parent and teacher opinions regarding st. louis public schools

8/8/2019 Parent and Teacher Opinions Regarding St. Louis Public Schools

1/31

Qualitative Research Findings:

Parent and Teacher OpinionsRegarding St. Louis Public Schools

September 13, 2010

Dr. E. Terrence Jones


2/31

Qualitative Research Format Separate Perception Analyzer dial

sessions and focus groupsconducted on August 17, 2010:

1. 44 SLPS teachers2. 36 parents of SLPS

students


3/31

Overview of Results Teachers and parents see weak

leadership as a continuing obstacle

Complaints are not directed at the

Special Administrative Board orSuperintendent Dr. Kelvin Adams

Both groups cite deeper systemic issuesand continuing instability as problems


4/31

Overview of Results Parents and teachers recognize signs of

improvement Are skeptical that significant progress will

continue

Articulate systemic problems Leadership with political agendas other than

educating the Citys children

Failure to commit to any policy long enough tosee results


5/31

Teachers Grade SLPSTeachers Grade SLPS: 2006

0% 0%

5%

63%

33%

0 %

1 0 %

2 0 %

3 0 %

4 0 %

5 0 %

6 0 %

7 0 %

A B C D F

Teachers Grade SLPS: 2010

2%

11%

46%

36%

5%

0 %

1 0 %

2 0 %

3 0 %

4 0 %

5 0 %

6 0 %

7 0 %

A B C D F


6/31

Parents Grade SLPSParents Grade SLPS: 2006

4%

11% 11%

52%

22%

0 %

1 0 %

2 0 %

3 0 %

4 0 %

5 0 %

6 0 %

7 0 %

A B C D F

Parents Grade SLPS: 2010

0%

17%

47%

31%

6%

0 %

1 0 %

2 0 %

3 0 %

4 0 %

5 0 %

6 0 %

7 0 %

A B C D F


7/31

Teachers Grade Own SchoolsTeachers Grade Their Own Schools:

2006

10%

3%

18%

35%35%

0 %

1 0 %

2 0 %

3 0 %

4 0 %

5 0 %

6 0 %

7 0 %

A B C D F

Teachers Grade The ir Own Schools:

2010

39%32%

16%11%

2%0 %

1 0 %

2 0 %

3 0 %

4 0 %

5 0 %

6 0 %

7 0 %

A B C D F


8/31

Parents Grade Kids SchoolsParents Grade The ir Children's

Schools: 2006

41% 41%

4%0%

15%

0 %

1 0 %

2 0 %

3 0 %

4 0 %

5 0 %

6 0 %

7 0 %

A B C D F

Parents Grade Their Children's

Schools: 2010

17%

47%

25%

8%3%

0 %

1 0 %

2 0 %

3 0 %

4 0 %

5 0 %

6 0 %

7 0 %

A B C D F


9/31

Teachers Grade Leadership

Teachers Grade SLPS Leadership

5%

18%

30%

34%

14%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

A

B

C

D

F


10/31

Parents Grade Leadership

Parents Grade SLPS Leadership

0%

14%

36%

28%

22%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

A

B

C

D

F


11/31

SLPS Improvement: Teachers

Teachers Evaluate Improvement in Quality of SLPS: Last 2-3 Years

7%

32%25% 23%

14%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Greatly Somewhat Somewhat Greatly

Improved About the same Worsened


12/31


13/31

Challenges Commit to a single strategy

The only constant is change. -parent

Address disparity between schools

People in my church who teach in the St.Louis Public Schools, it's like we're notteaching in the same city." -teacher

Measure progress validly and reliable Both groups say the current testing process is

inaccurate, unfair


14/31

Issues Teachers Hear About% Who Hear About Issues: Teachers

61.4

29.5

11.4

11.4

6.8

9.1

4.5

6.8

-

-

13.6

36.4

25.0

15.9

20.5

18.2

15.9

6.8

2.3

6.8

20.5

20.5

31.8

36.4

34.1

29.5

20.5

18.2

20.5

11.4

4.5

13.6

31.8

36.4

38.6

43.2

59.1

68.2

77.3

81.8

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

100% of c lasses taught by highly qualified teachers

Policy requires pupil/teacher ratios to meet state standards

Some SLPS high schools independently accredited

Before disaccreditation, St. Louis Public Schools metstandards in only 4 of 14 areas.

Possible court decision allow ing City children to attendCounty schools

Local elected school board continues to f unction, butw ithout authority

Voters recently passed $155 million bond issue

Recent budget requiring workforce cuts

SLPS w as unaccredited in 2007

Authority transf erred to spec ial administrative board

Almost nothing A little bit A fair amount A great deal


15/31

Issues Parents Hear About% Who Hear About Issues: Parents

47.2

52.8

33.3

27.8

13.9

38.9

19.4

22.2

19.4

11.1

36.1

19.4

30.6

36.1

30.6

16.7

25.0

25.0

19.4

16.7

8.3

11.1

19.4

19.4

36.1

22.2

30.6

25.0

27.8

19.4

8.3

16.7

16.7

16.7

19.4

22.2

25.0

27.8

33.3

52.8

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

Policy requires pupil/teacher ratios to meet state standards

100% of classes taught by highly qualified teachers

Before disaccreditation, St. Louis Public Schools metstandards in only 4 of 14 areas.

Poss ble court decision allow ing City children to attendCounty schools

Recent budget requiring w orkforce cuts

Some SLPS high schools independently accredited

Local elected school board continues to function, but

w ithout authority

Authority transf erred to special administrative board

Voters recently passed $155 million bond issue

SLPS w as unaccredited in 2007

Almost nothing A little bit A fa ir amount A grea t deal


16/31

Confidence in Boards: Teachers

Teachers ' Confidence in Governing Boards

9% 7%

46% 39%

0% 2%

48% 50%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

A great deal of confidence Quite a lot of confidence Some confidence Very little confidence

Elected School Board Special Administrative Board


17/31

Confidence in Boards: Parents

Parents' Confidence in Governing Boards

6% 6%

56%

33%

0%8%

56%

36%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

A great deal of confidence Quite a lot of confidence Some confidence Very little confidence

Elected School Board Special Administrative Board


18/31


19/31

Evaluating the SAB Groups appreciate businesslike

approach Credit Special Administrative Board with

bringing local businesses and privatemoney to the table

But describe the SAB as faceless and

nameless


20/31

Appeal of an Elected Board Reality vs. Theory

Parents maintain an attachment to theidea of an elected board, but remember

the actual elected boards asdysfunctional

See an elected board as having a

connection to the community


21/31


22/31

Defining Success Parents and teachers were asked to

rate the importance of 15 criticalgoals on a scale of 0 (not at allimportant) to 100 (extremelyimportant)


23/31

Top 4 Goals: Teachers1. Ensuring high-quality education for

all students in all schools

2. Recruiting and retaining the best

teachers3. Student safety

4. Achieving stability in leadership


24/31

Top 4 Goals: Parents1. Student safety

2. Ensuring high-quality education forall students in all schools

3. Improving graduation rates

4. Achieving reaccreditation


25/31

Future Governance: Parents

Parents' Preference for Future Governance

11%

19%

28%

28%

14%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Strongly prefe r e lected

school board

Some w hat preferelected school board

Some w hat preferappointed school board

Strongly preferappointed school board

No clear pr efe re nce


26/31


27/31

Evaluation of Board Structures

52.535.8Achieving reaccreditation

38.726.7Relationship with local communities

54.734.9Meeting academic standards

51.747.3Achieving stable funding

50.533.7Making SLPS the most attractive choice

57.135.9Improving graduation rates

55.437.6Improving attendance rates

53.740.7Strongest academic curriculum

55.247.1Upgrading technology

60.637.2Achieving stability in leadership

49.135.8Student safety

55.539.9Recruiting and retaining best teachers

62.936.6Ensuring high-quality education for all students in allschools

ParentsTeachers

Which Structure Is Better Suited to Achieve Goals?0 to 100 Scale, 0=Elected Board , 100=Administrative Board


28/31

Appointment of Board Members

Preferences: Who Best to Appoint Administrative Board Members

9%7%

34%

50%

6%

14%

53%

28%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Governor Jay Nixon Mayor Francis Slay St. Louis Board ofAldermen

State Legislature inJefferson City

Teachers Parents


29/31

Summary Parents and teachers see signs of

progress, but still lack confidence inthe future.

Both groups feel disenfranchised andbelieve the process is driven bypolitical agendas that are hidden tothem and beyond their control.

The closing of community schools hasmagnified this problem for parents.


30/31


31/31

Summary Parents and teachers differ in their

preference for a governance structuregoing forward.

Parents are strongly drawn to the communityconnections of an elected board, but prefer anappointed administrative board.

Teachers prefer an elected board, believing

that to be the better structure for accomplishingkey goals.

parent and teacher opinions regarding st. louis public schools

Documents