Equity Implemented

Partnership Update

Dr. Sarah K. Bruch

November 2018

CONCEPTUALIZATION

Equity Implemented Partnership

1

2

4

3

5

6

NEEDS ASSESSMENT

FOCUS AREAS

TASK FORCE

IMPLEMENTATION

EVALUATION

Collect student and teacher survey data to identify patterns

of disparities for students & school-specific challenges.

Develop policy briefs on key focus areas detailing evidence-

based strategies drawn from education policy research.

Convene diverse multi-stakeholder task forces to provide

input regarding strategies, policies, and programs.

Facilitate within District communication & planning to

coordinate implementation of recommendations.

Evaluate equity initiatives & assess progress on creating

more equitable experiences & outcomes for students.

Aim to create more equitable experiences and outcomes

for all students in the ICCSD using a data-informed,

evidence-based, inclusive process of decision-making.

1. Cultural competency training of educators

2. Restorative justice approach

3. Recruit and retain diverse teachers/staff

Racial Equity Multi-Stakeholder Task Force Recommendations

Implicit Bias Training – 3 year contract

Year 1: Restorative Justice Pilot in 3 schools

Year 2: Educator-initiated trainings

Engaged research firm to do brief on best

practices; focus group of current teachers of

color; support group for URM teachers/staff

1. Implicit Bias Year 2 Evaluation

2. Restorative Justice Practices Evaluation

3. Teacher Diversity Impacts Evaluation

Assessing Implementation and Evaluating Progress

Implicit Bias Training – 3 year contract

Year 1: Restorative Justice Pilot in 3 schools

Year 2: Educator-initiated trainings

Engaged research firm to do brief on best

practices; focus group of current teachers of

color; support group for URM teachers/staff

IB Evaluation Results: Small Impacts

Knowledge of Implicit Bias

Among trained teachers, some gains Comparing trained & untrained, small differences

IB Evaluation Results: Limited Results

“I feel prepared to discuss race and racism with students.”

“I redirect conversations about race and racism to stay on task.”

Preparedness to Discuss Race & Racism

No differences when comparing trained & untrained teachers

IB Evaluation Results: Small Impacts

“I feel competent to address implicit bias at my school.” “I am knowledgeable about strategies to mitigate the impacts of implicit bias.”

Self-Reported Competency and Knowledge about Strategies

Small, positive differences when comparing trained & untrained teachers

IB Evaluation Results: Demonstration of Competence

“I am knowledgeable about strategies to mitigate the impacts of implicit bias.”

Self-Reported vs Demonstrated Knowledge about Strategies

Much smaller percentages of trained teachers can describe specific strategies

IB Evaluation Results: Demonstration of Competence

“I have successfully implemented changes to practice to mitigate implicit bias.”

Self-Reported vs Demonstrated Practice Changes

Much smaller percentages of trained teachers can describe specific changes to their practices

IB Evaluation Report: Recommendations

Increase Knowledge of and Ability to Use Strategies and Make Changes to Practice

• While the training provided more strategies in Year 2, participants’ ability to identify

specific strategies to mitigate implicit bias was limited, and participant feedback

suggested a desire to learn more strategies.

Improve the Organization and Clarity of the Training

• The three most common critiques of the training concerned the structure and

organization, and logistical issues especially related to the timing of the training

sessions.

Implicit Bias Training is Necessary but not Sufficient

• Given the limited evidence of implicit bias trainings impacting teacher practices and

student experiences or outcomes, it is important for the District to consider what next

steps are needed to see changes practices and reductions in inequities in student

experiences and outcomes.

Restorative Practices Report

Purpose

• Inform the current level of knowledge and use of restorative justice practices

• Assess the impact of RJ use and practices on teacher and student perception of

school climate and on student behavior and discipline outcomes

Restorative Practices Results: Self-Reported Competency

20% 14% 15% 11%

42%40% 37%

34%

34%40% 42%

47%

5% 6% 6% 7%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

If asked, I could comfortablydefine restorative justice.

I am knowledgeable aboutrestorative justice practices.

I feel competent to use arestorative justice approach

in addressing conflict.

I have successfullyimplemented restorative

justice practices.

Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree

40%

60%

80%

100%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Te

ac

he

rs a

nd

stu

de

nts

wo

rk t

og

eth

er

to

ad

dre

ss

be

ha

vio

r p

rob

lem

s o

r c

on

flic

ts.

I have successfully implemented restorative justice practices.

40%

60%

80%

100%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Te

ac

he

rs a

nd

stu

de

nts

wo

rk t

og

eth

er

to

ad

dre

ss

be

ha

vio

r p

rob

lem

s o

r c

on

flic

ts.

I have successfully implemented restorative justice practices.

Collaborative Conflict Resolution

Teacher Perspective Student Perspective

Restorative Practices Results: Not Consistent w/ RJ

Restorative Practices Results: Not Consistent w/ RJ

PowerSchool Office Referrals – Actions Taken

Levels of RJ Practice Based on percentage of teachers reporting

that they have successfully implemented

restorative justice practices.

Disciplinary Actions TakenRJ: Apology/Restitution, Community Service,

Individualized Instruction,

Interim Setting by School Personnel

Punitive: Bus suspension, In-School

Suspension, Loss of Privilege, Out-of-School

Suspension, Saturday School, Time

Out/Detention, Time in Office

Other: Action Pending, Conference with

Student, Parent Contact, Other

7%10%

17%

33%

55%

48%

59%

35% 35%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Low Medium High Low Medium High Low Medium High

RJ action taken Punitive Other

0.56 0.51 0.49

6.05

4.28

3.53

0.900.67

1.11

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

Lo

w

Me

diu

m

Hig

h

Lo

w

Me

diu

m

Hig

h

Lo

w

Me

diu

m

Hig

h

White Black Hispanic

0.29 0.42 0.38

10.51

3.78

8.27

0.910.32

1.46

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

Lo

w

Me

diu

m

Hig

h

Lo

w

Me

diu

m

Hig

h

Lo

w

Me

diu

m

Hig

h

White Black Hispanic

Restorative Practices Results: Not Consistent w/ RJ

Racial Disproportionalities in Discipline (PowerSchool data)

Office Referrals Suspensions

RJ Practices Report: Recommendations

Research suggests that positive impacts from using restorative practices

requires:

• Shift in approach by buildings and district over a 3-5 year period of rigorous

implementation to be effective

• Alignment of existing policies

• Buy-in and support from building administrators

• Training and on-going support for educators in learning the skills and implementing

with fidelity

Teacher Diversity Impacts Evaluation & Plan

11%

23%

4%

6%

0%

12%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18

Support Staff Teachers Administration

ICCSD Employee Diversity Trends

Teacher Diversity Impacts Evaluation & Plan

Are there positive impacts of greater teacher/staff diversity in ICCSD?

• more positive experiences of school for all students and/or students of

color

• higher achievement for all students and/or students of color

• less racial disproportionality in discipline

Analysis is in-progress

What are the best practices and evidence-based recommendations for

how to increase teacher/staff diversity?

• Drawn from:

– national literature on how to obtain the benefits of teacher diversity

– professional association recommendations for best practices

– evidence from evaluations of specific programs and policy changes

LGBTQ Task Force Recommendations

Ongoing Work

Kingsley provided detailed update July 2018

LGBTQ Steering Committee continue guiding

implementation following roadmap

Inform planning and the identification of areas of focus

Identify areas of strength and opportunities for growth

Disaggregating data allows us to identify inequities between groups of students

Inform goal setting and assessment of progress in meeting goals

Encourage accountable for progress

Concrete Examples School Profiles & District Profile

Safety Brief for Safety Advisory Committee

Achievement analysis

Discipline analysis

Equity Program Manager position

Making Data-Informed Decisions

Academic Achievement Behavior/Discipline Climate/Culture

School Profiles – Alignment with CSIP

Within each of these three sections:

How to Use Your Results & Guiding Questions

Key Findings page

Detailed survey results from students, teachers, and parents organized by topic

– Assist schools in integrating disaggregated student data into their CSIP

– Inform building-level conversations about strategies to address inequities.

Inclusive Classroom Discussions Perceptions of Safety

District Profile – Stakeholder Comparisons

Safety Advisory Committee & Safety Brief

Achievement Analysis: Moving Beyond DescriptionUnderstanding School-Based Predictors

We know that ICCSD has substantial

achievement disparities, but we can know

more!

Use student and teacher survey data to

identify the school experiences and school

climate indicators that are most predictive of

achievement.

Use this information to target specific efforts

to increase achievement for all students and

reduce disparities in achievement.

FRPL64%

FRPL38%

FRPL41%

FRPL83%

Not91%

Not72%

Not72%

Not94%

White Black Latino Asian

2018 Iowa AssessmentMath Achievement Race x FRPL

Discipline Analysis: Unpacking the Process to Identify Where Disparities Occur

We know that ICCSD has substantial

disciplinary disproportionalities, but

we can know more!

Use Powerschool data to determine

where in the process disproportionality

occurs: referral rate, referral reason,

action taken given referral reason.

Use student and teacher survey data to

to identify the school experiences and

school climate indicators that are most

predictive of office referrals.

Use this information to target specific

efforts to reduce disproportionalities.

Enhance District Capacity for Data Analysis

Data management including student administrative records and merging of

administrative records with student survey data

Assist with design and analysis of evaluations for equity programming

initiatives

Provide periodic analysis of district data to leadership to inform decisions

Spencer Grant-Funded Equity Program Manager

Increase Alignment w/ District Goals, CSIP, & Current Initiatives

– Equity goals embedded within each, not as separate goals

Increase Use of Data Metrics to Assess Progress – Use existing data to track and monitor progress

– Student and teacher survey currently used to evaluate and assess equity

initiatives (IB, RJ, AVID, LGBTQ, and anti-bullying/responsiveness)

– Discuss using to assess implementation and impacts of other programs (PBIS,

SEL, etc.)

Update of the Comprehensive Equity Plan

Equity Implemented Partnership https://uiowa.edu/equityimplemented/