An Evaluation of the Public Schools of the District of Columbia Reform in a Changing Landscape (2015) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
1 Introduction
1 Introduction
Pages 9-22
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 9... ...
, the D.C. State Board of Education, the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Education, and the Public Charter School Board (PCSB)
|
From page 10... ...
recommended that the District of Columbia develop a plan for a sustainable, ongoing program of evaluation that yields reliable information, which can be used to support continued improvements to the school system: see Box 1-1. The report noted that there is no well-established model for ongoing evaluation of school districts, and that any district would benefit from a stable source of such information, whether it makes bold changes in governance or not.1 The report also provided a model for structuring the information an evaluation might collect: see Figures 1-1 and 1-2.2 EVALUATION QUESTIONS The charge to the authors of this second report was to evaluate changes in the D.C.
|
From page 11... ...
A thorough evaluation of budget expenditures and management would require resources and expertise that were beyond the committee's scope but we focused on the transparency of the budgeting process, and on the distribution of other sorts of resources, such as learning opportunities and highly qualified teachers. We examined the major goals the law was designed to achieve, some of the strategies that the city's education leaders pursued to achieve those goals, and changes in learning conditions and outcomes since PERAA was enacted.
|
From page 12... ...
! N St t New Structures and R l d Roles New Strategies Better Conditions Better Outcomes • Personnel recruitment, • Effective teachers, principals • Reduced absenteeism Mayoral Control evaluation, retention, support • Rigorous, differentiated • Increased student learning • Rigorous standards, !
|
From page 13... ...
Outcomes: Established and Are strategies Are conditions for Are valued outcomes working as intended? evidence-informed, of student learning being attained overall improving overall and and across diverse Reform!
|
From page 14... ...
The new NRC committee will commission studies by DC-EdCORE and hold open meetings to discuss the results of DC-EdCORE stud ies and other relevant research. The committee will write a consensus evaluation report that describes changes in the public schools during the period from 2009 to 2013 and also addresses the questions outlined in the PERAA legislation about effects on business practices; human resources operations and human capital strategies; academic plans; and student achievement.
|
From page 15... ...
Summative Evaluation of the District of Columbia Public Schools was composed of 10 individuals with expertise in relevant areas, including program evaluation, school governance and organization, urban education reform, teaching and learning, teacher training and evaluation, and student achievement and preparedness. Their backgrounds and experience include district governance, policy m aking, teaching, and research.
|
From page 16... ...
, but as we discuss in Chapter 3, neither the home page of the OSSE nor a new website called LearnDC, which provides some data for DCPS and the charter schools, guides the user to summative data about all public school students and schools.3 The website of the PCSB provides some useful information about the charter schools, but it offers little summative data about the students, schools, and educators in that sector.4 In addition, some of the data we received from the agencies were difficult to reconcile. 3 See http://dcps.dc.gov/DCPS/About+DCPS/Who+We+Are [May 2015]
|
From page 17... ...
The National Academy of Sciences' contract with the city for this evaluation included a subcontract for DC-EdCORE to collect and analyze quantitative and qualitative data on particular topics of interest to the city: see Box 1-4. DC-EdCORE produced five reports that address specific questions related to those topics; those reports were submitted to the city before this report was published.
|
From page 18... ...
5: Community and Family Engagement in DC Public Education: O fficials' Reports and Stakeholders' Perceptions (submitted November 5, 2015) : Summary of findings from interviews with city education officials and community members on the subject of city efforts to improve public engagement (Education Consortium for Research and Evaluation, 2014d)
|
From page 19... ...
: • the D.C. Council, • the District of Columbia Public Schools, • the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Education, • the Office of the State Superintendent of Education, • the Public Charter School Board, and • the State Board of Education.
|
From page 20... ...
Chapters 3 through 6 address the specific questions in our charge: Chapter 3 addresses the questions about structures and roles, discussing the way in which the city carried out the key provisions of PERAA and the current governance structure. Chapter 4 focuses on the strategy DCPS adopted with respect to a key goal, improving human resources, which is also one of the key topics in our charge.
|
From page 21... ...
This evaluation addresses all public schools in the District of Columbia, both DCPS and the public charter schools. We discuss data for DCPS and the charter sector whenever it is available, but significantly less information was available about the charter schools and students than those in DCPS.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.