teaching and learning environment quality managing student achievement risk n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Teaching and Learning Environment Quality managing student achievement risk PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Teaching and Learning Environment Quality managing student achievement risk

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 29

Teaching and Learning Environment Quality managing student achievement risk - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 138 Views
  • Uploaded on

Teaching and Learning Environment Quality managing student achievement risk. The fundamental mandate of K-12 organizations is to optimize student outcomes as measured by: Grade point averages Graduation rates Post secondary enrollment rates Student outcome is influenced by:

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

Teaching and Learning Environment Quality managing student achievement risk


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Presentation Transcript
    1. Teaching and Learning Environment Qualitymanaging student achievement risk

    2. The fundamental mandate of K-12 organizations is to optimize student outcomes as measured by: Grade point averages Graduation rates Post secondary enrollment rates Student outcome is influenced by: - Gender - Parental support - Socio-economic conditions - Race and ethnicity - Early childhood learning - Inspirational school culture - Class size - Curriculum - Facility conditions - Teacher qualifications - Other The Mission

    3. In 2005, a review of the literature After reviewing over 400 papers, the research reveals: The preponderance of evidence shows that facility conditions have an impact on student performance outcomes Studies vary in the magnitude of the impact facilities have on student outcomes Typically, the facility effect is in the range of 5-10 percent The First Step

    4. The TOP four factors found to have the highest impact on student achievement, in rank order are: Thermal comfort (temperature control) Indoor air quality (ventilation control) Visual comfort (lighting) Acoustics (sound control) The First Step

    5. In 2006, analysis of Canadian data from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) The analysis was based on findings in the years 2000 and 2003 The Canadian data includes evidence from over 1,000 school, 20,000 students, and over 1,000 Principals Canadian Research

    6. Three questions were asked about facility conditions: Is your school’s capacity to provide instruction hindered by a shortage or inadequacy of any of the following: 1) school buildings and grounds? 2) heating/cooling and lighting systems? 3) instructional space? Constructing an index

    7. Canadian Research One key finding was that Principals perceived a 26% deterioration in facility conditions from 2000 to 2003

    8. Set 1: How much do you agree with the following statements? (Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree) Students enjoy being in school Students work with enthusiasm Students take pride in this school Students value academic achievement Students are cooperative and respectful Students value the education they can receive in this school Students do their best to learn as much as possible. Student morale and commitment measures

    9. Set 2: How much do you agree with the following statements? (Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree) The morale of teachers in this school is high Teachers work with enthusiasm Teachers take pride in this school Teachers value academic achievement Teacher morale and commitment measures

    10. Set 3: In your school, to what extent is the learning of students hindered by…? (Not at all; Very little; To some extent; A lot) Student absenteeism Disruptions of classes by students Students skipping classes Students lacking respect for teachers Student use of alcohol or illegal drugs Students intimidating or bullying other students Student-related factors affecting achievement

    11. Set 4: In your school, to what extent is the learning of students hindered by…? (Not at all; Very little; To some extent; A lot) Teachers’ low expectations of students Poor student-teacher relations Teachers not meeting individual students’ needs Teacher absenteeism Staff resisting change Teachers being too strict with students Students not being encouraged to achieve full potential Teacher-related factors affecting achievement

    12. Canadian Research For all 24 Student and Teacher morale factors, Principals in Top Ranked Facilities consistently had a more positive perception, while Principals in Bottom Ranked Facilities had a more negative perception

    13. Canadian Research For all 24 Student and Teacher achievement factors, Principals in Platinum facilities consistently showed a significantly better perception, while all other levels showed lower and inconsistent results

    14. No known method for translating this basic reality into a measurable practice that can be implemented at the local level No known method for determining the level at which facility conditions are a hindrance to student outcomes Lack of clarity in determining where should school divisions direct their capital for the optimum learning results The Next Step

    15. Facility Condition Measurement High Schools Elementary Schools Middle Schools What it is, and what it shows

    16. FCI can only tell you information about the building as compared to itself FCI is about “restoring a building component to their as-built condition”, and does not incorporate upgrading components to meet changes in demand Basic FCI design incorporates the combined impact of the lifecycle renewal of building components and known building deficiencies – stated as a percentage of the current replacement value There is an absence of substantive research on how this FCI percentage should be interpreted in the k-12 sector FCI Limitations

    17. The FCI Disconnect • While FCI can be a relative assessment of facility conditions, it offers nothing tangible about the learning environment • While Principals are well positioned to assess the learning environment, they can only provide a perception facility conditions • Both require close examination for proper application at the local level

    18. Putting Pieces Together The Principals Assessment of School Survey (PASS) • Expanded PISA physical conditions • Physical condition questions • Painting, graffiti • Roof leak and related damage • Heating, cooling, ventilation, lighting • Noise issues • Cleaning • Interior finishes • Social class • PISA learning environment questions

    19. What is the state of school facilities? What are the “learning environment” conditions in the schools? The potential to calibrate ‘critical systems’ FCI and PASS into a new benchmark that can significantly enhance learning environment management processes at the local level The Power of PASS

    20. Making a Link? Critical Systems FCI Benchmarks

    21. Pedagogical Functionality: Schools facilities must provide structures that support the teaching and learning process. On this account, the literature indicates that the top four structural features of schools that impact student achievement include: - thermal comfort, - indoor air quality, - lighting, - acoustical control. Future School Facility Assessment

    22. Programmatic Suitability: Schools should provide facilities that support the delivery of curricular programmes. This dimension indicates that facilities must be adequate to support programme delivery (e.g. science laboratories, fitness facilities, etc.) Future School Facility Assessment

    23. Cosmetic Appropriateness: Schools should provide aesthetics that support the dignity of educational purpose. The cosmetic condition of schools has an undeniable symbolic function that sends important messages about the deemed importance of the educational work (e.g. graffiti removal, paint condition, landscaping, etc.) Future School Facility Assessment

    24. Participant Wellness: Schools must provide healthy and safe environments for all in attendance. Teaching and learning involve challenging tasks that cannot be efficiently or effectively accomplished when surrounded by concerns about personal health or safety (e.g. asbestos removal, fire code compliance, risk management, etc.) Future School Facility Assessment

    25. Prairie Valley School Division No. 208 (PVSD), located near Regina, Saskatchewan 38 schools, one administration building, and 8,100students In 2005 we started to shift facility management planning from ‘best practices in property management’ to ‘teaching and learning environment quality’ Concurrently, our Board made the commitment to reinvest all facility-related savings back into teaching and learning environment quality (savings must be guaranteed where possible) A Practical Application

    26. Aggregate facility-related savings (energy, maintenance, accommodation right-sizing, etc) have been used to support $24-million in capital funding for full-scale renewal of mechanical and electrical systems over a 7-year implementation period (energy was only 1/3rd of the total savings) A further $35-million has been included in the annual capital budgets for the same period to renew other areas like building envelope, interior finishes, roofing, and health and safety measures Our combined capital investment will be around $20 sq/ft from savings and a further $30 sq/ft from annual capital budgets bring our FCI to under 15% A Practical Application

    27. It is expected that this combined investment will allow PVSD to achieve a high quality teaching and learning environment that will not put student achievement at risk Through the regular use of the measurement instruments being produced as a result of our work with Dr. Roberts, we will establish and maintain a clear set performance standards for facility conditions These standards will then drive our annual capital planning process A Practical Application

    28. The foundation of our ability to quickly shift from ‘best practices in property management’ to ‘teaching and learning environment quality’ is built on five cornerstones: A fully populated capital asset management system database (Fame) New assessment tools intended to prevent facility conditions from hindering the quality of the teaching and learning environment (Dr. Roberts instruments) Engagement of Principals in measuring and managing customer satisfaction The ability to leverage ALL facility-related savings into capital funding (the annual savings are matched to the annual debenture payments over a 20-year term) A capacity-building strategy A Practical Application

    29. This strategic approach to managing facility conditions based on the quality of the teaching and learning environment offers the following values to my department: It elevates the strategic importance of facilities as an essential element in achieving our Divisions student achievement goals It gives me a seat at the academic table as a contributing team member and enhances our goal alignment It increases my access to funding It gives my department higher visibility with our Trustees It adds significant clarity to the role of managing facilities A Positive, more Integrated Future