mission
• Meet the applied research and technical assistance needs of Kentucky,
Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia.
• Conduct empirical research and analysis.
• Bring evidence-based information to policy makers and practitioners:
– Inform policy and practice—for states, districts, schools, and other
stakeholders.
– Focus on high-priority, discrete issues and build a body of knowledge over
time.
http://www.RELAppalachia.org
Follow us! @REL_Appalachia
10
What Does the Research Say
about Increased Learning Time
and Student Outcomes?
Introducing the new REL Appalachia report
Dr. Jim Lindsay
Senior Research Analyst
American Institutes for Research
Why this study?
• Districts are considering increased learning time (ILT) programs as
school improvement strategies.
• A summary of research on impacts of ILT programs can inform
districts’ choices on type of programs to adopt.
12
Unique features of REL Appalachia review
• Previous reviews: single approaches to ILT.
– Out-of-school programs.
– Summer school programs.
– Expanded learning time schools.
– Year-round schools.
• Research base is expanding, studies getting better.
• Review standards that focus on most rigorous studies.
• Examination of effects for approaches, outcomes types, student subgroups.
13
Research questions
• To what extent do the four types of ILT approaches affect student
outcomes:
– Out-of-school programs?
– Summer school?
– Expanded learning time schools?
– Year-round schools?
• What are the effects of ILT program characteristics, such as instructors’
qualifications, instruction approach, and teacher-to-student ratio?
• Are ILT programs effective for:
– Students at risk of academic failure?
– Students in urban, suburban, and rural schools?
– Students in elementary and secondary grades?
14
Review methodology
• Broad search for studies on ILT:
– Articles, reports, dissertations from 12 databases of research literature.
– Other reviews.
– Internet search.
– Websites of funding organizations and associations.
– Inquiries to researchers and funders.
• Systematic screening process for relevance.
• Review criteria for rigor: What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) group design
standards.
• Combining findings from studies: meta-analysis with conservative
assumptions.
15
Sample of studies
• Initial pool of studies: 7,000+
• After screening out nonrelevant studies (6,835) and studies not meeting
WWC standards (165), 30 studies remained.
K-5
16
2
11
1
Mixed
11
Low
19
0-5
11-20
21 or more
6
South
11
Northeast
2
Midwest
2
National Study
5
Cannot tell
6
4
Urban
4
Locale
6-10
4
West
6-8
9-12
Cannot tell
Region
K-8
Number of Studies
0
5 10 15 20
5
6
Cannot tell
9
0-50
51-100
13
1-1,000
5
1,000 or more
5
13
Suburban
4
Rural and Urban
2
Rural
2
National Study
7
Student
Needs
SocioNumber of
Econo
Students in the Number of Schools mic
Study
in the Study
Status
Grade Range
Number of Studies
0
5
10 15 20
5
Below_Standards
Behavior_Problems
ADHD
4
2
4
16
Sample of studies (continued)
Characteristics of ILT Programs
Characteristics of Study Reports
Number of Studies
5
10
15
K-5
Region
11
1
Mixed
11
Low
South
11
Northeast
2
Midwest
2
5
4
Urban
Locale
4
5
21 or more
6
Cannot tell
9
0-50
51-100
13
1-1,000
5
1,000 or more
5
13
Suburban
4
Rural and Urban
2
Rural
2
National Study
7
5
Below_Standards
Behavior_Problems
ADHD
20
6
Cannot tell
6
15
4
National Study
19
0-5
11-20
10
West
2
6-8
6-10
5
Cannot tell
16
K-8
9-12
0
20
Student
Needs
Number of
Students in the
Study
SocioNumber of Schools in Economi
the Study
c Status
Grade Range
0
Number of Studies
4
2
4
17
Findings
• Across all studies, out-of-school programs had a positive effect on
students’ academic motivation, but not on literacy or math
achievement.
– Effect was not substantial.
– Not all programs/program features produce positive impacts on all
outcomes.
18
Findings (continued)
• Characteristics of programs or samples that showed positive
effects:
– Certified teachers and traditional instruction each had a positive effect
on students’ academic outcomes; experiential instruction had a
positive effect on social-emotional skill development.
 Effects were statistically significant but not substantial.
– ILT had a small effect on the literacy achievement of students not at
risk for academic failure, but a substantial effect for students below
standards.
– ILT had a positive effect on the math achievement of students not at
risk.
– ILT had a substantial positive effect on the social-emotional skill
development of students with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder.
19
Findings (continued)
• Characteristics of programs or samples that showed positive effects
(continued)
– ILT had substantial positive effects for students in suburban settings
(literacy achievement).
– ILT had a positive effect for students in mixed settings (math
achievement and academic motivation).
– ILT had a positive effect for academic outcomes for students in
elementary grades, but ILT might have a negative effect for students in
middle school grades.
20
In summary
• The review was broad, systematic, impartial, and included only studies
capable of finding causal impacts.
• No single type of ILT works for all students, in all settings, and for all
outcomes.
– Each district should consider the desired goal of its ILT program, the
characteristics of the ILT, and the types of students who could best benefit
from the ILT.
21
In summary
Program Features, Student Groups, and Circumstances Under Which ILT Produces Statistically Significant Outcomes
ILT produced
negative results
when...
Implementation
features
Outcome
Literacy
Achievement
Math Achievement
ILT produced positive
results when...
 Students are in
middle school
grades (4 studies)
 Teachers are certified
(10 studies)
 Instruction is
traditional (9 studies)
 Teachers are certified
(5 studies)
Student groups
Settings
 Students are below
standards (3
studies)
 Participants live in
suburban locales (3
studies)
 Students are not at
risk (4 studies)
 Students are not at
risk (3 studies)
 Students are in elementary
grades (13 studies)
 Participants live in a variety
of locales (4 studies)
 Instruction is
traditional (4 studies)
 Students are in elementary
grades (6 studies)
Academic
Motivation
 Out-of-school program
approach is used (10
studies)
 Participants live in a variety
of locales (4 studies)
Social-Emotional
Skill Development
 Instruction is
experiential (4 studies)
 Students have
ADHD (3 studies)
Bold bullet points are findings that are large enough to be considered substantially important (g > .25 standard deviations).
22
Q & A discussion
23
Translating the Evidence on Increased
Learning Time into Practice
Dr. Yael Kidron
Senior Research Analyst
American Institutes for Research
Actionable, research-based practice guide
• Provided by the U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education
Sciences (IES).
• Written by an expert panel.
• Based on research vetted by the WWC.
25
1. Align the program academically with the school day
• Maintain ongoing communication between teachers and the out-ofschool program staff.
• Designate a school-based coordinator.
• Provide information to the out-of-school provider about schoolbased goals and learning objectives.
• Hire school staff for out-of-school programs.
• Follow FERPA guidelines for protecting student information.
26
2. Maximize student participation and attendance
• Design program features to meet the needs and preferences of
students and parents.
• Promote awareness of the program within the school and to parents.
• Use attendance data to identify students facing difficulties in
attending the program.
27
3. Adapt instruction to student needs
• Use formal and informal assessment data to inform academic
instruction.
• Use one-on-one tutoring if possible; otherwise, break students into
small groups.
• Provide professional development and ongoing support to all
instructors.
28
4. Provide engaging learning experiences
• Make learning relevant by providing practical examples and linking
instruction to students’ interests and experiences.
• Make learning active through collaborative learning and hands-on
projects.
• Build adult-student relationships.
29
5. Assess program performance
• Develop an evaluation plan.
• Collect program and student performance data.
• Analyze data and use findings for program improvement.
30
School Turnaround Learning Community (STLC)
• http://schoolturnaroundsupport.org/
31
Searching the STLC resource library
32
Q & A Discussion
33
Aligning Increased Learning Time
Academic Supports with Student Data
Dr. Joe McKown
Vice President
The National Center on Time & Learning
Closing the achievement and opportunity gaps
Generate Knowledge:
Document and
disseminate effective
practices of highperforming expanded
learning time charter
and district schools across
the country.
Improve School Practice:
Through technical assistance, grow
and strengthen the number of highquality expanded learning time
schools nationally.
Build Support:
Build broad-based
support to bring highquality expanded
learning time school
opportunities to all
high-poverty students
over time.
Inform Policy:
Support policy
development and
leverage federal, state,
and local funding to
support high-quality
expanded learning time
implementation.
35
NCTL’s principles of expanded learning time (ELT)
• Significantly more learning time for all students.
• A balanced approach to the school day—more time for core academics,
enrichment, and teacher collaboration.
• A catalyst for school redesign and turnaround.
• Better integration of community partnerships and expertise into the
school day.
• Deeper implementation of school and district priorities.
36
Relationship between time and achievement
Analysis of three years of test data from Illinois schools found a
direct correlation between more time in reading and math and
higher student achievement.
Dennis Coates. (2003, December). Education production functions using instructional time as an input.
Education Economics, 11(3), 273-292.
Twenty-five (25) percent more instructional time and high dosage
tutoring were two of the strongest predictors of higher
achievement.
Will Dobbie & Roland G. Fryer, Jr. (2011, December). Getting beneath the veil of effective schools: Evidence
from New York City (NBER Working Paper, No. 17632). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic
Research.
Students who attended charter schools with significantly more
time performed much better than peers in charter schools with
more conventional calendars.
Caroline Hoxby & Sonali Muraka,. (2008, Summer). New York City charter schools: How well are they teaching
their students? Education Next, pp. 54-61.
37
More time benefits both students and teachers
More Time to Raise
Student Achievement
More Time to Provide
Rich Engagement
Offerings for Students
More Time to
Collaborate and
Improve Quality of
Instruction
38
© 2014 National Center on Time and Learning; www.timeandlearning.org
Seven essential elements of high-quality ELT schools
See NCTL’s Time Well Spent for a detailed discussion of the practices of 30 ELT
schools serving high-poverty populations with impressive track records of student
success: http://www.timeandlearning.org/?q=time-well-spent-0.
39
High-quality intervention: Coordinated execution
40
Pennington Elementary School (Wheat Ridge, CO)
A high-quality targeted intervention
encompassing all of the elements needed to
differentiate based on student need.
41
Pennington Elementary School (continued)
Differentiation supported by dedicated meeting time to
analyze data for student grouping adjustments
Sample Grade 2 Student Schedule
Start Time:
7:45 a.m.
Breakfast + Assembly
Literacy Intervention
All students receive
intervention in groups of 2-8
students based on intensity of
support needed and areas of
weakness.
Literacy Core
Lunch + Recess
Specials
Read Aloud
Math Core
Math Intervention
Science/Social Studies
End Time:
4:15 p.m.
Enrichment Elective
One period/week:
Vertical intervention teams (by
support level provided) meet
to:
1. Discuss progress
monitoring data.
2. Regroup students.
3. Identify intervention
strategies to move students
forward.
42
Additional examples/resources
For more information about how expanded learning time schools are
implementing high-quality targeted intervention and acceleration based on data
analysis:
Time Well Spent
www.timeandlearning.org/timew
ellspent.pdf
43
Q & A Discussion
44
Expanded Learning Opportunities:
A Smart Investment
Virginia Partnership for Out-of-School Time (VPOST)
Blaire Denson
Director
Virginia Partnership for Out-of-School Time
Virginia Partnership for Out-of-School Time (VPOST)
• Statewide public-private initiative.
• Mission: Develop and expand academic, social, emotional, and physical
supports and services to school-age children and youth across the
Commonwealth of Virginia.
• Out-of-school time:




Before school.
After school.
Vacation periods.
Summer.
• Services: Technical assistance to school-based/school-linked programs,
partner organizations, and policy-makers.
– Support and promote high-quality programs to improve outcomes for youth
and families.
– Support statewide systems to ensure programs are of high quality.
46
Expanded learning opportunities
• Expanded learning opportunities (ELOs) offer structured
learning environments outside the traditional school day.
• Programs before and after school; summer programs; and
extended-day, -week, or -year programs.
• ELOs provide a range of enrichment and learning activities in
various areas:
–
–
–
–
–
Academic support.
Mentoring.
Arts.
Civic engagement.
Science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM).
47
Activities endorsed by VPOST
• Academic programs.
• Mentoring activities including collaboration among families,
communities, and schools.
• Hands-on learning.
• Financial models of operating ILT programs (e.g., after-school
programs) that are affordable, scalable, and sustainable.
• Arts.
• Civic engagement.
• STEM.
48
Benefits and gains
•
•
•
•
•
Increase graduation rates.
Boost students’ academic gains.
Increase student engagement in learning.
Cultivate students’ work-study habits.
Improve student behavior and socialemotional development.
• Improve school and community
connectedness.
• Raise aspirations for college.
49
What we know
• The research evidence is abundant.
• Highly effective before-school, after-school, and summer learning
models are plentiful.
• Outcomes are broad and deep: increased attendance, academic
success, higher graduation rates, reduction in the achievement gap
and summer learning loss, safety, engagement in STEM and 21stcentury skills.
• Great return on a very modest investment.
50
Conclusion
• After-school programs are key to keeping kids safe, helping working
families, improving academic achievement, and workforce development.
• We continue to support efforts to build capacity for expanded afterschool programs for Virginia’s children and youth.
51
Q & A Discussion
52
Examining Increased Learning Time
Practice in Context
Dr. Carol K. McElvain
Principal TA Consultant
American Institutes for Research
Examining ILT practice in context
• Programs that delineated elements appear to have impact to build:
– Stronger self-efficacy.
– Interest in school and career.
– Engagement.
– Relationships with peers and adult leaders.
• Areas of programming we looked at in case studies:
– College and technical education (CTE).
– English language skill building.
– STEM.
54
Key elements of strong CTE programs
• Emphasis on problem solving—“real world” problems.
• Critical thinking.
• Professionalism/work ethic.
• Oral communication.
• Strong teamwork.
• For older students:
– High school offers technical certifications for students.
– Culinary arts, entrepreneurship, carpentry, electrical and mechanical trades,
medical (nursing, home health care).
– College-bound programs—multiple-year reinforcement, advising, career
planning, and appropriate class choices.
55
Case studies: CTE
• Belle Fourche Middle School (SD):
– “Mind Your Own Business” program.
– Career-related skills developed—obtaining a business license, doing a cost
analysis, using a checking account, applying for a loan.
– Students designed and manufactured a product to sell at a business fair.
• Duquesne-West Mifflin Boys & Girls Club (PA):
– Students ran a “mini-mall” called The Zone on a street with good foot traffic.
– All aspects of mini-mall planned and managed by youth.
– Included ordering, food preparation, inventory, stocking, and customer
service.
• Community Works of Louisiana (LA):
– Assessments and personality inventories to explore potential careers.
– “Pathway” concept—from choosing high school classes to college.
56
Key elements of strong English language programs
• Instructional practices focused on language and academic support:
– Focused on the four domains of language development: reading, writing,
listening, and speaking.
– Intentionally focused on vocabulary development.
– Used students’ home language.
– Hired specialists for targeted support.
• Meaningful inclusion and affirming learning environments:
– Intentional outreach to English language learning students.
– Addressed social-emotional needs.
– Hired staff who had particular skills or expertise in working with English
language learning students (community members, bilingual staff, staff with
prior experience in English learning).
57
Key elements, English language programs (continued)
• Culturally relevant programming.
– Incorporated activities to instill cultural pride.
• Family and community engagement.
– Connected parents and other family members to relevant services
targeting immigrant and English language learning families.
– Acted as a liaison between families and school.
• Adequate professional development for staff to work with English
language learning students and families.
58
Case studies: English language
• Kindergarten Kids (ID):
– Emphasis on building ways for Hispanic students to “love language.”
– Intentional methods included concept mapping, pre-teaching, and re-teaching
for reinforcement.
– Provided students first with “big ideas,” then worked on words in a variety of
contexts and formats.
• Shorefront Ystars @PS22 (NY):
– New English language learning students paired with students who had been in
the United States longer and had stronger English language skills (mentors).
– Not only built rapport, but gave mentor students a stronger sense of
confidence in their own abilities.
• OurBridge (NC):
– Interest in working with Asian students a key to hiring.
– Linguistic tutor works individually with students for short time periods.
59
Key elements of strong STEM programs
• Provide opportunities to engage in inquiry-based activities.
– Consider ways to use alternate spaces and learning environments.
– Design program model/components and activities conducive to STEM
learning.
– Identify relevant STEM topics.
– Secure appropriate STEM resources and supplies.
• Community partnerships.
– Range and types of partnerships in 21st Century Community Learning Centers
STEM programs.
– Diversity of roles in STEM partnerships.
• Professional development in the content areas.
– Provide opportunities for STEM professional development from external
providers.
60
Case studies: STEM
• Bristol Borough at St. James Parish House (PA):
– Leverages strong partnership with the Holy Family University Criminal Justice
Department to engage students in forensic science activities and investigations.
– Through partnership, students have access to technology to examine hair
strands, fingerprints, and saliva.
• Red Cloud Indian School (SD):
– Program serves students in grades 9–12 in partnership with the South Dakota
School of Mines and Technology.
– Staff members alter the science labs for after-school program, allowing for
more creative use of space and self-directed, interest-based projects.
• E3 University at P.S. 2 (NJ):
– Students in grades 4–8 (many English language learning students) take
advantage of proximity to Passaic River and collect and analyze water samples
from around Patterson and perform related experiments and activities.
61
Q & A Discussion
62
Wrap-Up
Dr. Lydotta Taylor
Task 2 Lead
REL Appalachia
63
Stakeholder Feedback Survey