1 / 12

Steven M. Ross & Martha J Alberg Center for Research in Educational Policy

Supplemental Educational Services in the State of North Carolina: Evaluation Findings and Activities. Steven M. Ross & Martha J Alberg Center for Research in Educational Policy The University of Memphis http://www.memphis.edu/crep. Overall Provider Assessment.

telyn
Download Presentation

Steven M. Ross & Martha J Alberg Center for Research in Educational Policy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Supplemental Educational Services in the State of North Carolina:Evaluation Findings and Activities Steven M. Ross & Martha J Alberg Center for Research in Educational Policy The University of Memphis http://www.memphis.edu/crep

  2. Overall Provider Assessment Figure 1. Components of a Comprehensive SES/Evaluation Modeling Plan Service Delivery and Compliance District Coordinator Survey Customer Satisfaction Principal/Site Coordinator Survey Provider Survey Teacher Survey Parent Survey Effectiveness (Student Achievement) State Tests Additional Tests

  3. Percentages based upon approved providers and eligible districts. SES Participation

  4. SES Survey Response Rates Percentages based upon approved providers and eligible districts and schools.

  5. Do providers communicate regularly with school personnel and parents?

  6. Are providers working with districts, schools, and parents to develop instructional plans geared to students’ needs?

  7. Are you satisfied with the providers’ services?

  8. Matched SES-Control Student Design • The matched design is more rigorous and yields results that are more valid as compared to other available designs. As such, this design was chosen specifically for NC after great deliberation between CREP and DPI. • Student-level NCEOG scores from the prior year are gathered for each SES student and matched control student. • Control students are drawn from a pool of demographically similar students (prior achievement, ethnicity, gender) from the same schools. • Control students are students who were eligible to receive SES, but were not served during the current year.

  9. 2007-2008 READING RESULTS Directional Effects: % of 26 Providers Does SES Raise Student Achievement? 2006-2007 READING RESULTS Directional Effects: % of 23 Providers

  10. Does SES Raise Student Achievement? 2007-2008 MATH RESULTS Directional Effects: % of 28 Providers 2006-2007 MATH RESULTS Directional Effects: % of 17 Providers

  11. Considerations • Provider and teacher communication is vital and has been lacking in both evaluation years. • Collaboration between all stakeholders is necessary to increase focus on the individual needs of each SES student. • School personnel and providers could meet to discuss ways to adapt and integrate tutoring services with classroom activities. • Consistent attendance at tutoring sessions by students is vital for SES to yield results.

  12. Considerations • One can reasonably expect with the limited amount of tutoring (20-40 hours) a child receives, limited impact will be seen on his or her state assessment results. • The results from these studies can be utilized to require accountability and improvement by providers. • Policies or criteria should be defined for determining what constitutes satisfactory provider performance. • A classification system for providers should be clearly defined such as: full status, probation, etc.

More Related