Page 77 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 77 of 175 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
71
would be invited to participate in after school tutoring. For SES-type schools,
tutoring teachers were mindful of the number of students they would be tutoring.
Where the payoff of profit was central for the SES provider, the payoff for SES-type
volunteer tutor teachers was: 1) the opportunity to work with their own students, 2)
a smaller number of students than their regular day class that allowed for greater
one-on-one and small group instruction, and 3) a lower likelihood of distractions
from student behavior issues. Teachers who provided after school tutoring were less
inclined to invite students to after school tutoring who had behavior problems during
the regular school day. Students were selected based on academic need but also on
their receptiveness to participate in an after school tutoring program.
Student participation and enrollment for SES schools
In the schools with SES, a primary concern for SES providers was to pay
attention to the sizes of the groups tutored. This was to ensure that tutoring would be
profitable and thereby worthwhile endeavor for the SES provider. Sufficient
enrollment was sometimes not achieved for SES providers and the needs of running
a profitable business took precedent over the needs of students. As one parent
commented in the survey, “The tutor never showed because they told us that there
weren’t enough students in the program.” The clause for termination of SES
services in the Parent-Provider Agreement stated that any party involved (parent,
district, or SES provider) can terminate services if the provider is unable to meet
stated goals and timelines (Appendix G). This is an example of the divergent
objectives problem in the principal-agent relationship, where each party has different
Object Description
| Title | Organizational relationships in supplemental educational services (SES) and SES-type programs |
| Author | Tan, Thomas Anthony |
| Author email | diandtom@sbcglobal.net; thomas_tan@jusd.k12.ca.us |
| Degree | Doctor of Education |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Education (Leadership) |
| School | Rossier School of Education |
| Date defended/completed | 2008-08-07 |
| Date submitted | 2008 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2008-10-08 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Hentschke, Guilbert C. |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Datnow, Amanda Mafi, Gabriela |
| Abstract | The Center for Education Policy (CEP, 2007) released a July 2007 NCLB report examining the effectiveness of assistance to schools that have been unable to achieve state defined student Proficiency goals for two consecutive years. This academic tutoring assistance known as Supplemental Educational Services (SES) was deemed to be important or very important by less than 10% of the districts surveyed.; How can we explain differences in outside of the school day academic tutoring programs that are mandated (SES programs under NCLB) and those that are willingly provided (SES-type programs by schools)? These differences in programs can be studied and understood through what economists call "principal-agent" theory to study the relationships among the participants. The principal-agent (P-A) theory had its origins in the study of the problems that arise when objectives of a principal and agent diverge. The purpose of the study is to understand the P-A related performance problems among the participants in Supplemental Educational Services (SES). This study will examine the P-A organizational relationships within the three primary SES and SES-type school program elements – individualized instruction, provider accountability, and student participation. The three research questions that were developed to guide this study are: 1. How does the principal-agent relationship explain what instructional strategies and practices are used by SES and SES-type providers in out of school hours programs? 2. How does the principal-agent relationship explain how SES and SES-type providers are accountable for student learning? 3. How does the principal-agent relationship explain how SES and SES-type providers manage student participation?; In comparing SES and SES-type after school tutoring organizations, data analysis revealed that principal-agent problems in Title I schools required to provide SES were greater than those Title I SES-type schools that willingly provided after school tutoring. The six major findings of this study found principal-agent problems in the areas of SES organizational barriers, beliefs in tutoring effectiveness, sub optimization of SES, non-performance based competition among SES providers, and relationships among parents, tutors, and educators.; Recommendations for successful SES implementation and improvement of current practice to address these principal-agent problems included increasing the outreach to parents, using an SES provider report card to rank provider performance, improved sharing of existing student data between school districts and SES providers, expanding the pool of students who could benefit from SES tutoring, and improving communications and coordination through an SES provider-school district advisory council. Suggestions for future research include comparing SES implementations in coastal vs. inland California school districts, study of student motivation in after school tutoring, greater cooperation between SES providers and school districts, and the effectiveness of comprehensive vs. academic after school tutoring. |
| Keyword | principal; agent; education; elementary; k12; nclb; supplemental; educational; services; SES; tutoring |
| Geographic subject (state) | California |
| Coverage date | 2007/2008 |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m1643 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Tan, Thomas Anthony |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Tan-2371 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume26/etd-Tan-2371.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 77 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 71 would be invited to participate in after school tutoring. For SES-type schools, tutoring teachers were mindful of the number of students they would be tutoring. Where the payoff of profit was central for the SES provider, the payoff for SES-type volunteer tutor teachers was: 1) the opportunity to work with their own students, 2) a smaller number of students than their regular day class that allowed for greater one-on-one and small group instruction, and 3) a lower likelihood of distractions from student behavior issues. Teachers who provided after school tutoring were less inclined to invite students to after school tutoring who had behavior problems during the regular school day. Students were selected based on academic need but also on their receptiveness to participate in an after school tutoring program. Student participation and enrollment for SES schools In the schools with SES, a primary concern for SES providers was to pay attention to the sizes of the groups tutored. This was to ensure that tutoring would be profitable and thereby worthwhile endeavor for the SES provider. Sufficient enrollment was sometimes not achieved for SES providers and the needs of running a profitable business took precedent over the needs of students. As one parent commented in the survey, “The tutor never showed because they told us that there weren’t enough students in the program.” The clause for termination of SES services in the Parent-Provider Agreement stated that any party involved (parent, district, or SES provider) can terminate services if the provider is unable to meet stated goals and timelines (Appendix G). This is an example of the divergent objectives problem in the principal-agent relationship, where each party has different |
