jamila jones kennedy educ 872 april 7, 2011. schools are intended to provide distinct learning...
TRANSCRIPT
Jamila Jones KennedyEDUC 872
April 7, 2011
Schools are intended to provide distinct learning opportunities in multiple academic disciplines. Yet, the opportunities to learn the academic content are not equally distributed among districts, schools, classrooms or students.
Related to this, students’ performance varies across the country in ways that suggest certain regions and demographics lead to higher performance than others (achievement gap).
Typically lost within the achievement gap debate is the “opportunity to learn” (OTL) concept.
OTL as a concept: What students learn in school is related to what is
taught in school Whether students are provided the opportunity to
learn what is expected of them, especially the information for which they will be held accountable
The capacity of schools to provide adequate learning opportunities for all students
OTL used to encompass various ideas, including: 1)equal/equitable per-pupil funding, 2)adequate school organization, 3)equal access to qualified teachers, challenging curricula, and resources
As a research concept, OTL was first introduced in the 1960sCarroll’s model (OTL as a function of time)FIMS (OTL as content coverage w/o regard
to time) By the mid-1980s, the notion of OTL had
gone through revisionsSIMS (OTL in terms of curriculum)
More current research (in the 1990s and 2000s) focuses on OTL in terms of teacher qualifications, access to resources, funding, teaching method, etc.
Author: Marta ElliottSource: Sociology of Education, Vol. 71, No. 3 (July 1998), pp. 223-245
Research Questions:1. Do educational expenditures affect students’
achievement?2. What components of OTL affect math and
science achievement?3. If funds are allocated for the most critical
components of OTL, do students learn more?
Focused on effects of expenditures on:1. Teacher effectiveness2. Classroom resources
Data: U.S. Census Survey of Local Government
Finances for School Systems and NELS:88 Dependent variable – 10th grade
math/science item response theory (IRT) theta score
Independent variables: Student-level controls – SES, race, gender School expenditures – cost of instruction, staff and
student support services School-level controls – student composition,
school size, urban or not OTL – teacher qualifications, class size, pedagogy,
classroom resources
Sample:N=6,318 for math analysis; N=5,343 for
scienceTreatment of missing data with mean
values and dummy variables Method:
Hierarchical linear modeling (HLM)1. 8th-grade achievement and student-level
controls2. Expenditures and school-level controls3. Teacher qualifications and class size4. Teaching emphasis and classroom resources
Results – Math Achievement:Expenditures are significantly related to
higher achievement in math (p=.018)Students who achieve higher math scores
have more educated(p=.000) and experienced (p=.007) teachers and tend to be in larger math classes (p=.000).
Math scores were higher when teachers emphasized higher-order thinking (p=.000).
The use of calculators appeared to improve math achievement (p=.000), whereas the use of computers tended to decrease math achievement (p=.034).
Results – Science Achievement:Expenditures are significantly related to higher
achievement in science(p=.018)Only teacher’s education is related to student’s
science achievement (p=.000)Teachers’ emphasis on inquiry skills (p=.000)
and the condition of science equipment are significantly related to science achievement (p=.038)
No interactions between expenditures and student controls (SES, gender, etc) on math or science achievement were significant
Good Apples Bad ApplesSeeks to specify the path through which dollars translate into learning
Although significant, coefficients were very small
Thoughtful lit review; narrowly focused on OTL and spending
Uses survey data (NELS); creates teacher self-report issues
Relevant data sources No explanation of item response theory (IRT) theta score
Nice (novel?) treatment of missing data
Replicable; includes appendix w/ all variable measures
Good description of data, methods
Implications and further research ideas in conclusion
Discussion of limitations and how they were addressed
Policy Implications:A primary concern is to identify the
mechanisms through which money can effectively enhance learning.
Financial data collected at the school level is needed to further study the effects of expenditures on achievement. District level data are not the best estimate since it is differentially allocated across schools.
Author: Lisa Scherff, Carolyn PiazzaSource: Journal of Adolescent & Adult
Literacy, 52(4), Dec 2008/Jan 2009, pp. 343-352
Purpose: To examine OTL from the perspective of
students, the one, group of voices seldom heard from in discussions of quality literacy education.
Sample:More than 3,000 students in grades 9-12 in
four public high schools throughout Florida. Method:
Surveys administered by English teachers during last 3 weeks of the school year
56% response rate, n = 1,801
Instrument:Based on Standards for the English
Language Arts, co-written by IRA and NCTE Items measured:
1. Perceived Access – the right to participate2. Exposure (the number of opportunities to
participate) to: a) Content (reading, writing, speaking)b) Curricular tasks (collaborative work)c) Materials (novels, technology)
Results:Survey uncovered 3 problems:
1. Systems – OTL is largely an individual student phenomenon rather than a collective and systematic one
2. Offerings – OTL is often constrained by course and experiential offerings for students & the amount of time spent on certain literacy activities
3. Acknowledgment - If opportunity is something defined for students, and not with them, then decisions are made and goals are set without them having a say in the matter
Good Apples Bad ApplesConcluding remarks were on point! Arguments were convincing
Survey results are not used as support for the “Acknowledgments” finding
Included some limitations Bad use of citations (used to support findings)
Included reference to full survey
No context for findings (X% of students)
Lacks basic survey statistics (no data on item (non)response, frequencies, means, etc)
Used examples as “findings”
No analysis of survey data. Coding? Inter-rater reliability?
Lack of info calls accuracy and validity of findings into question
Policy Implications:Student opinions and perceptions can
contribute relevant and necessary information
For curricular standards to be accurately measured by mandated assessments, educators must ensure that students have more choice, ownership, and commitment to education
Authors: Christy Kim Boscardin, Zenaida Aguirre-Munoz, Ginger Stoker, Jinok Kim,
Mikyung Kim, and Janet LeeSource: Educational Assessment, 2005,
10(4), 307-332
Purpose: To examine whether and how various OTL
variables significantly impact outcomes and whether these effects are consistent across different content areas
Researchable Questions:1.What are various OTL variables that impact
student achievement? How are they differentially impacting student performance?
2.Is the impact of OTL variables consistent across different subject areas?
3.What student background characteristics are related to student achievement?
Sample:Tests administered to all students enrolled
in an English and/or Algebra course in schools within a large urban school district in the Midwest during the spring semester of the 2000-01 school year
Data used: Scores from the 4,715 students taught by 118
English teachers who completed the survey Scores from the 4,724 students taught by 124
Algebra teachers who completed the survey
Instrument: Teacher OTL Survey, developed by the
UCLA Natl Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST) & content experts
5 major sections related to aspects of OTL1. Teaching experience2. Teaching expertise in content topics3. Topic coverage4. Classroom activities5. Assessment strategies and preparation
Method: Two-level Hierarchical Linear Model
Student level – explores relationships between test scores and course grades, gender within teachersVars: course grade, gender, minority status,
lunch status Teacher level – explores relationships between avg
test scores from each class, teacher expertise, time spent covering content, and free/reduced lunch status of the classVars: teacher expertise, time spent on subject
area-specfic topics, average class free/reduced lunch
The other three OTL variables – teacher experience, classroom activities, assessment strategies – were not significant predictors and not considered in the final model
Results:Gender and course grade were significant
predictors of Algebra and English test scores, whereas ethnicity and free/reduced lunch status were not. Course grade positively related to Algebra and
English test scores (p<.00)Students earning As in Algebra and English
were expected to answer 7 and 4 more items correctly, respectively
Males outperformed females in Algebra; females outperformed males in English (p<.00)Average differences in Algebra scores - 0.42
points; English scores - 0.77 points
Results (cont.):Teacher expertise, time spent on content
areas, & avg free/reduced lunch status were significant predictors of Algebra and English test scores Students taught by “expert” teachers answered
3 and 4 more test items correctly, respectively Students of teachers who spent more time on
relevant content scored 0.85 points higher on Algebra and 1.59 points higher on English
Teachers with 10% more students on free/reduced lunch expected to have 1.14 point lower Algebra score and 1.20 point lower English score
Good Apples Bad Apples
Nice summary of importance of the study
Data in tables and text do not align. Which is correct?
Lit review focused on more recent work
Limitations of survey data (self-reporting)
Acknowledges limitations Participating district helped develop the end-of-course exam
Included relevant statistics in easy to read tables
No information on the teachers who took the OTL survey
Appendices describe models, variables, and effects
No information on exam or survey questions
Policy Implications:Before teachers are held accountable, they
need appropriate training and resources to ensure they are prepared to teach and see themselves as experts in their content areas
Recruit more qualified teachers. Local districts can require higher standards for teachers.
Content standards aligned with assessment, instructional goals, and professional development
Author: Aubrey H. Wang
Source: Early Childhood Education Journal , 2010, 37, 295-302
Research Questions: 1. Do African-American and Caucasian
kindergartners from low-income families have differential opportunity to learn mathematics?
2. To what extent do opportunities to learn mathematics predict math achievement for African-American and Caucasian children from low-income families?
Data: Early Childhood Longitudinal Study,
Kindergarten cohort (ECLS-K) Survey data from 48 items on math OTL
Participants:1,721 first time kindergartners in fall 1998
who lived below the poverty line Method of Analysis:
Factor analyses instructional time, instructional method,
instructional emphasis Independent t-tests
differences at entry and exitSimultaneous multiple regression
Dependent var. = math achievement Independent var. = instructional time, method,
emphasis (or OTL math)
Results of t-tests:Significant differences in math achievement
at kindergarten entry (p<.001) and exit (p<.001) with AA scoring lower than Caucasians
Significant differences in instructional time (p<.05) with low-income AA students having more than Caucasians
Significant differences in 3 types of instructional methods Use of manipulatives higher for AA (p<.001) Use of math worksheets and textbooks more
frequent for AA (p<.01) Use of explanation and real-life math more
frequent for AA (p<.001)
Results of t-tests (cont.): Significant differences in 2 aspects of
instructional emphasis Telling time and using measurement tools
accurately higher for AA (p<.05) Reading graphs and doing simple data collection
lower for AA (p<.05)
Regression Results: OTL predicts math achievement for:
Both races of students (p<.01, R2 = .62) Low-income AA kindergartners (p<.001, R2 =.59) Low-income Caucasian kindergartners (p<.001,
R2=.60)
Good Apples Bad Apples
Discusses limitations No info on 48-item teacher survey
Effective use of data tables Limitations of survey data (self-reporting)
Appendix defines models used, description of variables and relevant statistics
Nothing new or novel about the study; what’s its contribution?
Thorough lit review
Importance of topic is apparent
Policy Implications:Kindergarten teachers of low-income
students need to balance the math curriculum with more emphasis on higher order math content and less on manipulatives and math games
More current data collection efforts are needed; ECLS-K data are more than a decade old
Results make a case for increasing funding, but funding alone doesn’t explain why some students have higher achievement than others.
Given high stakes, need to ensure equitable access to educational opportunities before holding teachers, schools, and students accountable
OTL is difficult to measure. It requires information on the day to day activities of teachers and students, which is costly.
Need a national data set that includes measures of school finance, OTL, and student achievement. We also need data on the proportion of funds allocated to various needs so we can determine directly the effects of how money is spent.
Use OTL as part of the accountability system (rather than just student performance as an indicator of progress); may lead to the types of instruction and reform efforts that will ultimately yield desirable outcomes for all students