greenwich public schools · 2010-09-07 · greenwich public schools overview: harris survey 2010...

GREENWICH PUBLIC SCHOOLS Greenwich, Connecticut

Date of Meeting ______September 2, 2010 Title of Item: Harris Survey Results Report REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION OR PRESENTATION OF INFORMATION ITEMS ___ Action required _X_ Informational only Submitted By: Dr. Sidney Freund and Ms. Kim Eves___

Position: Superintendent and Director of Communcations

I will be present at Board Meeting to explain if called upon __X__ ____ Yes No Synopsis of Proposal: Recommended Action (if appropriate)

8/30/10

1

2 0 1 0 A D M I N I S T R A T I O N O F S U R V E Y

GREENWICH PUBLIC SCHOOLS

September 2, 2010

Harris Survey Report

Survey Objectives

 Provides ~30% of the measurement data for the District Success System

 Provides data for Data Teams, Strategic Improvement Plans and Goal-setting (Board, District, School, Program & Department)

 Provides opportunity for stakeholders to share their perspectives

 Assists in establishing priorities for continuous improvement

8/30/10

2

Survey Administration

 Administered every 2 years   2006 Baseline Administration

  March/April 2006

  2008 Administration   May/June 2008

  2010 Administration   March/April 2010

Response Rate

Surveys Administered 2006 Percent Responding

2008 Percent Responding

2010 Percent Responding

Elementary Students (3-5)

91% 86% 92%**

Secondary Students (6-12*)

74% 66% (89% at MS, 50% at HS)

80%

Teachers/Staff 81% 74% 77%

Parents (Total) 26% 29% 31%

Parents-Elementary 29% 32% 33%

Parents-Middle 15% 20% 31%

Parents-High 14% 18% 28%

Community Leaders 30% 22% 23%

*2008: Grade 12 students at GHS were on Senior Internships during administration. ** Grade 5 only

8/30/10

3

Mean Overall Satisfaction*

Survey Group GPS 2006

GPS 2008

GPS 2010

Harris 2010

Elementary Students (G5)

8.2 7.9 7.9 8.2

Secondary Students

7.8 7.6 7.6 7.3

Teachers/Staff

7.4 6.6 7.5 7.0

Parents 7.9 7.6 7.6 7.8

Community 8.3 7.0 7.4 n/a

* Mean Overall Satisfaction Rating for Harris Interactive Database (~200 school districts) and GPS

Analysis Highlights – What does the data tell us?

  General:

reaffirms the need to prioritize and plan for technology improvements – infrastructure, access, training, etc.

  Students:

explore concerns around preparing students for the world of work; food in the cafeteria

  Teachers/Staff: continued focus on involving teachers/staff in decision-making; workload;

recognition

  Parents:

address communication on individual student progress/needs

  Community Leaders:

explore concerns around preparing students for the world of work; understanding role of the board

8/30/10

4

GPS - “Additional Questions”

 The Harris Interactive Survey instrument provides the opportunity to customize up to 10 additional questions per survey group:   Open opportunity to suggest additional questions for consideration -

received suggestions from parents, staff, board and community

  Cross-role group selected questions for the students, parents, staff and community leader surveys.

  Received raw data from Harris, however, regression analysis and comparative data is not applicable

Results Review & Follow Up

  Present/Review at Leadership Institute – July 15, 2010   Review data at Full Day GDDT Meeting – August 23, 2010

  Modify District Strategic Improvement Plan as warranted   Review data at School SIT Review Day – August 27, 2010

  Modify School Strategic Improvement Plan as warranted   Present to Board/Public – September 2, 2010   Review with PTAC – September 3, 2010   School Principals review with staff & parents Supt. & Deputy – by

December 2010   Program Leaders review with staff Asst. Supt. & Dir. PPS – by

December 2010   Departments Heads review with staff MDO – by December 2010   Board of Ed. Update – Winter 2011

GREENWICH PUBLIC SCHOOLS OVERVIEW: HARRIS SURVEY 2010 ADMINISTRATION SEPTEMBER 2, 2010 BOARD OF EDUCATION REPORT

WHY DO WE CONDUCT THE HARRIS INTERACTIVE SCHOOL POLL EVERY OTHER YEAR? The satisfaction of our students, our staff, our parents and our community is an important component in the continuous improvement of student achievement. Satisfaction is both a leading and a lagging indicator of our success in our efforts at improving the educational experience for all students. The Greenwich Public Schools’ third administration of the Harris Interactive School Poll was conducted in March/April 2010. Central Administration and the Greenwich District Data Team have conducted a preliminary review of the results, received over the summer. Highlights from the review are as follows: GENERAL: * Increased response rate over previous administration (2008) with each stakeholder group, most significantly with secondary parents. * Increased satisfaction with teachers/staff – highest overall mean satisfaction over three administrations of the survey and higher than the Harris benchmark. * Overall satisfaction among the stakeholder groups has remained relatively even with the 2008 administration, with the exception of the increase in teacher satisfaction noted previously. * Computer Technology is an area of concern across all stakeholder groups; there has been a decline in satisfaction for secondary students and parents in this area. ELEMENTARY STUDENTS (GRADE 5): * Overall satisfaction has remained relatively stable, however, it is lower than the Harris benchmark * An area of concern for 5th graders relative to other areas surveyed is the school bus – particularly behavior and cleanliness * The Harris analysis notes the following areas as having the most influence on improving overall satisfaction: - improving the quality of the food served in the cafeteria - providing more interesting homework SECONDARY STUDENTS (GRADES 6-12): * Overall satisfaction for secondary students has remained relatively stable since the previous administration of the survey and is higher than the Harris benchmark. * Secondary students satisfaction with the guidance counselors has increased and is significantly higher than the Harris benchmark. * An area of concern for secondary students relative to other areas surveyed is Computer Technology – particularly in the ability to view test scores and grades on the web, teacher preparation to train students and availability. * The Harris analysis notes the following areas as having the most influence on improving overall satisfaction for secondary students: - preparing students for the world of work - preparing students for taking standardized tests - improving the quality of the food served in the cafeteria - school is too crowded TEACHERS/STAFF: * Overall satisfaction for teachers/staff increased significantly over the previous administration and is also higher than the initial administration in 2006 and the Harris benchmark. * Notable areas of increased satisfaction, relative to both the previous administration of the survey and to the Harris benchmark, are in the areas of school atmosphere, Board of Education, Superintendent, Principal, and in involvement in decision-making. * The most notable improvement was in the area that was identified for teachers as most influencing their overall satisfaction: the ability to influence policies that affect them.

GREENWICH PUBLIC SCHOOLS OVERVIEW: HARRIS SURVEY 2010 ADMINISTRATION SEPTEMBER 2, 2010 BOARD OF EDUCATION REPORT

* An area of concern for teachers/staff relative to other areas surveyed is Computer Technology – particularly in using web resources (blogs, wikis, etc.), using an interactive whiteboard, allocating sufficient funds for computer technology, and computers meeting the needs of students. * The Harris analysis notes the following areas as having the most influence on improving overall satisfaction for teachers/staff: - workload - recognition for a job well done - equipment meeting the needs of their students PARENTS: * Overall satisfaction for parents is an area of concern for the District – it has remained relatively unchanged since the last administration and is lower than the Harris benchmark. * Progress has been made on improving parent satisfaction in the areas of Equipment and Facilities, the Board of Education and the Superintendent. * Areas of concern for parents relative to other areas surveyed include Computer Technology (access to grades, test scores and homework), Communication and Involvement (regarding child’s performance), and the School Bus (behavior) * The Harris analysis notes the following areas as having the most influence on improving overall satisfaction for parents: - individual attention for child from teachers - keeping parents informed about their child’s academic progress - working with them to address the special needs of their child

- including parent views when making decisions - central admin./superintendent’s responsiveness to needs and concerns of parents - academic curriculum needs improvement - extracurricular opportunities for students

- crowded school - safe and accessible parking

COMMUNITY LEADERS: * Overall satisfaction among community leaders has improved since the last administration (2008), but remains lower than the first administration in 2006. * Progress has been made on improving community leaders’ satisfaction in the areas of District Administration and the Budget/Budget Process. * The Harris analysis notes the following areas as having the most influence on improving overall satisfaction for community leaders: - preparing students for the world of work - school board members performing their role NEXT STEPS: The Harris Data will be presented to teachers and parents at each school over the next several weeks. Programs, Departments, School Improvement Teams, and School Data Teams will review the data to determine whether modifications are necessary to the school improvement plan, and/or to program or department goals or action plans. By December 2010: - the Superintendent and Deputy Superintendent will meet with each Principal, - the Assistant Superintendent will meet with each Program Coordinator, - the Director of Pupil Personnel Services will meet with Program Coordinators, and - the Managing Director for Operations will meet with each Department Head to review their respective analyses of the Harris data (as well as achievement data) and the follow up that is planned to address areas of concern.

Greenwich Public SchoolsHarris Interactive School Poll

Elementary Students (gr 5) 2006 2008 2010657/91 544/86 623/928.0 7.6 7.8 — — 7.9 —7.8 7.6 8.0 ↑ — 7.8 ↑6.5 5.9 5.4 ↓ ↓ 6.5 ↓8.7 8.7 8.8 — — 8.2 ↑8.8 8.4 8.5 — ↓ 8.9 ↓8.2 7.9 7.9 — ↓ 8.2 ↓

Secondary Students (gr 6‐12) 2006 2008 2010

3508/74 3112/66 3704/807.2 7.0 7.1 — ↓ 6.4 ↑7.6 7.3 7.4 ↑ ↓ 6.7 ↑6.5 6.1 6.5 ↑ — 6.4 —8.3 8.0 7.3 ↓ ↓ 7.3 —8.0 7.5 7.9 ↑ ↓ 7.2 ↑8.2 8.1 8.5 ↑ ↑ 7.8 ↑7.9 7.7 7.7 — ↓ 7.6 ↑7.8 7.6 7.6 — ↓ 7.3 ↑

Teachers/Staff 2006 2008 2010

1115/81 985/74 1001/777.5 6.7 7.5 ↑ — 7.2 ↑6.9 6.4 7.1 ↑ ↑ 6.8 ↑7.8 7.2 7.3 — ↓ 7.0 ↑

Parental Support 7.5 7.4 7.5 — — 5.8 ↑6.2 5.2 6.3 ↑ — 6.3 —

Superintendent 5.4 5.0 7.7 ↑ ↑ 7.0 ↑6.2 5.4 6.1 ↑ — 6.5 ↓7.6 6.7 8.4 ↑ ↑ 7.6 ↑8.1 7.7 8.0 ↑ — 8.0 —6.0 5.5 6.1 ↑ — 6.1 —

Change 08 ‐ 10

Change 06 ‐ 10

Harris Districts

GPS 2010 vs Harris

Harris Districts

Change 08 ‐ 10

Change 06 ‐ 10

GPS 2010 vs Harris

Change 08 ‐ 10

Change 06 ‐ 10

Harris Districts

GPS 2010 vs Harris

Surveys / % Response Rate



School CounselorQuality of TeachingOverall Satisfaction

Direct Supervisor

School AtmosphereEquipment and FacilitiesSchool BusComputer TechnologyMain TeacherOverall Satisfaction

School AtmosphereEquipment and FacilitiesSchool Bus

Involvement/Decision Making

School AtmosphereEquipment and FacilitiesComputer Technology

Central AdministrationPrincipal

School Board

Computer TechnologyPrincipal

6.0 5.5 6. ↑ 6.8.3 8.0 8.3 ↑ — 8.1 ↑7.7 7.5 7.6 — — 6.7 ↑7.4 6.6 7.5 ↑ — 7.0 ↑

Parents 2006 2008 2010

1637/26 1794/29 1844/317.5 7.3 7.5 ↑ — 7.5 —8.0 7.9 7.5 ↓ ↓ 7.8 ↓

School Bus 7.4 6.9 7.0 — ↓ 6.9 —7.6 7.4 7.3 — ↓ 7.7 ↓

Child's Teacher 8.0 7.8 7.8 — ↓ 8.0 ↓7.0 6.4 6.9 ↑ — 7.0 ↓6.8 5.7 7.2 ↑ ↑ 7.0 ↑8.1 7.9 8.0 — — 8.0 —7.7 7.5 7.5 — ↓ 7.4 ↑6.8 6.5 6.5 — ↓ 6.5 —7.9 7.6 7.6 — ↓ 7.8 ↓

Community 2006 2008 2010115/30 102/22 108/237.3 6.5 6.6 — ↓8.0 7.5 7.6 — —7.8 6.4 6.9 — ↓8.2 7.3 7.3 — ↓8.6 7.9 7.6 — ↓

District Administration 7.9 5.4 6.9 ↑ ↓7.6 5.8 6.8 ↑ ↓8.3 7.0 7.4 — ↓

Change 08 ‐ 10

Change 06 ‐ 10

Note: Harris rating scale from 1 to 10. Statistically significant differences are represented by ↑ or ↓.

Change 08 ‐ 10

Change 06 ‐ 10

Harris Districts

GPS 2010 vs HarrisSurveys / % Response Rate


Equipment and Facilities

Overall Satisfaction

/ gCareerStudents

Computer Technology

Communications/Involvement

Board of EducationSuperintendent/CentralPrincipal/AdministrationCurriculum/Training

Teachers

Budget/Budget ProcessOverall Satisfaction

Communications/InvolvementCurriculum/Training

Budget/Budget ProcessOverall Satisfaction

Equipment and FacilitiesComputer Technology

1

Executive Summary- Greenwich Public Schools: 2009-2010

STUDY OVERVIEW The Harris Interactive School Poll has again been utilized by Greenwich Public Schools to help provide information about the experiences and satisfaction levels of key District stakeholders (students, teachers and staff members, parents, and community residents). District leaders first undertook this survey in the Spring of 2006 to develop a data-enriched environment for decision-making and to provide stakeholders the opportunity to present their views. A second wave occurred in Spring of 2008. This, the third wave of data collection, conducted in Spring of 2010, reflects changes that have occurred throughout the District. Recommendations provided in the summary are based on Impact models. These models take into account both how often an issue is occurring and the extent to which it correlates with stakeholder satisfaction. This method prioritizes areas where improvement will have the most beneficial impact. It is important to remember that areas targeted for improvement may or may not be low performing areas but do have a proven relationship with satisfaction. It is crucial that those who read this document understand that the models that help create these recommendations are correlation-based. That is, items that have a strong influence on satisfaction at Greenwich Public Schools are highlighted.

Readers of this report should also be mindful of context, environment, and the difference in timeframe when this year’s surveys were administered. OVERALL RATINGS The initial overall ratings for Greenwich Public Schools in 2006 were in the general range usually found in a business or organization embarking upon a quality improvement program. The results for this third wave of data implicate positive change within the district as several areas experienced significant increases in satisfaction. Monitoring satisfaction over time gives the administration an indication of how changes, both positive and negative, have been perceived by stakeholders. It also allows them to determine what new issues have arisen as the school environment has changed. While satisfaction rises in one area, it may decrease in a different area. As schools improve in the various areas of service, stakeholders will set higher expectations. In order to continue to improve, the District needs to remain focused on quality, and continue to seek feedback from these stakeholder groups. This will allow the District to continuously identify issues impacting satisfaction, and address them before they become more serious concerns. Identifying the issues impacting satisfaction is merely the first piece of the improvement process. Investigation through follow up discussion is the final piece. Simple solutions are possible when stakeholders speak, and are heard. For example, if teachers continue to express disappointment in being recognized and rewarded, administrators should sit down with them and open the dialogue; find out what it is they need to improve their satisfaction. Whether it be tackling a few

School Poll

2


larger issues across stakeholder groups or addressing as many issues as possible within one group, the district must take the next step – and listen. The ability to listen and respond effectively to these issues will allow Greenwich Public Schools to continue to provide a quality educational environment. OBSERVATIONS OF DATA In Spring 2010, Greenwich Public Schools heard from 7,180 stakeholders. This is down from 7,664 respondents in the previous wave (2008). Since last wave, elementary students (fifth graders) expressed an increased rating for Equipment and Facilities and no other significant changes in area ratings. In rating Overall Satisfaction, 85% rated their school experience an A or B. Six issues appearing in this wave’s overall satisfaction model for elementary students are six of the same drivers as in the previous wave. In other words, these issues continue to have an impact on the overall satisfaction of this group. Two of these issues have shown positive improvement this year – fairness of school rules and the temperature in the classroom. Cleanliness of school bathrooms was the top driver last year and was also a driver this year. While there was not a significant increase in the percentage of 5th graders reporting this problem, there was also not a significant decrease. This could be a good place to start the conversation with elementary students.

Engagement with their main teacher provides another opportunity to improve satisfaction for elementary students. Three drivers of satisfaction surrounded this theme: extra help was not available when needed, their main teacher did not make class fun and likes some kids more than others (see page 11 for further details). Secondary students displayed significant increases in ratings for nearly every area surveyed, including Equipment & Facilities, School Bus, and most of their teachers and administrators. The one area in which secondary students indicated a significant decrease in satisfaction this year is Computer Technology. Overall, satisfaction remained at 7.6 out of 10, with 86% of secondary students providing either an “A” or “B” satisfaction rating. For middle school students, four issues appearing in this wave’s overall satisfaction model are among the same drivers as in the previous wave. Three of these issues have shown positive improvement since last wave: preparation for the world of work, condition of school buildings and grounds, and preparation for taking standardized tests. More information on these issues can be found on page 12 of this report. Seven issues identified this year for high school students are among the same as those identified last wave (see page 13). Three of these issues have moved in a positive direction since last wave: the food served in the lunchroom, Science class curriculum, and availability of extra help when needed. Note that for both groups, there was no negative movement in the percentage reporting problems for issues impacting satisfaction. However, the top issue driving satisfaction for both middle and high school students this year was

3


preparation for the world of work. This issue also had a large impact on the satisfaction gap for secondary students in the last two waves. This could be a productive place to begin the discussion with this group. District teachers/staff also reported significant increases in satisfaction ratings for nearly every area, including School Atmosphere, Equipment and Facilities, School Board, Career, Involvement, all administration areas and perhaps most importantly, Overall Satisfaction. The areas of Computer Technology, Parental Support, and Students reflect ratings that remained consistent with last wave – no significant change noted. 83% of employees provided an A or B overall satisfaction rating this year. Three issues identified in the last wave as driving employee satisfaction appeared again this wave as a driver of overall satisfaction. However, on a positive note, a significantly lower percentage of teachers reported problems for two of these issues since 2008: principal asking for suggestions and opinions and the ability to influence the subjects/grades they teach. Many other issues driving satisfaction for teachers in last wave’s study saw positive change this year, including the top issue identified as driving satisfaction: the ability to influence policies that affect them (page 12 of this report provides more information about these issues). District parents provided increased ratings in the areas of Equipment & Facilities, Board of Education, and Superintendent. Parents’ rating for Computer Technology decreased this wave. 85% of all parents provided an A or B overall satisfaction rating this year.

For elementary parents, five of the same drivers of satisfaction from the previous wave appear again this wave as impacting overall satisfaction (see page 13). Four of the five did not change significantly this year, but one issue shows fewer parents reporting it as a problem: comfort of their child’s classrooms. The top two issues impacting satisfaction for elementary parents this year were also the top two issues in 2008: communicating when their child has a problem and teachers challenging their child to learn. Neither issue has worsened since last wave, but they haven’t improved either. A focus on improvement and conversation in these areas may result in even higher levels of satisfaction for the next wave. There are three repeat issues for middle school parents from last wave. Two of these issues also appeared as drivers of satisfaction in 2006 – conditions of school buildings and grounds and being continuously informed about their child’s academic progress – and have remained constant (no positive or negative change) since. Four of the this year’s issues are among the same drivers as last wave for high school parents, and three of these were also drivers in the first wave: working with them to meet the special needs of their child, a safe environment at school, and teachers challenging their child to learn. None of these issues have experienced positive or negative change since 2006, suggesting a group of high school parents with stagnant concerns, who may benefit from further discussion with administrators.

4


Among community members, two areas experienced increased satisfaction ratings since last wave: Administration and Budget/Budget Process. Two issues identified as driving satisfaction this year are among the same as those identified last wave: School Board’s performance of roles and respect for teachers in the District. Neither experienced significant change in the percentage of community residents reporting them as issues. These continue to be opportunities for discussion and improvement among this group. Greenwich Public Schools has experienced increased satisfaction in various areas for all stakeholders since last year – a very encouraging report. However, the highest satisfaction scores were seen during the first wave in 2006. Levels in 2008 and 2010 have rarely matched and occasionally, have actually dropped. Using the initial satisfaction scores as a goal, the district could focus energy on improving some of the many repeat issues apparent for most stakeholder groups. When issues continue to appear as drivers of satisfaction year after year, the importance of addressing these issues is clear with the objective to continuously improve satisfaction.

5


OVERALL RECOMMENDATIONS Greenwich Public Schools should continue to review all crosstabs to:

1. Identify top priority issues (among each and across all stakeholder groups).

2. Define each stakeholder audience (demographically, behaviorally, and attitudinally).

3. Hold focus groups and other qualitative research with key audiences to identify:

-How are communications with these groups currently handled? -What is going well among these groups? -What is the competition/what are the barriers for these groups? -Which behaviors/beliefs need to be stopped or started among these groups? -Understand the context around these groups – what is going on/what is the current situation? -Share best practices from other buildings in district.

Outline of the report that follows:

1. Overall Ratings – Trend Data (pages 6-10): This section takes a look at the change in the district’s satisfaction ratings from its first wave of School Poll to this current wave.

2. Priorities for Change – Tracking Last Wave’s Drivers of Satisfaction (for each stakeholder group – pages 11-18): This section reviews last wave’s driving issues and the change in frequency of these issues – how has the district improved on the issues previously identified as driving satisfaction?

3. Continuous Improvement – Current Priorities for Change (for each stakeholder group – pages 19-30): This section focuses on issues currently identified as drivers of satisfaction, providing recommendations for each.

6


OVERALL RATINGS - TREND DATA The following tables summarize changes in satisfaction that have occurred from Spring 2006 to Spring 2010. Numbers in parentheses () indicate sample size. Ratings are on a scale from 0-10. Arrows () indicate direction of movement for statistically significant changes.

ELEMENTARY (5TH GRADE) STUDENTS

2006 (n=657)

2008 (n=544)

2010 (n= 623)

2008 – 2010 (From last

wave)

2006 - 2010 (From first

wave) School Atmosphere 8.0 7.6 7.8 - - Equipment & Facilities 7.8 7.6 8.0 -

School Bus 6.5 5.9 5.4 - Computer Technology 8.7 8.7 8.8 - -

Main Teacher 8.8 8.4 8.5 - Overall Satisfaction 8.2 7.9 7.9 -

A = 10, A- = 9, B+ = 8, B = 7, B- = 6, C+ = 5, C = 4, C- = 3, D+ = 2, D = 1, F = 0

7


OVERALL RATINGS - TREND DATA (CONTINUED)

SECONDARY STUDENTS 2006

(n=3,508) 2008

(n=3,112) 2010

(n= 3,704) 2008 – 2010 (From last

wave)

2006 - 2010 (From first

wave) School Atmosphere 7.2 7.0 7.1 - Equipment & Facilities 7.6 7.3 7.4 School Bus 6.5 6.1 6.5 - Computer Technology 8.3 8.0 7.3 Principal 8.0 7.5 7.9 School Counselor 8.2 8.1 8.5 Math Teachers 7.5 7.5 7.8 English Teachers 7.8 7.6 7.7 - Science Teachers 7.7 7.4 7.7 - Social Studies Teachers 8.0 7.9 8.0 - Foreign Language Teachers 6.9 6.3 6.5

Quality of Teaching 7.9 7.7 7.7 - Overall Satisfaction 7.8 7.6 7.6 -

8


OVERALL RATINGS - TREND DATA (CONTINUED)

TEACHERS/STAFF 2006

(n=1,115) 2008

(n=985) 2010

(n=1,001) 2008 – 2010 (From last

wave)

2006 - 2010 (From first

wave) School Atmosphere 7.5 6.7 7.5 - Equipment & Facilities 6.9 6.4 7.1 Computer Technology 7.8 7.2 7.3 - Parental Support 7.5 7.4 7.5 - - School Board 6.2 5.2 6.3 - Superintendent 5.4 5.0 7.7 Central Administration 6.2 5.4 6.1 - Principal 7.6 6.7 8.4 Assistant Principal 8.0 7.6 7.9 - Direct Supervisor 8.1 7.7 8.0 - Career 8.3 8.0 8.3 - Involvement/Decision Making 6.0 5.5 6.1 -

Students 7.7 7.5 7.6 - - Overall Satisfaction 7.4 6.6 7.5 - OVERALL RATINGS - TREND DATA (CONTINUED)

9


PARENTS 2006

(n=1,637) 2008

(n=1,794) 2010

(n=1,844) 2008 – 2010 (From last

wave)

2006 - 2010 (From first

wave) Equipment & Facilities 7.5 7.3 7.5 - Computer Technology 8.0 7.9 7.5 School Bus 7.4 6.9 7.0 - Communication/Involvement 7.6 7.4 7.3 - Child’s Teachers 8.0 7.8 7.8 - Board of Education 7.0 6.4 6.9 - Superintendent/Central Admin. 6.8 5.7 7.2

Principal/Administration 8.1 7.9 8.0 - - Curriculum/Training 7.7 7.5 7.5 - Budget/Budget Process 6.8 6.5 6.5 - Overall Satisfaction 7.9 7.6 7.6 - OVERALL RATINGS - TREND DATA (CONTINUED)

10


COMMUNITY 2006

(n=115) 2008

(n=102) 2010

(n=108) 2008 – 2010 (From last

wave)

2006 - 2010 (From first

wave) Equipment & Facilities 7.3 6.5 6.6 - Computer Technology 8.0 7.5 7.6 - - Communication/Involvement 7.8 6.4 6.9 - Curriculum/Training 8.2 7.3 7.3 - Teachers 8.6 7.9 7.6 - Administration 7.9 5.4 6.9 Budget/Budget Process 7.6 5.8 6.8 Overall Satisfaction 8.3 7.0 7.4 - PRIORITIES FOR CHANGE - TRACKING 2008 ISSUES ELEMENTARY (5th GRADE) STUDENTS

11


The table below lists the issues that were targeted for improvement as a result of the last wave of the study (2008) and their associated area model incidence rates ("% problem"). Also listed is the "% problem" for those same issues this year, and whether there has been positive, negative, or no (-) statistically significant change. Notes: -If an issue is highlighted in bold, it had an impact on satisfaction in 2008, and again in 2010. -Statistically significant positive change reflects a lower "% problem" for that issue in 2010 than in 2008—movement in the right direction! -Statistically significant negative change reflects a higher "% problem" for that issue in 2010 than in 2008.

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS

LAST WAVE (Spring 2008)

n = 544 % Problem

CURRENT WAVE (Spring 2010)

n = 623 % Problem

Significant

Change

Are school bathrooms clean? 57% 51% - Are the rules at your school fair? 25% 17% positive Main teacher: Make class fun? 19% 22% - Main teacher: Like some kids more than others? 42% 39% - Do you get extra help when you need it? 18% 16% - Is the temperature in your classrooms usually comfortable? 36% 20% positive Is your school too crowded? 19% 14% positive Are most other students nice to you? 16% 13% - Are school buildings and grounds clean and in good condition? 17% 13% - Do you feel safe while in school? 3% 2% -

12


PRIORITIES FOR CHANGE - TRACKING 2008 ISSUES MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS The table below lists the issues that were targeted for improvement as a result of the last wave of the study (2008) and their associated area model incidence rates ("% problem"). Also listed is the "% problem" for those same issues this year, and whether there has been positive, negative, or no (-) statistically significant change. Notes: -If an issue is highlighted in bold, it had an impact on satisfaction in 2008, and again in 2010. -Statistically significant positive change reflects a lower "% problem" for that issue in 2010 than in 2008—movement in the right direction! -Statistically significant negative change reflects a higher "% problem" for that issue in 2010 than in 2008.

MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS


n = 1,747 % Problem


n = 1,713 % Problem

Significant

Change

Is your school preparing you for the world of work? 32% 27% positive Are students well-behaved on your bus? 71% 67% positive Are school buildings and grounds clean and in good condition? 32% 26% positive English Teacher: Makes this class interesting. 30% 27% positive Science Teacher: Gives you individual attention. 35% 28% positive Foreign Language Teacher: You learn a lot in this class. 37% 31% positive Does your school do a good job of preparing you for taking standardized tests? 22% 15% positive

Are most other students nice to you? 14% 13% - Math Teacher: You learn a lot in this class. 17% 12% positive Principal: Handle discipline fairly? 21% 21% - Is there extra help available when you need it? 12% 12% - Science Teacher: You have a serious problem with this teacher. 15% 14% - Social Studies Teacher: You learn a lot in this class. 14% 14% - Counselor: Treat your conversations as confidential? 11% 9% positive

13


PRIORITIES FOR CHANGE - TRACKING 2008 ISSUES HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS The table below lists the issues that were targeted for improvement as a result of the last wave of the study (2008) and their associated area model incidence rates ("% problem"). Also listed is the "% problem" for those same issues this year, and whether there has been positive, negative, or no (-) statistically significant change. Notes: -If an issue is highlighted in bold, it had an impact on satisfaction in 2008, and again in 2010. -Statistically significant positive change reflects a lower "% problem" for that issue in 2010 than in 2008—movement in the right direction! -Statistically significant negative change reflects a higher "% problem" for that issue in 2010 than in 2008.

HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS


n = 1,356 % Problem


n = 1,989 % Problem

Significant

Change

Is your school preparing you for the world of work? 31% 33% - Does your school do a good job of preparing you for taking standardized tests? 28% 28% -

Math Teacher: Provides helpful feedback on your work. 36% 30% positive Do you like the food served in the lunch room? 49% 44% positive Other than temperature, are classrooms comfortable? 32% 29% - Counselor: Give good advice regarding classes? 19% 15% positive Science Teacher: You like what is taught in this class. 36% 32% positive Social Studies Teacher: You like what is taught in this class. 26% 22% positive Social Studies Teacher: Grades fairly. 24% 17% positive Principal: Handle discipline fairly? 20% 14% positive Are students well-behaved on your bus? 45% 41% - Math Teacher: You learn a lot in this class. 23% 21% - Are your parents actively involved in your education? 22% 22% - Is your bus ride too long? 31% 29% - Is there extra help available when you need it? 12% 9% positive Are most other students nice to you? 11% 11% - Do you feel safe while in school? 5% 5% -

14


PRIORITIES FOR CHANGE - TRACKING 2008 ISSUES TEACHERS AND STAFF The table below lists the issues that were targeted for improvement as a result of the last wave of the study (2008) and their associated area model incidence rates ("% problem"). Also listed is the "% problem" for those same issues this year, and whether there has been positive, negative, or no (-) statistically significant change. Notes: -If an issue is highlighted in bold, it had an impact on satisfaction in 2008, and again in 2010. -Statistically significant positive change reflects a lower "% problem" for that issue in 2010 than in 2008—movement in the right direction! -Statistically significant negative change reflects a higher "% problem" for that issue in 2010 than in 2008.

TEACHERS AND STAFF


n = 989 % Problem


n = 1001 % Problem

Significant

Change

Policies that affect you? 67% 59% positive Disorderly student behavior? 40% 32% positive (Principal) Ask for your suggestions/opinions? 28% 10% positive Are you treated as a professional by the community? 25% 18% positive (Principal) Treat you with respect? 15% 5% positive Has anyone in school gone out of their way to give you help? 20% 16% - The subjects/grades you teach? 26% 20% positive Do library resources meet your needs? 21% 16% positive Communications with your Direct Supervisor. 12% 10% - Parental support for the school? 14% 12% - (Principal) Treat your conversations as confidential? 12% 6% positive Do you feel safe while in school? 3% 2% - Communications with Students. 2% 2% - PRIORITIES FOR CHANGE - TRACKING 2008 ISSUES

15


ELEMENTARY PARENTS The table below lists the issues that were targeted for improvement as a result of the last wave of the study (2008) and their associated area model incidence rates ("% problem"). Also listed is the "% problem" for those same issues this year, and whether there has been positive, negative, or no (-) statistically significant change. Notes: -If an issue is highlighted in bold, it had an impact on satisfaction in 2008, and again in 2010. -Statistically significant positive change reflects a lower "% problem" for that issue in 2010 than in 2008—movement in the right direction! -Statistically significant negative change reflects a higher "% problem" for that issue in 2010 than in 2008.

ELEMENTARY PARENTS


n = 966 % Problem


n = 954 % Problem

Significant

Change

Communicating when your child has a problem? 18% 21% - Do teachers challenge your child to learn? 16% 17% - Do teachers provide opportunities for parental involvement? 14% 20% negative Does your child receive enough individual attention from teachers? 24% 26% - Are your child's classrooms comfortable? 14% 7% positive Does science/lab equipment meet your child's needs? 24% 22% - Are school buildings and grounds clean and in good condition? 19% 11% positive Do school computers meet your child's needs? 12% 9% - Does the library meet your child's needs? 8% 7% - Were you satisfied with the administration's support given to your child? 8% 8% - Are you treated with respect by administrators? 6% 4% - PRIORITIES FOR CHANGE - TRACKING 2008 ISSUES MIDDLE SCHOOL PARENTS

16



MIDDLE SCHOOL PARENTS


n = 367 % Problem


n = 357 % Problem

Significant

Change

Working with you to meet the special needs of your child? 24% 22% - Counseling on the selection of courses? 33% 43% negative Required academic curriculum? 21% 23% - Are school buildings and grounds clean and in good condition? 21% 23% - Keeping you informed about your child's academic progress? 21% 20% - Do you have a serious problem with any of your child's teachers? 16% 19% - Do school computers meet your child's needs? 10% 16% negative Does school provide a safe environment for your child? 7% 7% - PRIORITIES FOR CHANGE - TRACKING 2008 ISSUES HIGH SCHOOL PARENTS

17



HIGH SCHOOL PARENTS


n = 439 % Problem


n = 520 % Problem

Significant

Change

Keeping you informed about your child's academic progress? 31% 36% - Including parents' views when making decisions? 39% 44% - Working with you to meet the special needs of your child? 25% 28% - Do you have a serious problem with any of your child's teachers? 28% 25% - Does school provide a safe environment for your child? 15% 11% - Are teachers available when you need to speak with them? 19% 21% - Was the problem you took to the administration resolved satisfactorily? 15% 16% - Do teachers challenge your child to learn? 18% 21% - (Board) Improving the course offerings in the schools? 20% 21% - Required academic curriculum? 11% 18% negative PRIORITIES FOR CHANGE - TRACKING 2008 ISSUES COMMUNITY

18



COMMUNITY


n = 102 % Problem


n = 108 % Problem

Significant

Change

Do your schools give you a good value for your tax dollars? 36% 31% - Are your current school tax rates acceptable to you? 31% 25% - Do athletic facilities and gym equipment meet the needs of children? 31% 29% - Do the School Board members perform their roles well? 39% 30% - Do you respect the teachers in the District? 4% 5% -

19


ELEMENTARY STUDENTS – Spring 2010 CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT AND PRIORITIES FOR CHANGE – CURRENT ISSUES An overall model of satisfaction was estimated for elementary students (grade 5) this year. Items listed on this page are the ones most deserving of attention within the District.

Overall satisfaction of elementary students stayed the same at 7.9 in 2008 and 2010. 85% of the elementary students provided a rating of either “A” or “B” for their school this year.

To increase the satisfaction of elementary students, we suggest Greenwich Public Schools concentrate on the following issues: • 63% of the students said that they did not like the food

served in the lunchroom. Students at North Street School (90%) were especially concerned with this issue. This accounted for 20% of the potential for increased overall satisfaction. In other words, if the frequency of this issue was reduced to 0%, overall satisfaction would increase from 7.9 to 8.2.

• 48% of the elementary students reported that their main teacher did not give interesting homework. This engagement issue accounted for 13% of the possible increase in the level of overall student satisfaction.

• 18% of the students indicated that the rules at their school were not fair. Students at North Street School (51%) said this most often. This issue represented 12% of the possible improvement.

• 51% of the students said school bathrooms were not clean. Boys (55%) reported this more often than girls (47%). This facilities item represented 10% of the opportunity for improvement.

• 20% of the students indicated that the temperature in their classrooms was not usually comfortable. This item represented 10% of the gap between the current and maximum possible satisfaction levels.

• 22% of the students said their main teacher did not make class fun. This engagement issue accounted for 9% of the possible increase in the level of overall student satisfaction.

• 13% of the students indicated that most other students were not nice to them. Students at Parkway School (2%) reported this least often and students with a self-reported most common grade (GPA) of ‘C’ or lower (28%) said this most often. This concern accounted for 7% of the possible rise in satisfaction.

• 17% of the students said they did not get extra help when they needed it. This issue represented 6% of the opportunity to improve students' overall satisfaction

• 11% reported that their main teacher did not help them want to learn. This concern accounted for 5% of the possible increase in the level of overall student satisfaction.

• 7% of the students stated that their main teacher did not like them. Boys (9%) reported this issue more frequently than girls (5%). This concern accounted for 5% of the potential for students’ increased satisfaction.

20


• 7% of the students said that they were not given enough instruction on how to use the computers at school. Students with a self-reported GPA of ‘C’ or lower (28%) said this most often. This situation represented 3% of the potential improvement.

MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS – Spring 2010 CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT AND PRIORITIES FOR CHANGE – CURRENT ISSUES An overall model of satisfaction was estimated for middle school students (grades 6-8) this year. Items listed on this page are the ones most deserving of attention within the District.

Overall satisfaction level for middle school students increased significantly from 7.4 in 2008 to 7.7 in 2010. 86% of the middle school students provided a rating of either “A” or “B” for their school this year.

To increase the satisfaction of middle school students, we suggest Greenwich Public Schools concentrate on the following issues: • 65% of the students said that they did not like the food

served in the lunchroom. Girls (69%) reported this more often than boys (62%), while 6th graders (54%) and students at Western Middle School (56%) said this least often. This accounted for 13% of the potential for increased overall satisfaction. In other words, if the frequency of this issue was reduced to 0%, overall satisfaction would increase from 7.7 to 7.9.

• 15% of the students stated that their school did not do a good job of preparing them for taking standardized

tests. Students at Central Middle School (20%) reported this concern most frequently and 6th grade students (10%) said this least. This issue represents 10% of the opportunity to improve.

• 27% of the students felt that their school was not doing an adequate job of preparing them for the world of work. 8th graders (35%) and students with a self-reported most common grade (GPA) of ‘C’ or lower (41%) indicated this most often. Students at Central Middle School (33%) also said this most often. This issue represented 9% of the potential for increasing overall satisfaction among this population.

• 33% of the students mentioned that their principal did not help them with problems. 8th grade students (44%) were especially concerned with this issue. This item represented 8% of the opportunity to increase students' overall satisfaction.

• 31% of the students indicated that the rules at their school were not fair. Boys (35%), 8th graders (41%) and students at Central Middle School (44%) said this most often. This issue accounted for 8% of the opportunity to increase middle school student satisfaction.

• 26% of the students said that they did not like what was taught in English class. Boys (29%) and 7th graders (36%) reported the highest frequency of concern. This issue represented 8% of the opportunity for increased overall satisfaction.

• 28% of the students indicated that they had felt like a failure at school. Boys (31%) said this more often than

21


girls (26%). Also, frequency of concern for this issue increased as self-reported GPA decreased, from students with an ‘A’ (24%) to those with a ‘C’ or lower (63%). This concern represented 7% of the opportunity for improvement.

• 26% of the students reported that school buildings and grounds were not clean and in good condition. Girls (23%), students at Eastern Middle School (12%) and those in 6th grade (18%) reported this least often. This facilities item represented 7% of the opportunity for improvement.

• 25% of the students reported that, other than temperature, their classrooms were not comfortable. Girls (20%), 6th graders (20%) and students with a self-reported GPA of ‘A’ (21%) were least likely to report this. This item represented 7% of the gap between the current and maximum possible satisfaction levels.

• 16% of the students said their teachers did not encourage them to take advantage of extra help. 8th graders (21%) and students with a self-reported GPA of ‘C’ or lower (37%) reported the highest frequency of concern. This issue represented 6% of the opportunity to improve students' overall satisfaction.

• 13% of the students said that other students were not nice to them. Girls (10%) and 6th graders (9%) said this least often. Also, frequency of concern for this issue increased as self-reported GPA decreased, from students with an ‘A’ (10%) to those with a ‘C’ or lower (28%). This concern accounted for 6% of the possible rise in satisfaction.

• 14% of the students indicated that school computers did not meet their needs. Girls (11%), 6th graders (6%) and students at Eastern Middle School (8%) were least likely to report this. This situation represented 4% of the potential improvement.

• 11% of the students said that their counselor did not give good advice regarding classes. 6th graders (7%) and students at Western Middle School (7%) were least likely to report this as a concern. This issue represented 4% of the possible rise in satisfaction for this stakeholder group.

• 7% of the students said they did not participate in class. Students in 6th grade (4%) and those with a self-reported GPA of ‘A’ (4%) reported the lowest frequency of concern. This engagement issue accounted for 3% of the opportunity to improve satisfaction of secondary students.

22


HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS – Spring 2010 CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT AND PRIORITIES FOR CHANGE – CURRENT ISSUES An overall model of satisfaction was estimated for high school students (grades 9-12) this year. Items listed on this page are the ones most deserving of attention within the District.

Overall satisfaction level for high school students significantly decreased from 7.8 in 2008 to 7.5 in 2010. 86% of the high school students provided a rating of either “A” or “B” for their school this year.

To increase the satisfaction of high school students, we suggest Greenwich Public Schools concentrate on the following issues: • 53% of the students said their school was too

crowded. 9th and 10th graders (58%, 60%) were more likely to report this than 11th and 12th graders (47%, 48%). This issue accounted for 14% of the improvement gap. In other words, if the frequency of this issue was reduced to 0%, overall satisfaction would increase from 7.5 to 7.7.

• 33% of the students felt that their school was not doing an adequate job of preparing them for the world of work. Girls (31%), 9th graders (24%) and students with a self-reported most common grade (GPA) of ‘A’ (30%) were least likely to say this. This issue represented 10% of the potential for increasing overall satisfaction among this population.

• 42% of the students said that they did not study with other students before or after school. Boys (46%) were

more likely than girls (37%) to mention this. Also, frequency of concern for this issue increased as self-reported GPA decreased, from students with an ‘A’ (34%) to those with a ‘D/F’ (74%). This item represented 9% of the opportunity to improve satisfaction.

• 29% of the students indicated that the rules at their school were not fair. Boys (34%) and students with a self-reported GPA of ‘C’ or lower (38%) were most likely to say this. This issue accounted for 9% of the opportunity to increase high school student satisfaction.

• 29% of the students mentioned that their principal did not help them with problems. 9th graders (22%) and students with a self-reported GPA of ‘A’ (24%) were least likely to report this. This item represented 9% of the opportunity to increase students' overall satisfaction.

• 44% of the students said that they did not like the food served in the lunchroom. Boys (47%) and 11th and 12th graders (53%, 55%) reported the highest frequency of concern. This accounted for 8% of the potential for increased overall satisfaction.

• 31% of the students said that they did not like what was taught in Science class. Girls (35%) and 10th graders (43%) were most concerned with this. This issue represented 8% of the opportunity for increased overall satisfaction.

• 29% of the students reported that, other than temperature, their classrooms were not comfortable. Boys (34%) and 10th graders (36%) were most likely to say

23


this. This item represented 7% of the gap between the current and maximum possible satisfaction levels.

• 28% of the students stated that their school did not do a good job of preparing them for taking standardized tests, representing 7% of the opportunity to improve.

• 23% of the students said that their Social Studies teacher did not make class interesting. Boys (21%) and students with a self-reported GPA of ‘A’ (19%) were least concerned with this. This issue represented 6% of the opportunity for increased overall satisfaction.

• 11% of the students said that other students were not nice to them. Students with a self-reported GPA of ‘D/F’ (42%) were most likely to mention this. This concern accounted for 5% of the possible rise in satisfaction.

• 12% of the students indicated that the school was not doing an adequate job of preparing them for college. This preparation item represented 4% of the potential for increased satisfaction.

• 9% of the students said there was not extra help available when they needed it. 12th graders (5%) indicated this least. This concern accounted for 4% of the opportunity to increase students' overall satisfaction.

24


TEACHERS/STAFF – Spring 2010 CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT AND PRIORITIES FOR CHANGE – CURRENT ISSUES An overall model of satisfaction was estimated for teachers and staff this year. Items listed on this page are the ones most deserving of attention within the District.

The overall satisfaction rating for teachers and staff in the District significantly increased from 6.6 in 2008 to 7.5 in 2010. 83% of the employees provided a rating of either “A” or “B” for their school this year.

To increase the satisfaction of teachers and staff, we suggest Greenwich Public Schools concentrate on the following issues:

• 56% of the employees indicated that their workload was too high. Teachers (63%) were more likely to report this than other staff (40%). And teachers with less than 4 years of experience were least likely to (41%). This concern represented 21% of the potential rise in satisfaction. In other words, if the frequency of this issue was reduced to 0%, overall satisfaction would increase from 7.5 to 7.8.

• 34% of the employees indicated that they had not received recognition for a job well done. High school teachers (41%) reported a higher frequency of concern than elementary (31%) and middle school teachers (30%). This issue accounted for 13% of the possibility for increased satisfaction.

• 27% of the employees felt that the equipment in their area did not meet the needs of students. Teachers (32%) were more likely to report this than other staff (17%), especially high school teachers (59%). This concern

represented 10% of the possible rise in employee satisfaction.

• 24% of the teachers and staff indicated that their involvement in team building and problem solving was not adequate. Teachers (28%) were more likely to indicate that this is true than other staff (18%), especially high school teachers (41%). This item accounted for 10% of the possible rise in satisfaction for this stakeholder group.

• 23% of the employees felt that school rules did not keep order and discipline. Teachers (28%) were more likely to say this than other staff (14%), and high school teachers in particular (40%). This situation accounted for 10% of the opportunity for improvement.

• 27% of the employees reported that school buildings and grounds were not clean and in good condition. This concern was greatest at International School at Dundee (62%), Central Middle School (56%) and North Mianus School (47%). This facilities item represented 7% of the opportunity for improvement.

• 18% of the employees said that other teachers/staff did not go out of their way for them. Male teachers (25%) reported this concern more often than female teachers (18%). This issue represented 6% of the potential rise in satisfaction.

• 11% of the teachers and staff said that parental support for the school was not adequate. Employees at Hamilton Avenue School (35%) were most likely to say this

25


is true of their school. This item represented 6% of the possible increase in satisfaction for this stakeholder group.

• 14% of the employees (20% of teachers) said their ability to influence the subjects/grades they teach was inadequate. This issue represented 5% of the possible increase in overall satisfaction.

• 12% of the employees felt that the rules for teachers and staff at their school were not fair. High school teachers (21%) were especially concerned with this issue compared to elementary (10%) and middle school teachers (11%). This concern accounted for 5% of the possible increase, as well.

• 9% of the employees felt that their principal did not ask for their suggestions and opinions. Teachers (11%) were more likely to report this than other staff (6%). This concern represented 4% of the potential for improvement.

• 6% of the employees felt that their assistant principal did not treat their conversations as confidential. High school teachers (1%) were less likely than elementary (8%) and middle school teachers (11%) to express this concern. This issue accounted for 3% of the opportunity to increase overall satisfaction for this stakeholder group.

26


ELEMENTARY PARENTS – Spring 2010 CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT AND PRIORITIES FOR CHANGE – CURRENT ISSUES An overall model of satisfaction was estimated for elementary parents (grades K-5) this year. Items listed on this page are the ones most deserving of attention within the District.

Overall satisfaction level for elementary parents remained constant at 7.8 in both 2008 and 2010. 86% of the elementary parents provided a rating of either “A” or “B” for their school this year.

To increase the satisfaction of elementary parents, we suggest Greenwich Public Schools concentrate on the following issues:

• 52% of the parents reported that there was not enough safe and accessible parking. Parents who volunteer in the district schools (54%) were more likely to say this than those who do not volunteer (46%). And, parents at North Mianus School (94%) were most likely to express this concern. This situation represented 12% of the potential increase in satisfaction. In other words, if the frequency of this issue was reduced to 0%, overall satisfaction would increase from 7.8 to 8.0.

• 34% of parents said the school needed to improve with including their views when making decisions. Parents who volunteer in the district schools (37%) were more likely to express this concern than those who do not volunteer (24%). And parents at Old Greenwich School (54%) mentioned this most often. This issue accounted for 9% of the possible increase in the level of overall satisfaction.

• 25% of the parents said that their child did not receive enough individual attention from teachers. Moms (27%) expressed concern for this issue more often than dads (13%), and parents who volunteer in the district schools (27%) expressed concern more often than those who do not volunteer (18%). This item represented 9% of the possible rise in satisfaction.

• 37% of the parents said teachers did not communicate to them when their child did something well. This issue accounted for 8% of the possible increase in overall satisfaction.

• 27% of the parents said that the required academic curriculum needed improvement. Frequency of concern for this issue was highest at Parkway School (45%). This issue accounted for 8% of the gap between parents’ current and maximum levels of satisfaction.

• 22% of the parents said their school was less than satisfactory at allowing them to be involved with their child's education. Parents who volunteer in the district schools (24%) were more likely to feel this way than those who do not volunteer (17%). And parents at the International School at Dundee (8%) were least likely to report this. This engagement item accounted for 7% of the gap between the current and maximum possible satisfaction scores.

• 20% of the parents indicated that the school did not do an adequate job of communicating when their child had a problem. This communication issue represented 7% of the opportunity for improvement.

27


• 21% of the parents felt that their school was not working with them to meet the special needs of their child. Frequency of concern for this issue was highest at North Street School (32%) and Old Greenwich School (31%). And parents who volunteer in the district schools (23%) were more likely to express this concern than those who do not volunteer (16%). This concern represented 6% of the opportunity for improvement.

• 17% of the parents felt that teachers did not challenge their child to learn. Parents at Parkway (27%) and Old Greenwich (26%) were most likely to report this. This concern represented 5% of the potential for improvement.

• 14% of the parents felt that there were not enough resource materials for their child. Parents at Parkway (24%) and North Street (23%) were especially concerned. This item also accounted for 5% of the gap that exists between the current and maximum levels of overall satisfaction among elementary school parents.

• 13% of the parents who said that they took a problem to the administration felt that the problem was not resolved satisfactorily. Parents at Old Greenwich (27%) and Parkway (25%) were most likely to say this. This concern represented 5% of the gap between the current and maximum levels of overall satisfaction.

• 16% of the elementary school parents rated preparation of students for taking standardized tests as less than satisfactory, accounting for 4% of the opportunity to improve.

• 8% of the parents reported that they had a serious problem with (any of) their child's teacher(s). Parents of boys (9%) were more likely to say this than parents of girls (6%). This issue represented 4% of the potential improvement in satisfaction.

• 10% of the parents said that administrators were not responsible in their handling of district finances. Parents reported this more frequently at Old Greenwich (23%). This represented 3% of the potential rise in satisfaction.

• 7% of the parents noted that their child's classrooms were not comfortable, accounting for 3% of the improvement possible. Parents who volunteer in the district schools (9%) were more likely to say this than those who do not volunteer (2%).

• 4% of the parents felt they were not treated with respect by administrators. Parents at Riverside School were least likely to say so; in fact none reported this as an issue. This item represented 3% of the potential for increased parental satisfaction.

• 5% of the parents said that teachers were not available when they needed to speak with them. Parents at Hamilton Avenue (14%) were most concerned with this issue. This situation represented 2% of the possible increase in satisfaction.

28


MIDDLE SCHOOL PARENTS – Spring 2010 CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT AND PRIORITIES FOR CHANGE – CURRENT ISSUES An overall model of satisfaction was estimated for high school parents (grades 6-8) this year. Items listed on this page are the ones most deserving of attention within the District.

Overall satisfaction level for middle school parents increased from 7.4 in 2008 to 7.5 in 2010. 85% of the middle school parents provided a rating of either “A” or “B” for their school this year.

To increase the satisfaction of middle school parents, we suggest Greenwich Public Schools concentrate on the following issues:

• 32% of middle school parents said that their child did not receive enough individual attention from teachers. This concern represented 16% of the possible rise in satisfaction. In other words, if the frequency of this issue was reduced to 0%, overall satisfaction would increase from 7.5 to 7.7.

• 33% of the parents felt that extracurricular opportunities were an area for improvement. Parents at Central Middle School (49%) expressed more concern for this than parents at Eastern and Western (both 24%). This issue accounted for 15% of the possible increase in overall satisfaction.

• 25% of the parents said that the Superintendent/Central Administration needed to improve in responding to the needs and concerns of parents. This item accounted for 14% of the opportunity for improvement.

• 22% of the parents said that the required academic curriculum needed improvement. Parents who volunteer in the district schools (26%) were more likely to express this concern than those who do not volunteer (15%). This issue accounted for 13% of the gap between parents’ current and maximum levels of satisfaction.

• 23% of the parents said the athletic facilities/gym equipment did not meet their child's needs. Parents at Central Middle School (40%) said this more frequently than parents at Western (16%) and Eastern (12%). This item represented 12% of the satisfaction gap for middle school parents.

• 23% of the parents reported that school buildings and grounds were not clean and in good condition. Again, parents at Central Middle School (42%) said this more frequently than parents at Western (20%) and Eastern (9%). And, middle school parents who volunteer in the district schools (29%) were more likely to report this than those who do not volunteer (8%). This issue accounted for 11% of the possible increase in overall satisfaction for this stakeholder group.

• 20% of middle school parents felt the school needed to improve at keeping them informed about their child's academic progress, representing 11% of the improvement gap. Parents of boys (24%) reported this more often than parents of girls (16%).

• 14% of the parents said that teachers were not available when they needed to speak with them. Parents of boys (20%) said this more frequently than

29


parents of girls (9%). This situation represented 8% of the possible increase in satisfaction.

30


HIGH SCHOOL PARENTS – Spring 2010 CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT AND PRIORITIES FOR CHANGE – CURRENT ISSUES An overall model of satisfaction was estimated for high school parents (grades 9-12) this year. Items listed on this page are the ones most deserving of attention within the District.

Overall satisfaction level for high school parents decreased from 7.4 in 2008 to 7.3 in 2010. 83% of the high school parents provided a rating of either “A” or “B” for their school this year.

To increase the satisfaction of high school parents, we suggest Greenwich Public Schools concentrate on the following issues:

• 59% of the parents felt that their child's school was too crowded. This issue accounted for 14% of the possible increase in overall satisfaction. In other words, if the frequency of this issue was reduced to 0%, overall satisfaction would increase from 7.3 to 7.6.

• 29% of the parents rated the Superintendent/Central Administration less than satisfactory at improving the overall quality of instruction. This concern represented 14% of the opportunity to increase overall satisfaction for parents.

• 45% of the parents reported that there was not enough safe and accessible parking. Parents who volunteer in the district schools (49%) were more likely to report this than those who do not volunteer (37%). This situation represented 10% of the potential increase in satisfaction.

• 37% of the parents felt the school needed to improve at keeping them informed about their child's academic progress. This issue accounted for 10% of the possible increase in overall satisfaction for this stakeholder group.

• 28% of the parents felt that their school was not working with them to meet the special needs of their child. Parents who volunteer in the district schools (32%) expressed this concern more than those who do not volunteer (21%).This concern represented 10% of the opportunity for improvement.

• 37% of high school parents said that their child did not receive enough individual attention from teachers. Parents who volunteer in the district schools (43%) were more likely to feel this way than those who do not volunteer (27%). This concern represented 9% of the possible rise in satisfaction.

• 21% of the parents felt that teachers did not challenge their child to learn. This concern represented 9% of the potential for improvement.

• 27% of the parents stated that preparation of students for college was less than satisfactory, accounting for 8% of the opportunity to improve.

• 11% of the parents of high school children felt that school did not provide a safe environment for their child. This concern accounted for 7% of the improvement gap.

• 13% of the parents identified keeping parents informed about school activities as an opportunity for

31


improvement, representing 5% of the possible increase in satisfaction for this stakeholder group.

• 6% of the parents felt they were not treated with respect by administrators. This item represented 4% of the potential for increased parental satisfaction.

COMMUNITY – Spring 2010 CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT AND PRIORITIES FOR CHANGE – CURRENT ISSUES An overall model of satisfaction was estimated for community members this year. Items listed on this page are the ones most deserving of attention within the District.

Overall satisfaction level for community increased from 7.0 in 2008 to 7.4 in 2010. 85% of the community provided a rating of either “A” or “B” for their school this year.

To increase the satisfaction of community members, we suggest Greenwich Public Schools concentrate on the following issues:

• 48% of the community felt that the District was not doing a good job of preparing students for the work world. Members who volunteer in the district (38%) were less likely to express this concern than those who don’t (59%). This issue accounted for 25% of the possible increase in overall satisfaction. In other words, if the frequency of this issue was reduced to 0%, overall satisfaction would increase from 7.4 to 7.8.

• 30% of the community said school board members did not perform their roles well. This concern represented

22% of the gap between current and maximum satisfaction levels.

• 27% of community members felt that the district could improve at keeping them adequately informed about school activities. This issue represented 18% of the opportunity to improve community satisfaction.

• 22% of the community felt that the required academic curriculum in the school district was not strong, accounting for 16% of the potential increase in overall community satisfaction.

• 12% of community members said they would not recommend the school district to parents. Community members who do not volunteer in the district (20%) were more likely to say this than those who do volunteer (6%). This situation accounted for 14% of the possible rise in satisfaction for this stakeholder group.

• 5% of community members expressed that they did not respect the teachers in the school district. This item represented 5% of the gap between the current and maximum satisfaction scores.

32


SUMMARY The information provided in this project will enable Greenwich Public Schools to continue to make decisions in a fact-based context, and allow customer and employee satisfaction to drive the organization forward.

Greenwich Public Schools performance is strong in some areas, while other areas present opportunities for improvement. The key is to keep the improvement process moving forward. It is clear that this is occurring in Greenwich Public Schools. It is important to remember that the absolute performance of the District matters much less than knowing how to improve.

This wave of the measurement process should be viewed as one of a continuing number of steps in the total quality improvement process. Greenwich Public Schools has reliable trend data on satisfaction. This will allow the District to continue to move forward, working towards solutions to the issues uncovered in this study. There may be some issues that require clarification before a solution can be created. For these, we suggest Greenwich Public Schools conduct focus groups to allow stakeholders the opportunity to further define and contextualize issues and problems, as well as suggest solutions.

Over time, Greenwich Public Schools has made numerous improvements throughout the District as a result of this study. As the District moves forward with its strategic plan, it will be important to continue to measure progress. The objective of another wave of this study would be to continue to document progress, highlight areas where improvement is moving more slowly, and revisit the priorities for change.

Overall, the Greenwich Public Schools should be encouraged by these results, and motivated to keep the quality process moving in the District.

greenwich public schools · 2010-09-07 · greenwich public schools overview: harris survey 2010...

Documents