Page 45 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 45 of 217 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
37
Specialized education & extended support. Furthermore, the Evidenced-Based
Model takes into account students from diverse backgrounds with special learning needs.
For the students who need additional support, they provide tutoring, instruction for
English language learners, an extended or longer day, summer school, and a different and
new approach to funding special education (Odden & Picus, 2008). The model calls for
extended support, summer school, extended day, one ELL support provider for every 100
students, and one tutor or pupil support per 100 students at risk. Supported by research,
the model also places a special focus on one-on-one tutoring delivered by a highly trained
teacher (Odden & Picus, 2008).
Professional development. Collaboration and time for planning are also built
into the model. Odden & Picus (2008) cite a large amount of research that justifies why
100-200 hours of professional development should be included, which would encompass
activates such as coaching, planning, and content and curriculum development. The
coaches, described earlier, will support and be the drivers of the school’s professional
development. Systematic professional development embedded within the school day is a
key lever to improving instructional practices (Odden, 2008).
Prototypical elementary school. It is important to note that when using the evidenced-based
approach, one should not solely focus on the inputs, but rather how the inputs are
being utilized and their impact. Odden & Picus (2008) state that there needs to be
monitoring and accountability and that simply gathering the resources will not suffice.
The table below demonstrates what a prototypical or model elementary would look like
utilizing the Evidenced-Based Model and reflects a small ideal school size and full day
Object Description
| Title | Allocation of educational resources to improve student achievement: Case studies of four California charter schools |
| Author | Patrick, Ramona Kay |
| Author email | rpatrick@usc.edu; ramonakaypatrick@gmail.com |
| Degree | Doctor of Education |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Education (Leadership) |
| School | Rossier School of Education |
| Date defended/completed | 2011-03-28 |
| Date submitted | 2011 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2011-05-04 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Picus, Lawrence O. |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Hentschke, Guilbert C. Nelson, John L. |
| Abstract | Charter schools are growing at a rapid pace have significantly more flexibility in their allocation of resources in comparison to their traditional public school counterparts in California. Because of this, it is important to study how successful charter schools, with this increased flexibility, are utilizing their resources to achieve high results with their students in a time of fiscal constraint. There is a plethora of data and research on effective school practices to improve student achievement, but a dearth of research on the effective allocation of resources at charter schools. The purpose of this study is to analyze how four high performing charter schools, with high percentages of socioeconomically disadvantaged students in Los Angeles, California, are implementing school improvement strategies and utilizing resources at their school site to impact student achievement. The Evidenced-Based Model, (Odden & Picus, 2008) along with Odden and Archibald’s (2009) Ten Strategies for Doubling Student Performance were used as a lens in this study to compare resource allocation as well as school improvement strategies to best support student achievement at the schools. This study will describe each schools’ instructional vision and improvement strategy, how resources are utilized to implement their instructional improvement plan, how the current fiscal crisis is affecting their allocation of resources, and how actual resource patterns are aligned with the Evidence Based Model (Odden & Picus, 2008). |
| Keyword | charter schools; resource allocation; evidenced-based model |
| Geographic subject (state) | California |
| Geographic subject (country) | USA |
| Coverage date | 2000/2010 |
| 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-m3815 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Patrick, Ramona Kay |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Patrick-4438 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume51/etd-Patrick-4438.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 45 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 37 Specialized education & extended support. Furthermore, the Evidenced-Based Model takes into account students from diverse backgrounds with special learning needs. For the students who need additional support, they provide tutoring, instruction for English language learners, an extended or longer day, summer school, and a different and new approach to funding special education (Odden & Picus, 2008). The model calls for extended support, summer school, extended day, one ELL support provider for every 100 students, and one tutor or pupil support per 100 students at risk. Supported by research, the model also places a special focus on one-on-one tutoring delivered by a highly trained teacher (Odden & Picus, 2008). Professional development. Collaboration and time for planning are also built into the model. Odden & Picus (2008) cite a large amount of research that justifies why 100-200 hours of professional development should be included, which would encompass activates such as coaching, planning, and content and curriculum development. The coaches, described earlier, will support and be the drivers of the school’s professional development. Systematic professional development embedded within the school day is a key lever to improving instructional practices (Odden, 2008). Prototypical elementary school. It is important to note that when using the evidenced-based approach, one should not solely focus on the inputs, but rather how the inputs are being utilized and their impact. Odden & Picus (2008) state that there needs to be monitoring and accountability and that simply gathering the resources will not suffice. The table below demonstrates what a prototypical or model elementary would look like utilizing the Evidenced-Based Model and reflects a small ideal school size and full day |
