In your opinion, what is the MOST challenging part of measuring school climate?

Voices from the Field is a place for administrators, teachers, school support staff, community, and family members to (1) share what you think by responding to a polling question, (2) see what others think by viewing the poll’s results, (3) learn what experts think by reading a short post that includes references and related resources, and (4) share your own experiences by posting comments on safe supportive learning topics.

In your opinion, what is the MOST challenging part of measuring school climate?

Learn What Experts Think

Why is measuring school climate important?

School climate and social and emotional conditions for learning affect attendance, engagement, learning, and academic performance (Osher & Kendziora, 2010; Thapa, Cohen, Guffey, & Higgins-D'Alessandro, 2013). The Conditions for Learning are those aspects of school climate that are most closely related to attendance and learning. They include perceptions (and experience) of: emotional and physical safety; emotional support and connectedness; academic challenge and support; and peer and adult social and emotional skills.  While these conditions are important for all students, they are particularly important for students who are at risk of poor outcomes and for helping to improve their learning (Osher, Sidana, & Kelly, 2008; Osher, Kendziora, Spier, & Garibaldi, 2013). It’s vital, especially in schools with high poverty rates, to be able to efficiently measure school climate.

What options do States, districts and schools have for measuring school climate?

There are many options for measuring school climate and conditions for learning.  School climate batteries vary by the number of surveys and respondents (e.g., just for students and teachers, student surveys aimed at just high school students), how surveys are administered (e.g., paper/pencil and/or electronic), how and what data is reported, and cost. For example, the ED School Climate Surveys (EDSCLS), a new, FREE web-based platform allows states, districts and schools to (a) administer school climate surveys to students, family, instructional staff, and non-instructional staff and then (b) act on reliable, nationally-validated data in real-time.  There are also many other valid and reliable school climate batteries available. For a list, go to https://safesupportivelearning.ed.gov/topic-research/school-climate-measurement/school-climate-survey-compendium.   

What does it look like when schools measure and use school climate data?

Cleveland provides an ideal test case, particularly for schools that serve large numbers of students who experience poverty and its adversities.  Cleveland is useful for a few reasons: problematic demographic trends, good data on school performance, as well as on the effects of interventions to improve conditions for learning, and the fact that it has used the same measures since 2008 to assess conditions for learning.

Cleveland is one of the few districts in the nation where 100 percent of the students are eligible for free or reduced price lunch.  The City’s poverty rate for children was 54% in 2014 (Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2016).  Compared with other cities, including Flint, MI, Cleveland also has very high rates of children with lead poisoning (CDC Surveillance, 2014).  In addition, Cleveland has been ranked as the most segregated of American Cities (Florida & Mellander, 2015).

All Cleveland schools, like other Ohio Schools, receive a school performance index that is a compilation of all state testing.  In addition, since 2008, the American Institutes for Research (AIR) has implemented a survey to assess Conditions for Learning (CFL) and how they change as a product of Cleveland’s effort to improve safety and student teacher relationships, to build student social and emotional competencies, and to provide tiered services to students who are at greater levels of risk and need. The CFL scales assess student perceptions of school climate: physical safety, emotional safety, peer social-emotional competence and norms, student support and connectedness, and academic challenge and support. The American Institutes for Research examined the data in 2008 and 2013 (Osher et al., 2008; Jarjoura & Osher, 2013) and found relationships between conditions for learning and academic performance. We now have repeated these analyses using data from 2008 to 2015, and have determined that Performance Index of the schools, which is based on standardized tests, is highly associated with the student perceptions of the conditions for learning. For example, our analyses of data from the 2012–13 school year found that:

  • For Grades 2–4, conditions for learning scale categories explain 63.3% of the variance in school performance indices.  When attendance is added to the analysis, the combination of attendance and the four conditions of learning explain 74.8% of the variance.  Emotional and physical safety are especially relevant (and statistically significant) in these grades.
  • For Grades 5–8, conditions for learning scale categories explain 59.3% of the variance in school performance indices.  When attendance is added to the analysis, the combination of attendance and the four conditions explains 67.1% of the variance. Emotional safety is especially relevant (and statistically significant) in these grades.
  • For Grades 9–12, conditions for learning scale categories explain 79.3% of the variance in school performance indices.  When attendance is added to the analysis, the combination of attendance and the four conditions of learning explain 83.9% of the variance.

These same analyses were replicated for each of the 7 academic years and produced similar findings (Osher & Davis, 2016; Osher, Davis, & Berg, 2016; Osher, Neiman, & Davis, 2015; Osher, Poirier, Jarjoura, Haight, & Mitchell, 2014).  These findings are consistent with statewide research in Alaska (Spier, Cai, Kendziora, & Osher, 2007) and California (O’Malley & Hanson, 2012), as well as with reports from  states which participated in the U.S. Department of Education’s Safe and Supportive Schools Program, which used surveys to drive interventions to improve school climate, behavior, and academic indicators in troubled schools.

Conclusion

Students learn best when they feel safe, supported, challenged and accepted. Lessons from states and districts show that schools and districts can collect and analyze school climate data to target interventions.  However, for this to be effective, schools and districts need to employ reliable and valid measures and do so in a manner that protects confidentiality.

Related Resources

School Climate Measurement

  • ED School Climate Surveys: Provides information about and access to the FREE suite of school climate surveys via a web-based platform that allows states, districts, and schools administer and use school climate survey data.
  • School Climate Survey Compendium: Lists valid and reliable school climate survey batteries.
  • School Climate Improvement Resource Package
    • Coming Soon! Data Interpretation Resources: Helps interpret school climate data.  Specifically:
      • A Data Analysis Worksheet that provides key questions EDSCLS users can utilize to guide analysis of their data;
      • A Data Interpretation Guide that provides technical descriptions of and recommendations for using and interpreting various school climate survey data; and
      • Data Interpretation Topical Discussion Guides to assist in using and interpreting data results for specific school climate topic areas, overall and by multi-tiered system of supports, as applicable.
    • Coming Soon! School Climate Improvement Online Modules:  Provide an opportunity to practice skills, including on engaging leadership and other stakeholders, analyzing school climate data, and identifying interventions.
  • School Climate Survey Webinar Series: Offers a series of webinar events focused on the measurement of school climate from start to finish-- from developing and managing a survey to evaluating the reliability of a survey after administering it.

Implementing Interventions

  • School Climate Improvement Resource Package
    • Quick Guide on Making School Climate Improvements: Provides the basics on what is involved in improving school climate, including descriptions of what it looks like when it is being done well, as well as pitfalls to avoid.
    • Coming Soon! School Climate Improvement Reference Manual:  Provides lists of goals, strategies, outputs, and resources on improving school climate via planning, engaging stakeholders, collecting, analyzing and reporting data, identifying and implementing interventions, and monitoring and evaluating.
    • Coming Soon! School Climate Improvement Action Guides:  Provides action steps on how each stakeholder-- district leaders, school leaders, instructional staff, non-instructional staff, families, students, and community partners--  can support school climate improvements, tips on what it looks like when it is being done well and what pitfalls to avoid, and questions to ask to engage in the school climate improvement efforts.
    • Coming Soon! School Climate Improvement Online Modules:  Provide an opportunity to practice skills, including on engaging leadership and other stakeholders, analyzing school climate data, and identifying interventions.
  • School Climate Implementation Webinar Series: Offers a series of webinar events focused on implementing programmatic interventions as part of school climate improvement processes.  In particular, it addresses the 'how to's' of implementation, including how to use data to identify appropriate programmatic interventions, how to select appropriate evidence-based programs via registries, how to plan effectively and how to implement new programs.

References

The Annie E. Casey Foundation, KIDS COUNT Data Center. Baltimore, MD: The Annie E. Casey Foundation. Retrieved from http://datacenter.kidscount.org.

Center for Health Affairs. (2007). Summary: Community health needs analysis and assessment. Cleveland, OH: Center for Community Solutions.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2016). CDC Surveillance Data. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Atlanta, GA.

Florida, R. & Mellander, C. (2015). Segregated City: The Geography of Economic Segregation in America’s Metros. Toronto, ON: Martin Prosperity Institute.

Kendziora, K., Osher, D., Chinen, M. (2008). Student connection research: Final narrative report to the Spencer Foundation. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.

O’Malley, M. D. & Hanson, T. (2012). School climate and academic performance across California high Schools.  S3 Factsheet#3. Los Alamitos: WestED.

Osher, D. & Davis, E., (2016, April). Why conditions for learning matter and how to use the Conditions for Learning Survey to improve attendance, CFL, and academic performance. Invited presentation at the Cleveland Metropolitan School District CAO Roundtable, Cleveland, OH.

Osher, D., Davis, E. & Berg, J. (2016, April). Improving the usefulness of the Conditions for Learning survey. Invited presentation at the Cleveland Metropolitan School District CAO Roundtable, Cleveland, OH.

Osher, D. & Kendziora, K. (2010).  Building Conditions for Learning and Healthy Adolescent Development: Strategic Approaches in B. Doll, W. Pfohl, & J. Yoon (eds.) Handbook of Youth Prevention Science (pp 121-140). New York: Rutledge.

Osher, D., Kendziora, K., Spier, E., & Garibaldi, M. L. (2013). School influences on child and youth development. In Z. Sloboda & H. Petras (Eds.), Advances in prevention science Vol. 1: Defining prevention science (pp.151-169). New York: Springer.

Osher, D., Neiman, S., & Davis, E. (2015, February). Why conditions for learning matter and how to use the Conditions for Learning Survey to improve attendance, CFL, and academic performance. Invited presentation at the Cleveland Metropolitan School District CAO Roundtable, Cleveland, OH.  

Osher, D., Poirier, J. A., Dwyer, K. P., Hicks, R., Brown, L. J. Lampron, S., & Rodriguez, C. (2008). Cleveland Metropolitan School District Human Ware Audit: Findings and recommendations. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.

Osher, D., Poirier, J. M., Jarjoura, G. R., Haight, K, & Mitchell, D. (2014). Follow-Up Assessment of Conditions for Learning in the Cleveland Metropolitan School District: Final Report. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research

Osher, D., Sidana, A., & Kelly, P. (2008) Improving conditions for learning for youth who are neglected or delinquent. Washington, D.C.: National Evaluation and Technical Assistance Center for the Education of Children and Youth who are Delinquent, Neglected, or at Risk.

Jarjoura, R. & Osher, D.(2013). School Climate, Conditions for Learning, and Academic Performance in High Poverty Schools. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.

Spier, E., Cai, C., Kendziora, K., & Osher, D. (2007). School climate, connectedness, and student achievement. Juneau, AK: Association of Alaska School Boards.

Thapa,  A., Cohen, J., Guffey, S. & Higgins-D'Alessandro, A. (2013).  A review of school climate research.  Review of Educational Research, 83 (3), 357-385. 

Share Your Experiences

To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
5 + 5 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.

Be the first to share your experience!